The need for affordable housing, food production, support for those with disabilities, and employment seemed to sway Huntsville’s planning committee at its April 14 meeting.
Tyler Ellis was before the committee asking for a zoning exemption in order to permit a 75 square metre duplex on his 50 hectares (123.55 acres) farm property located on Old Muskoka Road in Utterson.
While the Huntsville and Muskoka official plans do not allow duplexes to be built on rural zoned properties, Ellis said allowing the duplex would provide much-needed housing for two workers who would help with the farm. He also noted food from the farm would be donated to The Table Soup Kitchen Foundation and spoke of the importance of a local and reliable food source, particularly as the cost of food increases as it has during this pandemic.
“I do have an individual who has committed to working on the farm here and I’ve designated her farm manager and she does need a place to stay. She is a person who herself experiences a physical disability and so within the plans of that, I have incorporated the accessibility into the plans of that house, and alongside she also would need someone to assist her in the operations of the farm. I’m asking for a duplex so we can have individuals work on the farm and it would be at a reduced rate… I am not looking to make a profit. I’m looking to cover the cost of the mortgage to build because my purpose is to provide a community resource,” he told the committee. “This property was a fully operational, functioning farm 20 years before I purchased it and so to bring it up to speed, and to bring it up to a place where I can provide for the larger community, we need to really work this land.”
Ellis’s neighbour and builder also spoke to the committee about his support for the project.
Councillor Bob Stone wanted to know if the duplex would have separate access to the road and Councillor Jonathan Wiebe, who said he liked the application because “it shows a little more dynamic thinking than what we’re used to,” also questioned what would happen if the property sold down the line. “How do we make sure that if you sell the property, let’s say in 10 years, that we don’t suddenly have a duplex Airbnb on our hands. That kind of is incongruent with what the intention was.”
Planning manager Richard Clark said the exemption written into the bylaw would specifically state that the duplex would be for the use of the farmhands.
“And thinking outside the box is not always easy for planners but what I liked about this is that it was for people employed on a farm and we do have policies that support agriculture in the rural area so that’s why I felt, and staff felt, we’d be able to throw our support behind it because we can restrict it to tenants that are employed by the farm so that’s what we felt it had going for it, so I just wanted to point that out to make sure that was clear,” said Clark.
Committee unanimously approved the application.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
Nick Hannan says
As an individual who was born and raised on this road, I have seen much of the area farmland developed into housing.
This farm and property was always well maintained and kept tidy by the previous owners. The current owners seem to lack the initiative to upkeep this property to that standard. From the barn that looks to be on the verge of collapsing, to the simplicity of picking up the garbage that has blown out of the bins and the mess of their so-called “garden”
Their late night parties this past summer with multiple people and vehicles at their house shows their blatant disregard for any sort of care or respect for the community.
I have no doubt in my mind that this duplex will likely be sold for profit in the future. These current owners are by no means farmers.
I am disappointed in our local councilors, as they seem to have not done their research as to the scope of this so called farm.
Allen Markle says
This property was once a farm and a farmer lived there. The land was worked and animals were tended. Since we moved to the area in 2003 there have been horses there sometimes and recently there has been a ‘sort-of’ garden on a portion of the field. I don’t know if there has ever been anything harvested from that plot.
The field grows a good crop of goldenrod but it hasn’t been cut, even for hay. We already have a green-house in the area and the land here is very light; too light for cash cropping. Without massive soil remediation and a farmer, I doubt that this farm could support two people.
There may be room enough to raise cattle but it doesn’t sound like that is the intention.
A ‘farm’ to support a couple of people, this land is not. This is simply a piece of vacant land in search of a subdivision.
It is one thing to acknowledge ‘dynamic thinking’ but I think this is simply ‘dynamic’ talking.
Committee unanimously approved! In my opinion committee has been unanimously ‘shined.’
Eliza Casser says
What a step in the right direction! It is wonderful to see the town take steps toward helping the affordable housing shortage. It is also encouraging to see an old farm being restored to its former use: as a functioning farm. The users of The Table very much appreciate the opportunity to use a portion of this property for growing much needed produce.
Laura Collins says
It’s disappointing to see such negative and assuming comments on this article. I am a neighbour of the Ellis’ and have seen first hand the ways they have used their property to give back to the community.
The people who are working the community garden (specifically for the Table Soup Kitchen) have volunteered hours of their own time over the last two summers developing the garden and doing their very best to grow produce to donate to those who can’t afford it. To criticize that without knowing the full picture is saddening. I am so thankful for them and the hard, sacrificial work they have put into the garden to serve this community.
I surely hope that the previous commenters who are neighbours have had the respect and courtesy to share their concerns directly with the Ellis’ before posting their thoughts publicly. Now more than ever our communities need to support each other and give the benefit of the doubt rather than being quick to judge intentions and criticize.
I know these people personally and can assure you that the new residence being built will not be used for personal gain.
Thank you Ellis’ for the ways you are using your property to serve the community, and to those who have spent countless hours working on the garden to provide produce for the Table. Keep up the good work.
Nick Hannan says
To Laura Collins and others who may read this article,
I think it is a great idea and extremely generous for the owners of this land to donate to The Table Soup Kitchen. It’s nice to see my fellow neighbours looking out for those in need.
However, I simply cannot understand the logistics of this operation. I’m unsure of what crops they will be raising, but doing the simple math on a 10lb bag of potatoes, the numbers just don’t work out.
Looking at this weeks Food Basics flyer, a 10lb bag of potatoes sells for $1.88. Independent is selling their 10lb bag on sale for $2.99 (regular price of $5.00).
As an individual who has grown vegetables in Muskoka, I understand the amount of hours and labour required to furrow the land, plant the seeds, weed, garden and harvest.
I’m also unsure of the wages the owners will be paying the workers (none of my business either) But I simply can’t comprehend how they could produce 10lbs of potatoes for less than $5.00. Financially, it makes much more sense for the owners to purchase items and donate them.
Secondly, what were to happen if the current owners eventually decide they no longer wish to be active farmers? Are the tenants of the duplex forced to be evicted?
What happens if the current owners decide to sell and the future buyers have no desire or need for farmhands? Does the building sit vacant permanently, or will they be forced to tear the building down?
Also, how often will bylaw officers be checking to ensure the residents of the duplex are actively working on the farm?
Clearly our Councillors have decided that they would rather make money on building permits and property taxes, then uphold the laws designed by their predecessors.