Subdivision hearing witness dismisses impact of nearby farming practises

Impacts of a nearby winery and vineyard were part of the discussion during Tuesday’s deliberations in an Ontario Land Tribunal hearing over a proposed subdivision on the Rand Estate property in Niagara-on-the-Lake.

Vineyards borders the planned 196-home development pitched by Solmar Development, both owned by developer Benny Marotta.

Even though the proposed Rand subdivision and Two Sisters Resort have the same ownership, impacts the winery and vineyards would have on a large subdivision were raised by agrologist Sean Colville, one of several witnesses brought forward by Solmar since deliberations began April 9.

He said bird bangers are a “contentious” issue in rural farming communities such as Niagara-on-the-Lake, but noted Two Sisters does not use them.

Bird bangers are a loud tool used to scare birds and other wildlife off crops to prevent them from being damaged.

Farming machines are not used in the late hours and are only operated at Two Sisters between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.

"This should result in less nuisance complaints,” said Colville.

Odours shouldn’t be an issue either, he told the tribunal, as Two Sisters “typically does not use” agricultural source materials such as manure, although a mushroom compost was used when a new vineyard was planted at the site, he said.

Colville told the tribunal that lighting from the winery won’t cause concerns because it is only open from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Chemicals used on crops are applied with a “special type of sprayer” that contains the distance it would travel in the wind and “minimizes the potential for drift.”

Colville also doubts the winemaking property being visible from the subdivision is an issue. “Most people want to see the vineyards,” said Colville, also claiming the wine industry welcomes this as it could boost sales.

Catherine Jay, a witness on behalf of Solmar, delivered opinion evidence on urban design on Tuesday. One topic she touched on was the public realm of the proposal. She said even though the development may involve private roads, there are amenities that “could easily be enjoyed by the public.” These include a pedestrian walkway near the panhandle, as well as a parkette, and whistlestop walk.

She believes the proposal meets needed guidelines, and also does a good job integrating heritage with urban design, she opined Tuesday afternoon.

With party status in the hearing are lawyers representing the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake, Save Our Rand Estate (SORE), Solmar, and Blair and Brenda McArthur, who live at 210 John St.

Cross-examination of Jay began late in Tuesday’s deliberations, starting with SORE lawyer Catherine Lyons, who inquired about an urban design brief lacking anything about heritage, even though the town had already filed notices of intention to designate pieces within the lands as heritage attributes. “I see not one single mention of heritage,” she said.

A commemoration plan was also being worked on by a consultant retained by the developer, and Lyons asked Jay if she was involved in that process. Jay said she and the consultant “were working back and forth in a community design perspective and urban design perspective.”

The hearing will continue Wednesday with Jay.

Fedor Tchourkine, an engineer and Solmar witness, was scheduled to take the stand virtually Wednesday as well.

Kris Dube, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Niagara-on-the-Lake Local