Mountain View County's planning and development department reversed its position last week on a rezoning application by the sister of Div. 2 Coun. Trish McKean.The application from Nolan and Tamara Ziebarth was to rezone 11.5 acres from a 151-acre quarter in Water Valley that has already had one parcel removed for an acreage on which McKean and her family reside. The quarter is owned by McKean's and Tamara Ziebarth's grandmother, Margaret Rodgers.The Ziebarths were applying under the county's fragmented parcel policy, based on their claim that an unnamed creek is a permanent barrier between the parcel and the balance of the quarter.Planning had recommended refusal at the July 5 council meeting, concluding after two separate site visits that the parcel does not meet the county's guidelines for fragmented land.The hearing was recessed at the urging of interim planning director John Rusling, who said he would arrange another site visit to settle the matter after Nolan Ziebarth, McKean (who removed herself from council for the hearing) and neighbour Jeff Luft disputed the department's findings.Last week Rusling told council that under county policy, approval could be considered for the application if a majority of five conditions are met:ï It is a permanent year-round water body.ï The slope from top of bank to high water mark is greater than 30 per cent.ï The depth from top of bank to high water mark is greater than seven metres.ï The width from high water mark to high water mark is greater than four metres.ï The water body bisects entirely the land in question.ìWe believe the first and last bullets are present Ö and the high water mark exceeds four metres in width,î Rusling said.ìThree out of five bullets are satisfied and this can be recommended for approval,î he said.Rusling's findings contradicted the July 5 report to council that was prepared under former director Diana Hawryluk.That report said the creek ìis not a permanent year-round water body, but seasonal; the slope from the top of the bank is less than 30 per cent; the depth of the existing creek is less than seven metres; the width of the creek in many instances is less than four metres; and in a dry year or perhaps later on in the summer or in the fall, this creek would not be bisecting the land entirely.îHowever, other than a technical question from Div. 7 Coun. Al Kemmere on the process of amending the bylaw from a Country-Residential to Agriculture-2 designation, there was no discussion and the six sitting councillors voted unanimously in favour of the rezoning.Briefly addressing council prior to the close of the hearing, Nolan Ziebarth said the couple ìrecognize and respectî the planning department for its work on the file but wanted to thank Rusling personally for his followup site visit.In his report to council, Rusling stressed the importance of additional letters from neighbours received during the July 5 hearing.ìThese letters essentially conclude that the area is fragmented, the stream cannot be crossed with a vehicle or quad, and the stream is spring fed and runs continually,î Rusling wrote.ìAdministration accepts the information contained in the letters received at the public hearing, specifically that the water runs continuously and that the water body cannot be crossed by equipment. Many of the letters received were from longtime residents of the community and their conclusions were verified on our site visit,î he wrote.
