A heated public hearing for a rezoning application by a Mountain View County councillor's sister was put on hold last week after the new county planning chief recommended a site visit.ìMy sense is something is not right here,î interim planning director John Rusling said at last Wednesday's council meeting.ìI'm seeing very conflicting evidence here and something's not adding up.îThe application from Nolan and Tamara Ziebarth was to rezone 11.5 acres to Country Residential from a 151-acre quarter that has already had one parcel removed for an acreage on which Div. 2 Coun. Patricia McKean and her family reside. The quarter is owned by McKean's and Tamara Ziebarth's grandmother, Margaret Rodgers.The couple was applying under the county's fragmented parcel policy, contending that an unnamed creek is a permanent barrier between the parcel and the balance of the quarter.However, planning staff reported at the meeting, two separate site visits found that the parcel does not meet the county's guidelines for fragmented land.The creek, said the report, 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.îThe application, planner Dolu M. Gonzalez said in her summary at Wednesday's hearing, ìdoes not meet the criteria for fragmented land as it can be accessed by the remainder of the land and can be reasonably used with the balance of the quarter.îAddressing council, Nolan Ziebarth said his family moved to the site three years ago to assist his wife's grandparents and denied the unnamed creek is seasonal.ìThe water body is not seasonal,î Ziebarth said, adding that the parcel has never been farmed because of its natural characteristics.McKean, who removed herself from council for the hearing, spoke in support of the application, also questioning the planning department's description of the creek.ìI'm not sure how they feel the land dries up in the spring when we can skate on it in the winter,î McKean said.The rezoning, she added, is not for monetary gain.ìIt is an application for compassionate reasons ÖThis was a wish of our grandmother to give me and my sister a piece of the family farm.îCouncillors received a package with copies of letters of support from several couples and individuals from the area, endorsing the application and confirming the couple's claims about the status of the creek.Speaking in support of the application, Jeff Luft said he has lived in the area for 46 years and his father for 76 years and ìanyone calling that a seasonal creek dropped the ball,î he said.ìThe whole community is supportingî the application, he added.ìThe creek is definitely a divider of the land.îWhile standing at the podium, Luft became more agitated and started directly questioning Gonzalez on whether she had even gone down to the creek bed during her site visits.ìYour pictures are great but they're not showing the whole truth,î Luft told the planner.Gonzalez responded that the aim of the second site visit ñ undertaken both by planning and agricultural services staff ñ was to reconfirm the initial findings.ìIt's not like we make up the policy,î Gonzalez said.The impasse ended when Rusling suggested he do a site visit in company with interested parties and council passed a motion to that effect.The hearing is scheduled to resume Aug. 17.In her report to council, Gonzalez wrote that during her second site visit, on May 18, ìit was observed that in the central area of the creek, where the topography seems to flatten, the majority of the riparian area has been disturbed due to heavy grazing, to the point that is unhealthy. It was also observed that the water running in the creek before, on the previous site visit, was dried out completely to the point that the creek is easily crossable.î
