01/08/2014 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

September 18, 2013 Page 5 Section 174-25(C)(1) permits "farms: agricultural, or horticultural or silvicultural." This provision does not permit "aquaculture." Moreover, the Zoning Bylaw defines a "farm" as: A parcel of land containing at least five (5) acres used for the primary purpose of agriculture, horticulture, floriculture or viticulture, including facilities for the sale of produce, wine and dairy products, insofar as the majority of products for sale have been produced or grown by the owner of the land on which the facility is located. (Emphasis added). Mr. Cook's proposal does not meet this definition for two reasons. First, the term "aquaculture" is not included in the definition. Second, the proposed grant is less than the five (5) acre minimum requirement. Consequently, Mr. Cook cannot claim that his proposal is a"farm." Section 174-25(C)(2) permits "Farms: livestock or poultry, but not swine, provided that any building housing livestock or poultry is not less than one hundred and fifty (150) feet from the property boundary." Mr. Cook's proposal does not qualify for this provision because it is not a "farm" and because it is less than five (5) acres.3 Section 174-25(C)(4) permits "agricultural activities other than the raising or housing of livestock, swine or of poultry where more than twenty four (24) birds are kept." Mr. Cook's proposal is not eligible under this provision because "aquaculture" is not mentioned and "aquaculture" is not "Agriculture." Furthermore, Mr. Cook is conducting aquaculture whereas this particular provision applies to "other agricultural activities." Aquaculture is the raising of shellfish; the raising of animals is specifically addressed in Subsections (1) and (2). Subsection (4) is obviously intended to permit "other 3 Mr.Cook's flexible cages are"structures"and fall within the definitions of"structures"and"buildings"under the Zoning Bylaw definitions.