Laserfiche WebLink
been produced or grown by the owner of the land on which the <br /> facility is located. (Emphasis added). <br /> Mr. Cook's proposal does not meet this definition for two reasons. First, <br /> the term "aquaculture" is not included in the definition. Second, the proposed <br /> grant is less than the five (5) acre minimum requirement. Consequently, Mr. <br /> Cook cannot claim that his proposal is a "farm." <br /> Section 174-25(C)(2) permits "Farms: livestock or poultry, but not swine, <br /> provided that any building housing livestock or poultry is not less than one <br /> hundred and fifty (150) feet from the property boundary." Mr. Cook's proposal <br /> does not qualify for this provision because it is not a "farm", it is less than five <br /> (5) acres and because the aquaculture cages will be less than 150 feet from the <br /> boundary of the grant as well as from Ms. Caffyn's property boundary. <br /> 2 <br /> Section 174-25(C)(4) permits "agricultural activities other than the <br /> raising or housing of livestock, swine or of poultry where more than twenty <br /> four (24) birds are kept." Mr. Cook's proposal is not eligible under this <br /> provision because the term "aquaculture" is not mentioned. Furthermore, Mr. <br /> Cook is conducting aquaculture whereas this particular provision applies to <br /> "other agricultural activities." Aquaculture is the raising of shellfish; the <br /> raising of animals is specifically addressed in Subsections (1) and (2). <br /> Subsection (4) is obviously intended to permit "other agricultural activities" and <br /> cannot be read to authorize the entirely different activity of aquaculture. <br /> Finally, Section 174-25(C)(5) allows, by Special Permit, "the raising or <br /> housing of livestock, but not swine, or of poultry where more than twenty-four <br /> birds are kept on a parcel of land containing less than five (5) acres, provided <br /> any building housing livestock or poultry is not less than fifty (50) feet from the <br /> property boundary." Mr. Cook's proposal is not eligible under this provision <br /> because his proposed aquaculture cages will occupy the entire grant area and <br /> 2 Mr. Cook's aquaculture cages are"structures"and fall within the definitions of"structures"and"buildings" <br /> under the Zoning Bylaw definitions. <br /> 7 <br />