Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1988-04, Page 16OPPORTUNITY or OPPORTUNISM? To develop or not to develop? That's the question for a rural community in Grey County, where a well-known developer has proposed that an industrial/ commercial complex be built on 300 acres of farm land. Some residents are fighting the proposal. Others are rolling out the red carpet ... Soeseeitasarare oppormtunity to rein- vigorate a sagging agricultural community. For others, it's a short-term, quick -fix plan with alarming long-term consequences. Opinions vary, but one thing is certain. The industrial/ commercial complex pro- posed for a hefty block of land in Grey County has not been received with unbridled enthusiasm by the farming population. The family-owned com- pany of Charles Watson, Sr. and Charles Watson, Jr. is the power behind the project. The Watsons, who operate Wat-Cha Farms and own about 1,600 acres in Normanby and neighbouring Egremont Township, hope to attract a major industry on 300 acres of their land in Grey County, land in the centre of a Normanby Township farming community. The industry itself would probably require up to 100 acres; the rest of the property would support commercial facilities complementary to the indus- try — a gas station, a coffee shop, perhaps a bank. The land would be sold to these businesses, although the Watsons say they are "not ruling out a lease option on certain portions of the land." This proposed "Park of Com- merce" would be located five miles north of Mount Forest on Highway 6. A lack of sewage and water services would limit development to a "dry" industry which would not use or .__ -- ��' -'c_ _ - _.'� .yly, y' — discharge large volumes of water and effluent. According to Charles Watson, Jr., the Watsons are pursuing an industry that would have "some- thing of a high-tech nature." It would not only have to meet govemment regulations, he says, but additional standards that the Watsons have set. But the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food (OMAF), worried about preserving agricultural land and reducing rural/urban conflict, is standing firm in its opposition to the Wat-Cha proposal. The Grey County Federation of Agriculture, while it supports development in south Grey, is saying that the Park of Commerce should be located elsewhere. Near an urban area, the federation argues, there is less conflict with farm operations and the services needed to avoid environmental problems are available. The Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, with its track record of dedication to the preser- vation of food land and the farmer's right to farm, has also voiced concern. Local politicians, meanwhile, have thrown their support behind the Wat-Cha proposal. They are asserting that new jobs and a healthier tax base are definitive attractions. A sixth group, made up of local ratepayers who call themselves Citizens for the Protection of the Environ- ment and Foodland (CPEF) is contending that the loss of agricultural land is only part of the problem. Members say that the proposal undermines the aims of the region's official plan, could lead to environmental problems in the long run, and is likely to interfere with the surrounding farm community. The issue is difficult to resolve, and the dissenting voices involved in the debate are a long way from harmonizing. According to Charles Watson, Jr., the development would generate between 1,000 and 2,000 jobs. He sees it as a contribution to the local economy, and as an incentive for rural youth, who would otherwise migrate, 14 THE RURAL VOICE