JULIE BERTRAND
Independent Reporter
County council passed the land use bylaw 1443- 10 on Wednesday, March 9 at its regular meeting, completing a process that took several months of debate and discussions.
This bylaw will regulate the subdivision, zoning, use and development of land in the county and establish the authorities required to exercise the related powers, functions and duties on behalf of the county.
“I think this bylaw is one of the better bylaws in Alberta,” said Johan van der Bank, director of planning and development at the county.
The major difference between this bylaw and its predecessor is that farm permits are not required anymore.
“We don’t do the farm permit anymore, because it really didn’t do anything,” said van der Bank.
“Not five per cent of people in the county bought it to take on a farm permit. Nobody knew what it was for.”
Public hearing
Council heard a total of four presentations from people supporting and opposing the bylaw at the public hearing that took place before the final vote.
Two letters in opposition to the bylaw were also read.
“The issues presented by the first letter have all been resolved,” said van der Bank.
The second letter was written by Rob Sommerville and contained strong opinions.
In his letter, Sommerville alleged that the new bylaw did not contain necessary exemptions for a variety of agricultural practices and he blamed the county staff for not providing the county council with adequate options to choose from in adopting the bylaw.
“The other one makes some unsubstantiated statements that are blatantly not true. Those were also addressed to council, “ van der Bank said in reference to Sommerville’s letter.
Council closed the public hearing and, later in the afternoon, they proceeded with the second and third reading of the bylaw.
“They had considerable debate about some points but, in the end, they passed the bylaw with one councillor voting in opposition,“ said van der Bank.
New regulations
Van der Bank was quick to point out that the new land use bylaw was written after careful research of what other municipalities and counties do.
“In fact, we’ve looked at all our neighbours to the north, the east, the south and the west, except Red Deer County, which I know is the same,” said van der Bank.
“We looked at Camrose County, Lacombe County, Paintearth County, Flagstaff County, Special Areas and Kneehill County.”
One of the bylaw’s goals was to have a seamless transition between the different types of developments present in the county. It was accomplished by adding new urban regulations.
“We can’t just have rural style developments right next to towns and expect the blend to be a good blend,” said van der Bank.
Ratepayers should not fear the new regulations, since the county will exercise its discretion in how it applies them, according to van der Bank.