MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - The county’s subdivision and development appeal board (SDAB) has upheld an earlier decision by the municipal planning commission (MPC) to deny a subdivision application in the Reed Ranch rural neighbourhood east of Olds.
The SDAB released its ruling on the matter last month following a 90-minute public appear hearing on Jan. 2 that saw both the applicant and appellant make presentations.
In November, the MPC refused a subdivision application to subdivide three lots within an existing 10 acre parcel. The subject property is located along Township Road 334, also known as the Wimborne Road, approximately 25 kilometres northeast of Olds.
The three proposed lots were 1.46 acres, 1.58 acres, and 2.28 acres in size within SE 25-33-28-4. The property is in an identified agricultural preservation area.
The MPC ruled that the application did not comply with the Municipal Government Act (MGA) or with the county’s municipal development plan and land use bylaw. The applicant appealed the subdivision application refusal.
During the Jan. 2 SDAB hearing, the appellant told the SDAB that neighbouring landowners did not object to the subdivision, there are other similarly sized lots in the county, and the application proposes access easement for proposed lots.
In its response to the appeal, administration as the respondent reiterated that the proposal does not comply with the MGA, municipal development plan and land use bylaw.
Specifically, administration said two new lots exceeds the number of titles allowed for lands within agricultural preservation areas, that the new multi-lot residential subdivisions require paved internal access roads, that the proposal does not meet dwelling density rules or residential lots or within quarter section, and that the subject lands are not within a growth centre.
In it ruling, the SDAB gave seven reasons for denying the appeal, including the following (quoted from decision):
• The board respects the submission from the appellant that the proposed subdivision does have the support of adjacent landowners and that there may be similar subdivisions approved in various parts of Mountain View County. With that being said, the board notes that although it does consider adjacent landowner comments as a component of application review, that these comments do not outweigh the various areas of non-compliance with provincial and county legislation that the proposed subdivision demonstrates and therefore cannot be supported.
• The board has determined that the proposed subdivision is not compliant with Section 3.3.6 of Mountain View County Bylaw 20/20 municipal development plan as it would result in the exceedance of the total allowable lots permitted to be subdivided from the quarter section.
• Although the board respects that the Appellant has extensive experience in the construction industry and intends to provide on-site servicing for each new lot, the board determined that insufficient information was provided by the appellant to allow for the board to confirm if adequate water is available.
The appellant could appeal the SDAB decision to the Alberta Court of Appeal within 30 days of the board’s decision.
Both the MPC and the SDAB are made up of county councillors and appointed public members.
