MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - The county’s subdivision and development appeal board (SDAB) has heard an appeal of an earlier refusal of a subdivision application in the Reed Ranch area east of Olds.
The 90-minute appeal hearing was heard in person and online on Jan. 2, with the appellant and the respondent each making presentations to the board, which is made up of county councillors and appointed public members.
In November the county’s municipal planning commission (MPC) refused a subdivision application to subdivide three lots within an existing 10 acre parcel.
The subject property is located along Township Road (Twp. Rd.) 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), and the county’s municipal development plan and land use bylaw.
The applicant appealed the subdivision application immediately following the MPC ruling.
During the Jan. 2 SDAB hearing, the appellant told the board 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.
As well, the appellant said soil testing from 2006 indicates that the site can accommodate multiple septic systems.
He called on the SDAB to reverse the MPC’s earlier decision.
“I think that the attitude towards subdivision in our area is misguided by council,” he told the board. “Our communities are being killed off by not allowing some housing to exist in our area. Farms are just becoming bigger and bigger and there’s less and less people living out in the farm community.
“No growth is allowed there and it’s killing our communities. It’s killing the small villages and towns throughout the province and not just this province. These small communities are just dying out and with them the community centres, the schools, you name it.”
In its response to the appeal, administration as the respondent called on the board to uphold the refusal.
Administration 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 (not access easement agreements), 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.
The SDAB is expected to give its ruling on the appeal within 15 days of the Jan. 2 hearing.
