MDP final reading on Aug. 15: Beattie
Mountain View County council will wait for the green light from its urban partners before proceeding to the final stages of adopting a new Municipal Development Plan, Reeve Bruce Beattie said Wednesday.
Outlining the timetable for passage of the revised document, Beattie said staff would bring back recommended changes to the MDP at the July 18 meeting, along with five proposed amendments to address the towns’ concerns over growth centres outside their boundaries.
If the amendments are approved following a council discussion, Beattie said, they will be forwarded to the towns for review.
“Then if Olds and Sundre decide their needs have been met, we’ll (vote on) second reading.”
If all goes according to schedule, council will vote on final reading of the MDP at its Aug. 15 meeting, following council’s summer break.
“At each one of those dates there are opportunities for change,” Beattie said.
The amendments were drafted by administration after both the towns of Sundre and Olds initiated the dispute resolution provision contained in their respective Intermunicipal Development Plans. The core concern of both town councils was the inconsistency between existing IDPs and the proposed MDP section on growth centres.
The amendments, presented by CAO Tony Martens at Wednesday’s meeting, specify:
• The MDP will not apply to lands within the IDP Fringe and IDP Referral Area. Land-use decisions in those areas will instead be guided by policies negotiated and approved in the IDP.
• For the Highway 2/27 Special Policy Area (Netook Crossing), lands within the IDP Fringe and IDP Referral Areas will no longer be redesignated to Direct Control District.
• IDPs “may require that municipal water and wastewater infrastructure be provided to the same standards as lands within the urban centre.”
Mayor Annette Clews confirmed with the Gazette after the meeting that the proposed amendment package would satisfy the Town of Sundre’s objections to the new MDP.
“It solidifies the working co-operative relationship between the municipalities,” Clews said.
The proposed change “sounds promising,” said Netook Crossing North developer Herb Styles, who sat in the gallery for Wednesday’s continuance of the June 27 public hearing on the MDP.
“I’m coming away with high hopes that they have to abide by their existing agreements,” Styles said.
“I feel very positive about the positions taken this morning.”
During the Town of Sundre’s presentation on June 27, Div. 6 Coun. Paddy Munro noted there was no mention of density in the IDP with the town.
“Would the Town of Sundre encourage high-density rural development on the fringe?” Munro asked the delegation.
“It is a process, and the council of the day would … determine” the density, Clews said.
The July 18 meeting will also give councillors the opportunity to propose changes to the MDP based on the public’s written submissions and oral presentations from the June 27 public hearing.
Div. 7 Coun. Al Kemmere gave notice last week that he will want to revisit the proposed Economic Growth Corridor provision, as it would “lead to piecemeal development” in areas of high visibility.
“I would like to have the highway corridor limited to Highway 2, one mile either way of the interchanges,” Kemmere said.
Beattie noted that similar concerns were raised by several public presenters during the hearing process and said it would be included as part of council’s July 18 discussions.