MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF FOOTHILLS NO. 31 January 21, 2015

Location: M.D. of Foothills Administration Office 309 Macleod Trail South – High River

COUNCIL AGENDA

A. GENERAL MATTERS

1. Call Meeting to Order 2. Approval of the Agenda as Distributed 3. Consideration of Additions to the Agenda 4. Minutes – January 14, 2015 5. Accounts – January 21, 2015

B. PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING

C. PUBLIC HEARINGS & MEETINGS

Theresa Chipchase Pg. 3 10:00 am *1. Hayes, M.P. Hayes Investments Ltd. & Martain Enterprises Ltd.

SE 04-22-29-W4M – Amend CR District (three parcels) Drew Granson

Pg. 22 10:50 am *2. Rancho Verde Stables Ltd. – NW 17-22-01-W5M – Site Specific Amendment (To Allow a Maximum of 40 Animal Units on the Subject Properties) Theresa Chipchase

Pg. 36 1:30 pm *3. 1588803 Alberta Ltd. – SW 35-21-01-W5M – A to CR District & Amend CR District (eighteen parcels) Heather McInnes

Pg. 61 2:30 pm *4. 1094468 Alberta Ltd. – SW 19-19-28-W4M – Development Permit Application D. MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING ITEMS

Pg. 69 *1. 1827438 Alberta Ltd. – S 26-21-01-W5M – 2nd & 3rd Reading Bylaw Pg. 72 *2. Teen Challenge Inc. – NW 36-22-03-W5M – 2nd & 3rd Reading of Bylaw

E. SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ITEMS

Pg. 78 *1. Majer – SW 31-22-04-W5M – Subdivision Approval Pg. 84 *2. 1827438 Alberta Ltd. – S 26-21-01-W5M – Subdivision Approval &

Road Name Request Pg. 91 *3. Kromm – NW 29-22-02-W5M – Acknowledgement of Receipt of

SDAB Order No. S03/14

Page 1

F. MISCELLANEOUS MUNICIPAL ITEMS

G. TABLED ITEMS

H. NEW BUSINESS

1. Committee Reports I. OTHER MATTERS

1. Adjourn 2. Next Meeting – January 28, 2015 at 9:00 am 3. January Accounts Review – Councillors: J. Parker, R. Chase & D. Miller

Page 2

PUBLIC HEARING

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPT. REPORT LAND USE BYLAW AMENDMENT

January 21st, 2015 at 10:00 am

LANDOWNER: Terrance Hayes, Michael Hayes & Corp. and Ron Martian & Corp.

AGENT: Mark Mooney

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE 04-22-29-W4M, Plan 7911289, Lot 3

DIVISION: #6– Larry Spilak

EXISTING PARCEL: 19.74 ac

EXISTING LAND USE: Country Residential

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: 3 x 3.0 to 4.48+/- acre CR parcels

FILE MANAGER: Theresa Chipchase

PROPOSAL: This application is to amend the Country Residential Land Use District to allow for the future subdivision of three additional 3.0 +/- acre to 4.48 +/- acre parcels from the 19.74 acre parent parcel, leaving a Country Residential balance of 8.91+/- acres.

LOCATION: The subject property is located approximately ¼ mile north of Dunbow Road One mile east of Highway 2 One mile south of the City of Calgary limits Eight miles north of the Town of Okotoks Directly east of the Hamlet of Heritage Pointe POLICY AREA: The proposal has been reviewed within the terms of the MDP2010 and the Land Use Bylaw. The application also falls within the Country Residential Policy Area within the Intermunicipal Development Plan between the City of Calgary and the MD of Foothills, considerations from this document have also been provided. QUARTER SECTION BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 1990 – Plan 1763LK, Lot 2 approved for two 2.5 acre lots from the NW corner of property,

never finalized. 1996 – Plan 7911289, Lot 4 one five acre lot approved from the 10 acre parent, reserves were

deferred as per the IDP with the City of Calgary. 1997 – Road allowance (32nd Street) closed north of applicants.

Page 3

1999 – Plan 9910947, Lot 1 and Plan 0010080, Lot 3, subdivision approved for a 2.0 and one

3.89 acre Country Residential parcel directly north of applicant. 1999 – Boundary adjustment approved adding lands to Plan 0412632, Block 2, Lot 1. 2000 – Plan 0011935, Block 1, Lots 1 through 5, 5 lot subdivision approved, 1.93 acres to 2.36

acres lots with internal road development and a 23.37 acre balance. Five 1.93 acre lots were applied for, Council was supportive of three 2.0 acre lots consistent with the IDP with the City of Calgary, the applicant disagreed and appealed the decision to the Alberta Planning Board who overturned Council’s decision. The applicant applied for and was granted 4 time extensions on the file. The applicant then appealed the road construction standards for the application, the appeal was denied. The applicant then asked Council to consider a revised site plan in consideration of the 1999 Land Use Bylaw coming into effect. The revised plan was accepted.

2001 – Wetland was filled in south of the applicant’s parcel, it was investigated by Alberta

Environment and the landowners at the time were required to remediate the site back to its original state under a Water Act approval.

2004 - Plan 0412632, Block 2, Lots 1 through 3 and Plan 0012707, Lot 3, 4 lot subdivision

approved, lots between 4.56 and 7.84 acres in size. Road extended east from five lot subdivision approved in 2000, directly north and east of the applicant. Approval required geotechnical reports for slope stability with established building envelopes with significant ERE registered over three of the four approved lots. Lots zoned CRA with respect to building envelopes and ERE’s. Public reserve was deferred by caveat on each of the lots as the lots are within the IDP with the City of Calgary. Lot 3 includes an old rail line which forms a unique bank on its north boundary. The ERE proposed was to be provided at the first significant break in the slope of the ravine (top of bank).

2009 – Plan 0912747, Block 10, Lots 1 through 3, 3 lot subdivision approved south west of

applicant. Lots zoned CRA with respect to building envelopes and ERE. ERE provided over the creek through the property. Overland drainage easement registered over the ERE.

SPECIAL SITE CONSIDERATIONS:

Physiography: Good building sites exist within the eastern portion of the property with rolling topography under grassland cover. Two large draws traverse the parcel from north to south, one to the east of the heavy tree cover and one adjacent to the west boundary line. The west draw has a creek running through it which connects to Environmental Reserve Easements registered both to the south and north of the property. The lands slope to the northern boundary, along two thirds of this property line, to a heavily treed valley. Slopes exists within the western half of the parcel within the heavy aspen tree growth, the areas from the tree line to the west boundary may have environmental significance that may

Page 4

bPo AwwnleWM AASp Pi

WI SN P II

be considerPublic workon the appli

Additionallywithin one owildlife movnorth of theetter to CouWatershed Manageme

Access: Access is pStreet Eastproposed fo

Public worknternal roa

Water / Wandividual s

Site ImprovNo structure

POLICY / P

DP (CITY ONTERMUN

red by Counks has also ication.

y there is coof the drawsvement thro property auncil that beManagement Plan 201

roposed to . A commoor Lots 1 an

ks has recod be constr

astewater: eptic dispo

vements: es or impro

PLANNING

OF CALGANICIPAL DE

ncil for protsuggested

oncern with s on the sit

ough the prond fall withecause theent Plan, Ph12 should b

Lots 2 andon approachnd 3.

mmended tructed to se

sal systems

ovements ar

CONSIDE

ARY/MD OFEVELOPME

tection, by wthat Enviro

regards toe, it has theoperty, as tin the Bow lands are whase 1: Wa

both be con

d 4 via sepah, leading t

that should ervice all lot

s and wate

re present o

RATIONS:

F FOOTHILENT PLAN

way of an Eonmental R

the identifie potential tthese drawsRiver Basiwithin the B

ater Quality sidered wit

arate approo two sepa

the applicats within the

r wells are

on the site.

LLS) N MAP 1 – P

EnvironmenReserve Eas

ied buildingto impact os eventuallyn. The City

Bow River Band the Bo

th the applic

oaches to bearate 5 to 6

ation be ape proposal.

proposed f

.

POLICY AR

ntal Reservsement sho

g site for Looverland flowy connect t

y of CalgaryBasin that tow Basin Wcation.

e constructmeter panh

proved by C.

for each lot

REAS

ve Easemenould be prov

ot 3. Locatew, creek anto the Bow y has statedthe Bow Ba

Watershed

ted directly handles is

Council tha

.

nt. vided

ed nd River d in their asin

to 32nd

at an

Subject parrcel

Page 5

2.2.2 COUNTRY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

1. Areas of country residential development are recognized within the M.D. of Foothills (see Map 1). These areas may further develop for country residential use according to the country residential policies of the M.D. of Foothills and this Intermunicipal Development Plan. Country residential areas within the Intermunicipal Development Plan may ultimately be incorporated into urban development. Subdivision applications within designated areas of existing country residential development should address this potential. Urban Overlay Subdivision Design Principles

Each country residential plan of subdivision should take into consideration:

a. Conformity to country residential subdivision standards within the M.D. of Foothills

and the potential for future subdivision and redevelopment to urban standards and densities;

b. Protection and provision for future servicing and transportation rights-of-way, as described in Sections 2.6 and 2.7 of this Plan;

c. Wherever possible, creation of clustered country residential development; d. Wherever possible, provision for direct access to municipal roads without the

creation of panhandle lots; and e. Where necessary, the possible preparation of a conceptual scheme relating the

proposed subdivision to the future subdivision and development of the subject lands, balance lands and adjacent areas to urban standards and densities.

2. Municipal Reserve Principles

Municipal and/or school reserves should only be taken by direct dedication of land or registration on title of deferred reserve caveat. Cash shall only be taken in lieu of reserve after consultation with and agreement by The City of Calgary. There shall be no disposition of reserve land without appropriate Intermunicipal referral and consultation as provided for under Section 31 of this Intermunicipal Development Plan. In the event that two or more acres can be dedicated as municipal and/or school reserve neither deferred reserve nor cash in lieu of reserve may be taken; such reserve must be taken by direct dedication of land.

3. Environmental Reserve Principles

Lands that qualify as environmental reserve under Section 664(1) of the Municipal Government Act should be dedicated at the time of subdivision approval as either environmental reserve or environmental reserve easement in favour of the M.D. of Foothills.

4. Country residential development outside of designated country residential policy areas is discouraged. Nevertheless, land use redesignation application to permit further

Page 6

I

counacco

a. CD

b. Imin

c. Imin

d. Ime. Ef. Ag. Uh. A

3

5. On lashowa. C

csyC

b. Ac. In

a

6. Any a desstruc

ntermunicip

ntry residenording to the

ConservatioDevelopmenmpacts of dn Section 3mpacts on fn Sections 2mpacts on a

Effects of deAdequate acUrban overlaAppropriate

.1 of this In

ands adjacewn on Map Conform to tonsideratioystem, the

Creek; Address anynclude, wheny significa

subdivisionsignated cocture plan o

pal Develop

tial develope following

n of good ant Plan anddevelopmen.4 of this Plfuture servi2.6 and 2.7adjacent laevelopmentccess to roaay principleIntermunic

ntermunicip

ent to Natu2, each plathe subdivis

on to the pofocus of wh

y effects of ere necessaant Natural

n which wouountry residor concept p

pment Plan

pment withicriteria:

agricultural Land Use

nt on futurelan; cing and tra

7 of this Pland uses witt in environads, water

es, as listedcipal referraal Develop

ral Areas aan of subdivsion standa

otential for fhich is to be

developmeary, a concAreas, wild

uld create mdential policplan.

n Map 2 – N

n the M.D>

land, as deBylaw; urban grow

ansportation; thin both mmentally sesupply and

d under polial and consument Plan.

as defined uvision shoulards of the uture dedice the valley

ent on Natueptual sche

dlife habitat

more than fcy area may

Natural Area

> of Foothill

efined in the

wth corrido

on corridors

municipalitieensitive or hd septic/sewcy 1 aboveultation as

under Sectiold: M.D. of Foo

cation of a cy of the Bow

ural Areas; aeme relatinand corrido

fifteen couny require th

as and Hab

ls should be

e M.D. of F

rs and facil

s and faciliti

s; hazardous wage handlie; and provided fo

on 2.5.4 of

othills and gcontinuous w River, Pin

and g the propoors or bodie

ntry residenhe preparati

bitat Types

e evaluated

oothills Mu

ities, as de

ies, as desc

areas; ing systems

or under Se

this Plan a

give due open spac

ne Creek an

osed subdives of water

tial lots oution of an ar

Subje

d

nicipal

escribed

cribed

s;

ection

and

e nd Fish

vision to r.

tside of rea

ct parcel

Page 7

2 1

2

3

4

*Cp G Twsb

2.5.4 NATU

1. Natural 2. Both have on

2. A Naturaphysicaleither re

3. Where aand Fisheventuaabove.

4. Notwithsillustratefuture upbeen de

*NOTE* ThCalgary as property.

GROWTH M

The subjecwithin the Msubject parbelow.

URAL ARE

areas withimunicipalit these Natual Area is dl or historicaetains or haappropriateh Creek, inclly be align

standing poe or assumepdates. En

etermined.

e applicatioAspen Fore

MANAGEM

ct parcel is M.D. of Foocel within t

EAS

n the Intermties will giveural Areas. defined as oal compones had re-es, certain Nacluding suced to a con

olicy 3 above existing onvironmenta

on falls withest, specific

MENT STRA

located wothills Growthe District

municipal De due cons

open spaceents, whichstablished aatural Areasch wetlandsntinuous op

ve, Map 2 (“or proposedal significan

hin an area cally throug

ATEGY (GM

ithin the Cwth Managis identifie

Developmenideration to

e containing, although ia natural chs outside th

s as the Briden space s

“Natural Ared park land.nce or cond

of land desgh the draw

MS)

Central Distement Stra

ed by the g

ap

nt Plan bouo any impac

g unusual oit need not haracter. he valleys odle Creek asystem as id

eas and ha Boundarie

dition of the

scribed withw and creek

rict (highligategy. Thereen star o

Approximate location of

applicant withinDistrict

ndaries arects that dev

r representbe comple

of the Bow and Priddis dentified un

abitat Typeses will be fuse Natural

hin the IDP k areas iden

ghted belowe approximon the Dist

n

e identified velopment m

tative biologtely undistu

River, PineSloughs m

nder Sectio

s”) does nourther refineAreas has

with the Cintified on th

w in red) amate locatio

rict map as

on Map may

gical, urbed,

e Creek may

n 2.5.3

ot ed in not

ity of is

as noted n of the s shown

Page 8

Growth Management Vision for the Central District: “The Central District of the MD has been the growth engine for the MD and this trend is expected to continue into the future. While significant development and intensification of development is expected in this area, it will need to be undertaken bearing in mind the aspirations of our municipal neighbors and with due consideration to riparian and wetland areas. Opportunities for joint initiatives will play a key role in providing effective, efficient and affordable services for this area.” MDP2010 Policy 3, 8 and 9 in the Residential Section of the MDP 2010 reads: 3. Proposals for residential parcels should be developed to be compatible with the surrounding area and existing land use. Consideration will be given to the density, design, traffic and the visual impact of the proposal on the adjacent lands. Proposals shall be considered on the basis of the following criteria:

3.1 Impact on agricultural industry, the efficient use of land and the conservation of water 3.2 Guidance found within this MDP, and other documents as listed in Appendix A, Planning Hierarchy 3.3 Impact on the natural capital of the MD 3.4 Suitability of the land for residential uses 3.5 Environmental significance of the land and adjoining properties 3.6 Environmental impact 3.7 Cumulative effects of development 3.8 Condition of the Provincial and/or Municipal road servicing the proposed

development. 8. All residential developments shall meet the approved MD standards including, but not

limited to soil, slope stability and water table analysis, biophysical assessment, proof of water, water and wastewater systems requirements, storm water management, road design, setbacks, site coverage, building heights, landscaping and dedication of reserves.

9. All residential parcels shall have a developable area of land which: 9.1. Is not subject to the development restrictions such as those created by sour gas or

other natural resource extraction, flooding, hazardous lands, landfills, transfer stations, sewage lagoons or other restrictions as indicated by the MGA and the Provincial Planning Regulation.

9.2. Contains a water table and soils suitable for the construction of a residence and the wastewater disposal system to be utilized.

9.3. Does not exceed 15% in slope unless a report has been submitted to the satisfaction of the MD, prepared by a qualified Professional which indicates that the developable area is suitable for residential construction.

9.4. Meets the setback requirements of the Land Use Bylaw.

Page 9

MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF FOOTHILLS LAND USE BYLAW (Adopted by Bylaw 60/2014, December 17th, 2014) SECTION 9 GENERAL REGULATIONS 9.8 DEVELOPABLE AREA FOR PARCELS

9.8.1 Every lot in a subdivision must include a suitable developable area, which is defined

as the minimum area required to ensure that there is adequate space for a building site, water well and sewage disposal system taking into account the setback distance requirements of the municipality’s land use bylaw, any required setbacks recommended by a geotechnical engineer following a review of the site, meets provincial requirements, and meets the following criteria:

a. The developable area is not subject to the development restrictions such as those

created by sour gas or other natural resource extraction, flooding, hazardous lands, landfills, transfer stations, sewage lagoons or other restrictions as indicated by the Act and the Provincial Planning Regulation;

b. The developable area contains a water table and soil suitable for the construction

of a building site and wastewater disposal system to be utilized;

c. The developable area does not exceed 15% in slope unless a report has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Municipality, prepared by a qualified Professional which indicates that the developable area is suitable for residential construction; and

d. The developable area is sufficient to accommodate all buildings within the

applicable setback requirements for the land use district; and e. The developable area is considered developable by the Subdivision Authority. SECTION 13 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS 13.1 COUNTRY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 13.1.1 PURPOSE AND INTENT

To provide for acreage development consistent with the policies outlined in the Municipal Development Plan.

13.1.2.1 SUB-DISTRICT 13.1.2.1 Parcels may include the following sub-districts in cases where Council feels that

there is a need. Not all parcels will be separated into sub-districts. Should a parcel include the sub-district, all district rules apply with the addition of the special provisions noted in accordance with the sub-district.

13.1.2.2 Sub-district “A” is a designation added to the land use district indicating a

requirement for special consideration on the development of the site and/or placement and construction of buildings or structures on the lands through approval

Page 10

of a development permit. Reference Section 2.4 of this Bylaw for more details on special provisions for parcels with sub-district “A”.

13.1.7.4 Minimum Environmental Setback Requirements:

a. Slope: i. Adjacent to a slope of 15% (8.3 degrees) or greater, development shall be

setback a minimum of 30 meters or the distance determined by a Geotechnical Report.

b. Water Body

i. 30 meters (98.43 ft.) (from top of bank); or ii. Setback determined appropriate by the Approving Authority in accordance

with the “Riparian Setback Matrix Model”, whichever is greater. CIRCULATION: Landowners (1/2 mile)

No letters received prior to the submission of this Staff Report

Western Wheel

Advertised January 7th and January 14th, 2015

AER The AER no longer illustrates abandoned well sites within their referral responses through “Directive 79 - Surface Development in Proximity to Abandoned Wells” Additionally the AER no longer provides responses to the municipality, if the application does not result in additional overnight accommodations.

The landowner however has ensured through their due diligence in response to AER’s Directive that no abandoned wells exist within the confines of their parcel.

Alberta Transportation

No objections or concerns

Public Works Public Works has reviewed the application and has the following recommendations, all as conditions of redesignation: Stormwater Management Plan Comprehensive Site Drainage Plan Lot grading plan Building envelopes High Water Table testing for foundation design and Septic System Septic Disposal Evaluation Public Works also requests the following as a condition of the subdivision: Additional 5 meters of road widening west side of 32nd Street East. Public Works also recommends that an internal road be constructed to service the development proposal with all lot access provided from the

Page 11

internal road and Environmental Reserve easements provided over the portions of Lots 1 and 3, west of and inclusive of the tree line.

Municipal Fire Chief

No concerns

City of Calgary The City of Calgary Administration believes this application to be in line with the goals and intent of the Foothills/Calgary Intermunicipal Development Plan and therefore the City has no objections. However, we wish to outline our concerns and make the following comments for your consideration. The subject lands fall within an area identified in the Foothills/Calgary Intermunicipal Development Plan as a Country Residential Policy Area as per “Map 1: Policy Areas”. As such, the principles and policies of section “2.2.2 Country Residential Development Policies” must be addressed. Specifically; 2.2.2 – 1d. Wherever possible, provision for direct access to municipal roads without the creation of panhandle lots; The subject lands are also located within/adjacent to Aspen Forest as denoted by “Map 2: Natural Areas and Habitat Types”. Policies of section 2.5.4 Natural Areas” must be addressed. The subject lands are also located within the Bow River Basin. There are two watershed management plans that apply to the development area, the Bow Basin Watershed Management Plan, Phase 1 and the Bow Basin Watershed Management Plan 2012 which should be considered in the planning process.

OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL’S CONSIDERATION: Following are possible options for Council’s consideration: OPTION #1: APPROVAL Council may choose to grant 1st reading to the land use bylaw amendment to allow for the future subdivision of three additional 3.0 to 4.48+/- acre Country Residential parcels with an 8.91 acre Country Residential balance on Plan 7911289, Lot 3 SE 04-22-29-W4M for the following reasons: Council supports the application as it is considered to be in alignment with the intent of the Residential Section of the MDP2010, specifically with respect to directing additional Country Residential development to lands already zoned Country Residential.

Page 12

Staff suggests that Council impose the designation of CR – A district on the proposed lots to ensure that all recommendations and restrictions as outlined in the storm water management plan, site drainage plan, lot grading plan, septic disposal evaluation, building envelope identification and high water table testing for foundation design and septic system are complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works department as conditions of the development permit. A completion certificate by a Professional Engineer verifying all aspects of the noted reports have been met and a $5,000.00 deposit as a pre-release condition to ensure compliance of all conditions of the development permit may also be required by Council. Should Council choose to grant first reading to the Bylaw they may wish to impose the following conditions: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR OPTION #1:

Applicant to fully execute and comply with all requirements as outlined within a Development Agreement(s) for the purposes of payment of the community sustainability fee, storm water management, lot grading and any other necessary municipal and on-site improvements as required by Council and the Public Works department;

Storm water Management Plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Comprehensive site drainage plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Lot grading plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Submission of a Geotechnical Report completed in accordance with MD standards to be provided for high water table testing for foundation designs and septic systems for each of the lots proposed to the satisfaction of the Public Works department, as a condition of subdivision ;

Submission of Septic Disposal Evaluations for each of the lots proposed to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Site plan to be provided which identifies building envelopes on each of the lots proposed which meets the requirements as outlined in Policy 9 under the Residential section of the MDP2010 to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Proof of water as per the Provincial Water Act on all proposed parcels; Final redesignation lot fees to be submitted; Submission of an executed subdivision application and the necessary fees.

OPTION #2: REFUSAL Council may choose to refuse the application that would allow for the future subdivision of three 3.0 to 4.48 +/- acre lots for the following reasons: In consideration of the criteria noted within Policy 3 in the Residential Section of the MDP2010 Council is of the opinion that the application insufficiently addresses the intent of the Residential Policy with respect to the environmental impact, the cumulative effects of the development and the suitability of the site for residential purposes. Further Council considers the development to be

Page 13

inconsistent with the intent of the Country Residential Policy within the Intermunicipal Development Plan with the City of Calgary with specific respect to Policy 2.2.2 – 1d. requesting direct access to municipal roads without the creation of panhandle lots. ENCLOSURES:

Location Map Land Use Map Subject and Adjacent Lot Sizes Proposed Site Plan Lot Ortho Water Well Reconnaissance Report

Page 14

LOCATION MAP

City of Calgary

Okotoks

Heritage Pointe

Hwy 2 Hwy 2A

Hwy 552

Dunbow Road

Subject Parcel

Hwy 552

Hwy 7

Hwy 549

Page 15

44St

E

246 Av E

226 Av E

72 S

t E

243 Av E

256 Av E

218 Av E

258 Av E2255 Dr W

2255 Dr E

236 Av E

Bow RiverBottom Tr E

Dunbow Rd E

76 S

t E

66 St E

Dewinton Riding Club Rd E

Norri s

Coulee Tr

1014 Dr E

255 Av E

1020

DrE

62 St E24 S

t E

262 Av E 261 Av E

48 S

t EH eritageLakeShore

s

Herit

ageP

o inte

Dr

Mead

ow

PointeDr 56

St E

H erita ge

Is l e

Ranc

heDr

Old Quarry Rd W

ShannonLoop

Her

itage LakeDr

16 S

t E

Shan

non

Hill

Norris

Co

ulee Loop

De Winton

Heritage Pointe

DC23

DC11

25272830

32 34 35 36

34

12

3 4 514131110 129 15 16

2423222120191817

3230 312928272639 403836353433

41 4644 47 4842 4351

22-29

Page 7

.

Municipal District of Foothills No. 31Land Use Map Book

This map is compiled by the MunicipalDistrict of Foothills No. 31. Reproduction,in whole or in part, is prohibited without express permissionfrom the Municipal District of Foothills No.31.The MD of Foothills No. 31 provides this information in good faithbut provides no warranty nor accepts any liability arising fromincorrect, incomplete or misleading information or its improper use.Information is maintained on a regular basisData Sources Include Municipal Records and AltaLIS.

Multiple Land Uses

A- Agricultural

AA - Agricultural Sub A

CMH- Commercial Hamlet

CMP - Commercial PArk

CMR- Commercial Rural

CMY- Commercial Highway

CR- Country Residential

CRA- Country Residential Sub A

DC- Direct Control

EP- Environmental Protection

ER- Environmental Reserve

INH- Industrial Hamlet

INN- Industrial Natural Resources

INP - Industrial Park

INR- Industrial Rural

MR- Municipal Reserve

PUL - Public Utility

R- Residential

RA- Residential Sub A

REC- Recreation

SR- School Reserve

August 15, 2014Page 16

SUBJECT AND ADJACENT LOT SIZES

Subject Parcel

Page 17

SITE PLAN

Page 18

LOT ORTHO

Page 19

WATER WELL RECONNAISANCE REPORT

Page 20

Page 21

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MEETINGS

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT

LAND USE BYLAW AMENDMENT January 21, 2015 at 10:50am

LANDOWNER: R.G. Greene Holdings Ltd. & Rancho Verde Stables Ltd.

APPLICANT: CivicWorks Planning & Design, Kristi Beunder

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NW 17-22-01 W5M; S & E of Road & LSD 11

DIVISION: #5 – Ron Chase

EXISTING PARCEL: 32.87+/- acres & 21.29+/- acres

EXISTING LAND USE: A – Agricultural

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: N/A

FILE MANAGER: Drew Granson

PROPOSAL: The purpose of the application is for Site Specific Amendment to the Agricultural Land Use District to allow for an existing Private Riding Arena on the subject lands to be used as a Limited Public Arena, and to allow up to 40 animal units on the subject parcels, as well as, to allow for a Dance Studio to operate within the Arena.

LOCATION:

The subject properties are located at the west end of 198th Avenue West, and directly east of 80th Street West. This is approximately 2 kilometers south of Highway 22X, and within the City of Calgary and MD of Foothills Intermunicipal Development Plan Area. POLICY AREA:

The proposal falls within the M.D. of Foothills/City of Calgary Intermunicipal Development Plan but does not fall within an Area Structure Plan, Outline Plan, or Area Redevelopment Plan and has therefore been reviewed within the terms of the MDP2010, the Land Use Bylaw, and the M.D. of Foothills/City of Calgary Intermunicipal Development Plan. PROPOSAL:

The applicants are proposing a Limited Public Riding Arena and Boarding Facility with a maximum of 40 Horses to attend the property at any given time. In addition, the applicants are proposing a Dance Studio to operate in conjunction with the apartment located within the riding arena. The subject lands are under two separate titles; one consisting of 21.29 acres, containing a 34,877 square foot equestrian centre currently being used under private arena status, a 5,600 square foot storage and machinery building, an outdoor riding arena, and several paddocks. The second title consists of a 32.87 acre parcel containing an outdoor riding arena, paddocks, and pasture land. A small hay shed and several shelters are also located within the 32.87 acre parcel. No additional structures are proposed with this application. The existing equestrian centre contains a 12,500 square foot indoor arena, a 2,500 sq. ft. lunging arena, a 1,500 sq. ft. hot

Page 22

walker area, and 41 stalls. In addition, the second story of the equestrian centre contains a 1,212 sq. ft. 2 bedroom apartment, and a 3,493 sq. ft. office and viewing area. The subject parcels total 54.07 acres in size which currently allows for a maximum of 18 animal units. The applicant has stated that allowing 40 animal units is to utilize the existing 41 stalls within the equestrian centre for indoor boarding. The 2 bedroom apartment is the only residence on the subject lands and is currently occupied by the daughter of the landowner. The applicant has stated that the proposed dance studio would meet requirements of minor home occupation, including but not limited to a maximum of one non-residential employee and a maximum of four business visits per day. The dance studio is proposed to operate during weekday evenings, Saturdays from 9:30am to 3:00pm, and closed on Sundays. Four off site employees associated with the Riding Arena use are proposed and the Arena would operate seven days a week between 8:00am and 8:00pm Monday to Friday and 8:00am to 6:00pm on Saturday and Sundays. Arena operations would generate no more than the 16 vehicle trips per day. The two proposed operations would generate a maximum of 20 non-residential visits per day.

Note: For a detailed schedule of dance studio hours of operation, please refer to the attached submission.

Note: For a detailed description of the full amendment proposal, please refer to the attached submission.

SPECIAL SITE CONSIDERATIONS:

Access:

Access to the 21.29+/- acre parcel is on the east property line through an existing approach off of the offset cul-de-sac on 198th Avenue West. This approach would require widening to meet commercial approach standards. An existing common approach off of 80th Street West provides direct access to the 32.87+/- acre parcel from the west. As well, this parcel is accessed indirectly through the 21.29+/- acre parcel from the east. Physiography:

Topography: The subject properties contain mixed topography, including steep north facing ridges and flatter terraces and two gullies which run south to north; one in the west portion and the other along the shared property line in the southern portion of the two subject parcels. The structures are all located in the northern portion of the subject lands which is relatively flat with subtle northern facing slope

Vegetation: Most of the 32.97+/- acre parcel is grassland, dense trees cover the western portion of this property, and tree stands are located along the two shallow gullies. The 21.29+/- acre parcel is predominantly treed including the gully and a ridge located directly south of the equestrian centre is densely treed. A shelter belt is located along the driveway and north boundary.

Page 23

Site Improvements:

A hay shed and several shelters are located within the 32.97+/- acre property; there are multiple structures along the north property line which do not meet 15 meter side yard setback requirements. An outdoor riding arena and small paddocks are also located within this parcel. The 21.29+/- acre parcel contains six large paddocks, an outdoor riding arena, the equestrian centre, and the 5,600 sq. ft. storage building. The equestrian centre is entirely surrounded by paved surface which contains underground storm drains. A concrete bay for manure and shavings handling is located off the southwest corner of the equestrian centre. No additional structures are proposed with this application.

Note: For a detailed description of site improvements and proposal, please refer to attached submission.

Background

An 18.71 acre parcel was subdivided from the 40 acre parent parcel in 1997 resulting in the subject 21.29 acre parcel. In 1980, the landowners of the 40 acre parcel applied for the development permit to allow a private use riding arena with built in apartment for the accommodations of a horse trainer, proposing no additional traffic and no public use of the facility. Approval at this time allowed for a maximum of 13 animal units on the 40 acre property. This approval was appealed by two adjacent landowners; however, the Development Appeal Board upheld the Development Permit Approval. Two additions to the arena and stables of 3960 sq. ft. and 2052 sq. ft. were approved in 1985. The two closest dwellings are approximately 150 meters and 200 meters from the existing equestrian centre. Both of these dwellings are approximately 250 meters from the existing manure storage bay. Area History Access to the subject property crosses NE 17-22-01 W5M via 198th Avenue West; within this

quarter section there are seventeen Country Residential parcels. In 1980, an equestrian facility was allowed for the boarding and training of up to 33 horses, on

plan 204LK Block 5, which is a 16.8+/- acre parcel approximately 160 meters east of the subject property. This existing equestrian park is considered non-conforming; a non-conforming use of land or buildings may continue; however, no additional buildings may be constructed on the lot while the non-conforming use continues, and no clinics or events are allowed on this property. In addition, an application in 2004 for amendment to the Country Residential district to bring the facility into compliance including the addition of a 260 stall Horse Shelter and an application in 2005 to redesignate this parcel from Country Residential to Direct Control for the purpose of a Commercial Equestrian Facility were both refused, due to Council’s opinion that these additions were considered to be excessive on a parcel of 16+/- acres in size, and would have a negative impact on adjacent lands.

An application for Site Specific Amendment, within a 3.07 acre portion of SW 20-22-1 W5M, to allow an Intensive Vegetation Operation was refused, in 2007, due to its incompatibility with the surrounding land uses.

In 2009, a 9.24 acre parcel approximately 300 meters east of the subject lands received approval for a Development Permit for a Bed & Breakfast.

Page 24

On June 18th, 2014, application for an Indoor Commercial Dog Kennel, on a 9.49 acre parcel, approximately 700 meters east of the subject lands, was refused due to Council’s opinion that considering the size and restraints of the parcel, the applicants are unable to meet the required setbacks of 300 meters from the kennel facility to any dwelling located on adjacent lots, and as a result the proposed use may be beyond the scope of development suitable on this size of a Country Residential property.

The Direct Control District #1 is approximately one kilometer north of the subject parcels. This DC District is specific to Spruce Meadows Equestrian Centre. There are no permitted uses and discretionary uses include; accessory uses, country recreational centres and lodges, dwellings, extensive agricultural uses, and intensive agricultural uses.

In 2012, a Development Permit for Intense Vegetation Operation, specifically a private use tree farm for the Spruce Meadows tree replacement program, was approved for 11+/- acres of a 59.23 acre portion of SW 20-22-1 W5M.

POLICY / PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

MDP 2010: Policies 3 and 4 in the Agricultural Section of the MDP2010 read: 3. Agricultural uses and industries that support agriculture should be encouraged to locate in the

Municipality. Non-agricultural uses should only be permitted on lands where the MD judges the proposal to have minimal negative impacts on the agricultural resource.

Policy 2 in the Economy Section of the MDP2010 reads: 2. Proposals for commercial or industrial developments in addition to Natural Resource Extraction

should be developed to be compatible with the surrounding area and existing land use. Consideration shall be given to size, design, noise, odor traffic, dust and the visual impact of the proposed on the adjacent lands. Proposals shall also be considered on the basis of the following criteria:

2.1. Appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure. 2.2. Land use conflicts are minimized. 2.3. Impact on adjoining lands. 2.4. Reasonable privacy is afforded to residents 2.5. Design does not preclude the possible development of adjoining lands. 2.6. Retention of the natural site features. 2.7. Efficiency of use of land.

LAND USE BYLAW:

As this is an application for a Site Specific Amendment, the inclusion of land use considerations that exist under the Land Use Bylaw ie: setbacks, permitted signage, allowances for structure, etc.; fall to Council’s discretion.

“permitted use – site specific” means a use provided for in a Site Specific Use Bylaw for which, subject to the limitations outlined in the Site Specific Use Bylaw, the development authority must, if the application otherwise conforms to this Bylaw, issue a development permit. The following are sections directly affecting the subject application: 10.1 AGRICULTURAL USES AND LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS 10.3 RIDING ARENA 10.5 BOARDING SERVICE 10.12 HOME BASED BUSINESSES

Page 25

CIRCULATION:

Landowners (1/2 mile)

No letters have been received prior to the submission of this Staff Report.

Western Wheel Advertised January 7th and January 14th, 2015. Public Works Existing approach off of 198th Avenue West requires widening to the

satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Alberta Health Services

The applicant must ensure than no nuisance exists as defined under the Nuisance and General Sanitation Regulation (AR 243/2003) of the Public Health Act of Alberta (RSA 2000);

The applicant must ensure that the water is potable as stated in the Nuisance and General Sanitation Regulation (AR 243/2003) of the Public Health Act of Alberta (RSA 2000).

Community Development

Applicant must obtain Historical Resources Act approval.

FORTIS Alberta No objection to the proposal and no easements required. TELUS Requires an easement to protect service cable. Ab. Environment No Concerns. Safety Codes If approved, the existing structure will require a Professional Engineer

Review to ensure all Alberta Building Code requirements for the proposed use and occupancy. An approved copy of this Professional Engineer Report to be submitted to the Municipal District of Foothills No. 31 as a condition of occupancy.

ATCO Pipelines No Objection. Fire Chief No Comment. City of Calgary The City of Calgary Administration respectfully recommends the M.D. of

Foothills to; Ensure the manure containment area and manure handling operations

meet the highest level of best practices and exceed the requirements of the Agricultural Operations and Practices Act. In alignment with the SSRP, the growing importance of cumulative effects management highlights the need for a detailed approach to this matter.

Take into account the impact of future roadway and interchange configurations on Highway 22X of the Provincial Southwest Calgary Ring Road project.

Watershed Management Plans, recommendations of noted plans should be considered in the planning process: The Bow Basin Watershed Management Plan, Phase 1: Water Quality:

this plan contains water quality objectives and recommends actions to be taken to maintain or improve surface water quality within the basin.

The Bow Basin Watershed Management Plan 2012: this plan has recently been completed and provides watershed recommendations on land use and water resources.

Page 26

OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: The following are possible options for Council’s consideration: OPTION #1: APPROVAL OF SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT

Council may choose to grant 1st reading to the Site Specific Land Use Bylaw Amendment application to allow for a Limited Public Arena, a maximum of 40 animal units on the subject lands, and Dance Studio as permitted uses on the 21.29+/- acre portion of NW 17-22-01 W5M and the 32.87+/- acre portion of NW 17-22-01 W5M as Council is of the opinions that the proposed development will not unduly interfere with neighbouring land uses or materially interfere with or affect the use, enjoyment, or value of neighbouring properties. Council may wish to impose the following conditions of approval:

It is the responsibility of the application to obtain the necessary Development Permits; Final redesignation lot fees to be submitted.

OPTION #2: REFUSE APPLICATION

Council may choose to refuse the application for Site Specific Land Use Bylaw Amendment to allow for a Limited Public Arena, a maximum of 40 animal units on the subject lands, and Dance Studio as permitted uses on the 21.29+/- acre portion of NW 17-22-01 W5M and the 32.87+/- acre portion of NW 17-22-01 W5M as Council is of the opinions that the proposed development is be beyond the scope of development suitable on the subject Agricultural properties. ENCLOSURES:

Location Map Half Mile Land Use Map Submitted Site Plan Submitted Proposal Outline

Page 27

Location Map

Subject Parcels

City of Calgary

198th Ave. W.

Page 28

Half Mile Land Use Map

Subject Parcels

Page 29

Submitted Site Plan

Page 30

Submitted Application Outline

Page 31

Page 32

Page 33

Page 34

Page 35

PUBLIC HEARING

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPT. REPORT January 21st, 2014 at 1:30 pm

LANDOWNER: 1588803 Alberta Ltd.

AGENT: CivicWorks Planning and Design / Kristi Beunder

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW 35-21-01-W5M and SW 35-21-01-W5M, Plan 9012375, Lot 1 and portion of Plan 0110200, Block 3, Lot 12 MR for proposed road construction

DIVISION: #5– Ron Chase

EXISTING PARCELS: 63.78 ac, 10.28 acres & 3.85 acres (MR parcel)

EXISTING LAND USE: Agricultural, Country Residential and Municipal Reserve

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: Eighteen (18) 2.44 to 2.77 +/- acre Country Residential lots over two titles, with MR and PUL spaces also proposed.

FILE MANAGER: Theresa Chipchase

PROPOSAL: Redesignation of the SW 35-21-01-W5M from the Agricultural Land Use District to the Country Residential Land Use District in order to permit the future subdivision of 18 Country Residential lots, lots proposed between 2.44+/- acres and 2.77 +/- acres. Municipal Reserve is to be provided along the full west boundary of the existing title as open space. The MR is to surround the storm pond for the development, which is to be provided as a 1.46 acre PUL. Additional MR is to be provided at the eastern end of the development in the form of a green space. Redesignation of the SW 35-21-01-W5M, Plan 9012375, Lot 1 from the Country Residential Land Use District to Municipal Reserve in order to provide reserve dedication to the above mentioned 18 lot subdivision proposal. Disposition of a portion of NW 26-21-01-W5M, Plan 0110200, Block 3, Lot 12 MRis proposed to facilitate road construction. The disposition of the MR proposed to the future subdivision.

LOCATION: The subject property is located seven and one half miles north of the Town of Okotoks, one mile west of the hamlet of Dewinton and directly east of Highway 552.

Page 36

POLICY AREA: The proposal does not fall within any Intermunicipal Plan, Development Concept Plan, Area Structure Plan, Outline Plan or Redevelopment Plan and has therefore been reviewed within the terms of the MDP2010, Growth Management Strategy and Land Use Bylaw. QUARTER SECTION BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 1968 – application approved to subdivide one 20 acre parcel from the north east corner of the quarter section as the first parcel. 1990 – application approved for one 10.5 acre parcel taken from the remainder of quarter section in the south west corner. 1998 - application approved for one 60 acre parcel approved from north half of quarter section. 1998 – 20 acre first parcel out consolidated into the 60 acre parcel along north boundary of

quarter. 2001 – 5 acre parcel approved, North West corner of quarter 2008 – 15 lot subdivision approved with lots ranging from 2.99 to 4.53 acres, a 6.12 acre

Municipal Reserve and road dedication between Lots 4 and 5, the subdivision is known as Dynasty Ridge.

SPECIAL SITE CONSIDERATIONS:

Topography: The property contains steep terrain with slopes levelling to a plateau along the eastern boundary, sloping from the plateau to the east and south boundaries. The lands continue to slope to the west, levelling to flat terrain adjacent to Highway 552. The terrain is rolling with grassland cover, with a small portion of wet hummocky land along the north boundary. Along the top of the plateau, there are sporadic aspens and some red willow. Access: Access to the site is proposed from internal road construction which would connect the development to Highway 552. The applicant has been working with the municipality’s public works department to consider all possibilities for construction within the municipality’s guidelines and have indicated that the road will be developed on a 7% grade. The applicant’s property also has access connections in the following locations:

Page 37

north through the Dynasty Ridge subdivision via an acquisition of land registered on two of the lots (see enclosed map). This acquisition if constructed would connect through two existing lots within the subdivision, to Dynasty Ridge Drive West with connection to 250th Avenue West.

south through an undeveloped road right of way that is surveyed out of the Eden Park

subdivision. This road right of way if constructed would connect to Eden Park View West with connection to 262 Avenue West. (see enclosed map)

Road construction would impact an overland drainage easement registered in 2012, for the benefit of the Eden Park subdivision (south of the application), which runs through the applicant’s 10.28 acre Country Residential parcel parallel to its south boundary (see enclosed map) The application also requests that a small portion of an existing reserve (Plan 0110200, Block 3, Lot 12 MR) be disposed of, in order that construction of the internal road developed for the property can be provided through these lands. *NOTE* - Disposition of a reserve or portion of a reserve requires the municipality to hold a separate public hearing. It must also provide a Bylaw indicating the area of the disposition and the area of the lands to remain under the Municipal Reserve dedication. The Bylaw is forwarded to the Registrar for removal of the MR designation from the appropriate lands, cancelling the existing titles and issuing new titles. Upon issuance of the new titles, the municipality has the right to sell the disposed lands. The Municipal Government Act establishes where the proceeds from the sale are to be allocated. They are as follows: MGA, Division 9, Use and Disposal of Reserve Land Use of reserve land, money 671(2) Municipal Reserve, school reserve or municipal and school reserve may be used by a municipality or school board or by them jointly only for any or all of the following purposes:

(a) A public park; (b) A public recreation area; (c) School board purposes; (d) To separate areas of land that are used for different purposes.

Stormwater: A 1.46 acre public utility lot is proposed, to contain a storm pond within the north west corner of the development area surrounded by the proposed Municipal Reserve parcel. Water: Individual ground water wells are to be drilled for each lot proposed. Groundwater is not proposed to be utilized for irrigation purposes, outside of the building envelopes provided. Exterior non potable usage will be accommodated through low impact development techniques, rainwater capture and private cisterns.

Page 38

Wastewater: All lots are to include high efficiency waste water systems. Land Uses: 45.21 acres Country Residential 17.06 acres Municipal Reserve 1.46 acres Public Utilities lot 10.41 acres Roads Density: The application under the municipality’s current density policy would be allowed to create 16 lots. The applicant has 18 lots within their proposal which would be classified as an exemption. The applicant has explained that they wish to apply the density bonusing provision, which would allow the two additional lots based on an over-dedication of Municipal Reserves in the amount of 20% as set out in Section 9.7 of the Land Use Bylaw which outlines the density bonus provisions. Density bonusing would also require that the Municipal Reserves provided are contiguous and developable. Municipal Reserve: The application requests that Council allow the proposed 1.46 acre Public Utility Lot to be surrounded by a 14.64 acre Municipal Reserve dedication north of the proposed internal road and 1.01 acres of Municipal Reserve dedication south of the proposed internal road. An additional 1.41 acres of reserve is to be provided within the middle of the road right of way at the eastern end of the proposed development as additional green space to be maintained by a Home Owners association registered on title to the properties. Note: The application proposes 17.06 acres of Municipal Reserve dedication and 1.46 acres of Public Utility which provides an over dedication of 10.69 acres, based on a 10% public reserve requirement. Based on a 20% public reserve requirement, the application would propose an over dedication of 4.33 acres. Improvements: No structures or improvements currently on property POLICY / PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: MDP2010: Policy 4 in the Agricultural section of the MDP2010 reads: 4. When considering the conversion of agricultural lands to other uses the Municipality shall

consider the following:

Page 39

P3

G Tnt

4.1 Guapp

4.2 Preope

4.3 Imppro

4.4 InfoMu

4.5 Re

Policy 3 in 3. Proposa

surroundtraffic anconsider

3.1 Imp3.2 Gui

Plan3.3 Imp3.4 Suit3.5 Env3.6 Env3.7 Cum3.8 Con

GROWTH M

The Subjecnoted withinthe subject

idance andproved planesent or proerations. pact the prooperty and pormation co

unicipality. sponse to r

the Resideals for resideding area and the visuared on the

pact on agridance founnning Hierapact on the tability of thvironmentalvironmentalmulative effndition of th

MANAGEM

ct Property n the M.D. property is

d Policy conns in the Plaoposed use

oposed useproperties tontained wi

referrals se

ential sectential parce

and existingal impact ofbasis of the

cultural indnd within thiarchy; natural cap

he land for r significanc Impact; fect of the dhe Provincia

MENT STRA

is located wof Foothillsidentified b

ntained withanning Hier

e of the land

e will have othat may bethin the far

ent to Provin

tion of the els should bg land use. f the propose following c

ustry, the eis MDP, an

pital of the Mresidential uce of the lan

developmenal and/or M

ATEGY:

within the Cs Growth Mby the gree

hin the Munrarchy found in the vici

on the existe affected.mland asse

ncial govern

MDP2010 be developeConsidera

sal on the acriteria:

efficient used other doc

MD; uses; nd and adjo

nt; unicipal roa

CENTRAL Managemenn star on th

Appr

nicipal Devend in Appennity, includ

ting or pote

essment re

nment depa

reads: ed to be co

ation will be adjacent lan

e of land ancuments as

oining prope

ad servicing

DISTRICTnt Strategyhe GMS Dis

roximate locatiwithin Di

elopment Pndix A of theing that of c

ential agricu

cords main

artments.

ompatible wgiven to th

nds. Propo

nd the conss listed in ap

erties;

g the propo

T (highlighte. The approstrict Map s

ion of applicanistrict

Plan and othe MDP. confined fe

ultural use o

ntained by t

with the he density, dosals shall b

ervation of ppendix A,

osed develo

ed below inoximate locshown belo

nt

her

eding

of the

he

design, be

water;

opment.

n red) as cation of w.

Page 40

Growth Management Vision for the Central District: “The Central District of the MD has been the growth engine for the MD and this trend is expected to continue into the future. While significant development and intensification of development is expected in this area, it will need to be undertaken bearing in mind the aspirations of our municipal neighbors and with due consideration to riparian and wetland areas. Opportunities for joint initiatives will play a key role in providing effective, efficient and affordable services for this area.” MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF FOOTHILLS LAND USE BYLAW (Adopted by Bylaw 60/2014, December 17th, 2014) SECTION 12 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS SECTION 12.1 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT 12.1.1 PURPOSE AND INTENT To promote a wide range of agricultural land uses that encourage growth,

diversification and development of the agricultural industry while having regard for the agricultural value and rural character of the area consistent with the policies outlined in the Municipal Development Plan.

12.1.2 SUB DISTRICT 12.1.2.1 Parcels may include the following sub-districts in cases where Council feels that

there is a need. Not all parcels will be separated into sub-districts. Should a parcel include the sub-district, all district rules apply with the addition of the special provision noted in accordance with the sub-district: a. Sub-district “A” is a designation added to the land use district indicating a requirement for special consideration on the of the site and/or placement and construction of buildings or structures on the lands through approval of a development permit. Reference Section 2.4 of this Bylaw for more details on special provisions for parcels with sub-district “A”.

SECTION 13 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS SECTION 13.1 COUNTRY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 13.1.1 PURPOSE AND INTENT

To provide for acreage development consistent with the policies outlined in the Municipal Development Plan.

13.1.2.1 SUB-DISTRICT 13.1.2.1 Parcels may include the following sub-districts in cases where Council feels that

there is a need. Not all parcels will be separated into sub-districts. Should a parcel include the sub-district, all district rules apply with the addition of the special provisions noted in accordance with the sub-district.

13.1.2.2 Sub-district “A” is a designation added to the land use district indicating a

requirement for special consideration on the development of the site and/or placement and construction of buildings or structures on the lands through approval

Page 41

of a development permit. Reference Section 2.4 of this Bylaw for more details on special provisions for parcels with sub-district “A”.

SECTION 9 GENERAL REGULATIONS 9.7 DENSITY BONUS

9.7.1 Over dedication of Municipal reserve lands, to a minimum of 20% total dedication, provided by way of developable land, may allow the developer a density bonus of up to 25% of the allowable density, at the discretion of Council in accordance with the density provisions listed in Section 9.7.

9.7.2 Density bonus incentives for Municipal/School Reserve in the Municipality are intended to apply primarily to comprehensively planned residential developments where one contiguous, developable parcel of land, can be dedicated and may be considered suitable by Council.

9.7.3 When considering if applications are suitable for density bonus incentives Council will give consideration to:

a. Size of the proposed development; b. Type and design of the development; c. Percentage of MR/School reserve lands proposed; d. Site characteristics;

e. The needs for a school site, fire halls, recreations centers, or other amenities in the subject area;

f. Potential impact on the surrounding area; g. Suitability of access for the site; h. Servicing capability; i. Any other considerations Council deems appropriate. CIRCULATION: Landowners (1/2 mile)

No letters received prior to the submission of this Staff Report

Western Wheel Advertised January 7th and January 14th, 2015

AER (Alberta Energy Regulator)

The AER no longer illustrates abandoned well sites within their referral responses through “Directive 79 - Surface Development in Proximity to Abandoned Wells” Additionally the AER no longer provides responses to the municipality, if the application does not result in additional overnight accommodations. The landowner however has ensured through their due diligence in response to AER’s Directive that no abandoned wells exist within the confines of their parcel.

Alberta Culture and Tourism – Historic Resources Management Branch

Applicant must obtain Historical Resources Act approval prior to proceeding with the subdivision development by submitting a Historic Resources Application through Alberta Culture and Tourism’s Online Permitting and Clearance (OPaC) system.

Page 42

Public Works Public Works has reviewed the application and has the following recommendations, all requirements to be obtained with the redesignation approval on all lots proposed:

• Stormwater Management Plan; • Comprehensive Site Drainage Plan; • Lot Grading Plans; • Building Envelopes for all proposed parcels; • Geotechnical testing and report; • Slope stability testing and report; • High Water Table testing for foundation design; • Septic Disposal evaluation;

Public works will also require that the internal road be designed to MD Municipal road standards as exemplified under design “C1” with a 7% maximum grade. The approach proposed would connect to an Alberta Highway, therefore the approach must meet and be accepted by Alberta Transportation.

Municipal Fire Chief No concerns

Alberta Transportation The following is paraphrased from Alberta Transportation’s letter, the full copy is attached to this staff report for Council’s review: “Development of the Eden Park and Dynasty Ridge country residential properties has made provision for the subject property to gain indirect access to Highway 552 by way of the local road system which would satisfy the requirement of road access as stipulated in Section 9 of the regulation. At this juncture there has been no provision but direct access to the highway of which subsequently would require development of an all directions intersection at 258th Avenue and Highway 552, strictly from Alberta Transportation’s point of view, the application as insufficient information to properly address the impact on the highway. The department is prepared to accept a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) to support and qualify this application. The assessment is necessary to develop an access management strategy that would be fully reflective of the departments current Access Management Guidelines and Highway Geometric Design Standards. As the TIA would adequately address any transportation related concerns in this instance a waiver of said Section 14 would be granted at the time of subdivision.”

Safety Codes Some of the proposed lots would require a Geotechnical report for slope stability and septic field concerns. Lot grading and contouring for the proposed internal road will be required to

Page 43

ensure suitable building sites and road access.

ATCO PIPELINES ATCO Pipelines has no objection OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: Following are possible options for Council’s consideration: OPTION #1: APPROVAL Council may choose to grant 1st reading to the application for redesignation of SW 35-21-01-W5M from Agricultural District to Country Residential District and the redesignation of SW 35-21-01-W5M, Plan 9012375, Lot 1 from Country Residential District to Municipal Reserve and to permit the future subdivision of 18, 2.44 to 2.77 +/- acre lots, three Municipal Reserve parcels and a Public Utility lot for the following reasons: In their consideration of the criteria noted in Agricultural Policies 4.3 and 5.4 of the MDP2010, Council is of the opinion that the proposal would not be detrimental to the agricultural use of the balance of the quarter section. In addition, Council agrees that the proposal is in alignment with the intent and policy outlined in the Residential section of the MDP2010 and the application falls within the density provisions (with support of bonus provisions) and lot size restrictions for Country Residential development. Staff suggests Country Residential – A district on all proposed parcels to ensure that the recommendations and restrictions as outlined in the septic disposal evaluation, high water table testing, building locations, storm water management plan, lot grading plan, geotechnical report, comprehensive site drainage plan and slope stability testing (all provided as conditions of redesignation) are constructed to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer, to be complied with as part of the development permit process. A completion certificate by a Professional Engineer verifying that all aspects of the noted reports have been met may be required. Council may also wish to require a $5000 deposit as a pre-release condition to ensure compliance of all conditions of the development permit. Should Council choose to grant first reading to the Bylaw they may wish to impose the following conditions: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR OPTION #1:

Consideration of a bylaw which disposes of a portion of Plan 0110200, Block 3, Lot 12MR subsequent to a public hearing;

Applicant to fully execute and comply with all requirements as outlined within a Development Agreement(s) for the purposes of construction of all internal road infrastructure, payment of the community sustainability fee, storm water management, lot grading and any other necessary municipal and on-site improvements as required by Council and the Public Works department;

Page 44

Stormwater Management Plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Compliance with all requirements as set forth by Alberta Transportation; Compliance with all requirements as set forth by Alberta Culture and Tourism; Comprehensive site drainage plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Lot grading plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Submission of a Geotechnical Report completed in accordance with MD standards to be provided for slope stability testing to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Submission of a Geotechnical Report completed in accordance with MD standards to be provided for high water table testing for foundation designs and septic systems for each of the lots proposed to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

Submission of Septic Disposal Evaluations for each of the lots proposed to the satisfaction of the Public Works department;

A traffic impact assessment will be required to be submitted to the satisfaction of Alberta Transportation;

Proof of water as per the Provincial Water Act on all proposed parcels; Final redesignation lot fees to be submitted; Submission of an executed subdivision application and the necessary fees.

OPTION #2: TABLE Council may choose to table the application pending the outcome of a public hearing to be scheduled, regarding the possible disposition of a portion of the Municipal Reserve parcel identified as Plan 9012375, Lot 1 SW 35-21-01-W5M, for the purpose of constructing a road. OPTION #2: REFUSAL Council may choose to refuse the application for the redesignation of SW 35-21-01-W5M from Agricultural District to Country Residential District and the redesignation of SW 35-21-01-W5M, Plan 9012375, Lot 1 from Country Residential District to Municipal Reserve and to permit the future subdivision of 18, 2.44 to 2.77 +/- acre lots, three Municipal Reserve parcels and a Public Utility lot for the following reasons: In consideration of Policy 2 of the Agricultural Section of the MDP2010, Council did not find sufficient merit in the proposal to consider removing the subject lands from the Agricultural land use district. Additionally, in their consideration of the criteria noted in Residential Policies 3.1, 3.4 and 3.7 of the MDP2010, Council is of the opinion that the application does not adequately address the intent of the Residential policy with respect to the suitability of the land for residential uses and the cumulative effects of the development.

Page 45

ENCLOSURES: Location Map Land Use Map Subject and Adjacent Lot Sizes Proposed Site Plan Lot Ortho Map of Drainage and Road Rights of Way Application proposal from applicant’s agent Water Well Reconnaissance Report

Page 46

LOCATION MAP

Subject Parcel

Okotoks

City of Calgary

Hwy 2A Hwy 2

Dunbow Rd.

Hwy 552

Hwy 549

Hwy 552

Hwy 547

Page 47

HWY 549 W

1096Dr W

274 Av W

16 St

W

262 Av W

286 Av W

242 Av W

2255 Dr W258 Av W

Macleod TR

HWY 5

52 W

266 Av W

306 Av W

12 St

W322 Av W

338 Av W

250 Av W

48 St

W

290 Av W

2322

Dr W

284 Av W

Meridian St

244 Av W

40 St

W

5 St W

24St

W

2242 DrW

20StW

DeWinton Ridge Rd

Dynasty D

rW

298 Av W

Old Quarry Rd W

2 St E

1080 D

r W

27StW

308 Av W

Crocus Meadows Dr W

De Winton

123456

7 8 9 10 11 12

1315161718

19 20 21 22 23 24

2627282930

31 32 33 34 36

7

18

30

De Winton

Heritage Pointe

3 4 514131110 129 15 16

2423222120191817

3230 312928272639 403836353433

41 4644 47 4842 4351

21-01

Page 12

.

Municipal District of Foothills No. 31Land Use Map Book

This map is compiled by the MunicipalDistrict of Foothills No. 31. Reproduction,in whole or in part, is prohibited without express permissionfrom the Municipal District of Foothills No.31.The MD of Foothills No. 31 provides this information in good faithbut provides no warranty nor accepts any liability arising fromincorrect, incomplete or misleading information or its improper use.Information is maintained on a regular basisData Sources Include Municipal Records and AltaLIS.

Multiple Land Uses

A- Agricultural

AA - Agricultural Sub A

CMH- Commercial Hamlet

CMP - Commercial PArk

CMR- Commercial Rural

CMY- Commercial Highway

CR- Country Residential

CRA- Country Residential Sub A

DC- Direct Control

EP- Environmental Protection

ER- Environmental Reserve

INH- Industrial Hamlet

INN- Industrial Natural Resources

INP - Industrial Park

INR- Industrial Rural

MR- Municipal Reserve

PUL - Public Utility

R- Residential

RA- Residential Sub A

REC- Recreation

SR- School Reserve

August 15, 2014Page 48

SUBJECT AND ADJACENT LOT SIZES

Subject Parcels MR – road construction proposed

through this parcel

Page 49

SITE PLAN

Page 50

LOT ORTHO

Page 51

MAP IDENTIFYING DRAINAGE AND ROAD RIGHTS OF WAY

Subject Parcels

Eden Park subdivision

Dynasty Ridge subdivision

Eden Park ROW connection

Dynasty Ridge Acquisition of Land on titles

Eden Park Drainage ROW

Page 52

LETTER FROM APPLICANT’S AGENT

Page 53

Page 54

Page 55

WATER WELL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT

Page 56

Page 57

Page 58

LETTER FROM ALBERTA TRANSPORTATION CONCERNING ACCESS

Page 59

Page 60

PUBLIC MEETING

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT

DIRECT CONTROL DISTRICT #2 January 21, 2014 @ 2:30 PM

LANDOWNER: 1094468 Alberta Ltd.

AGENT: Waddell Construction Ltd.

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Plan 0915629, Block 1, Lot 8 SW 19-19-28 W4

DIVISION: #1 – Rick Percifield

EXISTING PARCELS: 1.99 acres

EXISTING LAND USE: Direct Control District #2

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: N/A

FILE MANAGER: Heather McInnes

PROPOSAL: Development Permit Application 14D 232 This is an application for Development Permit that requests development of an 12,800 sq. ft. shop containing 5 bays and 2 of the bays are proposed to be rented out. The landowner has not provided staff with an idea of who the renters may be. The other bays are proposed to be used by a construction company, being Waddell Construction.

As Council is the development authority for Direct Control District lands, they shall decide on all applications for development permits, and may approve an application for the issuance of a development permit, with or without conditions or refuse the application in its entirety.

LOCATION: The subject property is located on the east side of Highway 2A, just south of Cargill. POLICY AREA: This property is located within the Highway 2A Industrial Area Structure Plan (H2AIASP) and development is guided by the Municipal Development Plan and the Highway 2A Industrial Area Structure Plan under the Industrial Commercial (IC) policy area. SITE CONSIDERATIONS: Access The subject property is accessed off of Highway 2A via 475th Avenue, which is a cul-de-sac road. PROPOSAL: The application is for a 160’ x 80’ (12,800 sq. ft.) industrial/commercial building that will include five bays, and five washrooms. Two of the bays have been stated to be rented out, although, no users have been identified on this application, and will be required to receive their own development permits, if Council feels this property can support more than just a construction company. The other bays are proposed to be used for Waddell Construction, which specializes in concrete foundations and flatwork. The applicants have stated that they have

Page 61

extensive equipment to achieve this in the way of wall panels, rebar, flatwork tools, crane, skid steers, excavators and trailers. This location is proposed to be used for the main shop for this business, and their existing place in Blackie will still be retained for their main office. It was stated that the equipment will be parked indoors when not in use. The form storage is proposed to in the North East corner of the property and in self-contained cages. Rebar will be stacked on dunnage beside this form storage. Garbage is proposed behind screening in a U shaped containment wall. The business will have approximately 4 – 5 employee vehicles parked at the shop during the working day and normally just their crane would be in and out of the shop a couple times per day. 1 -2 semi loads per week for loads in and out. This site will rarely see customer visits, work is done off site. Screening and Landscaping: Landscaping was only stated to be minimal in consideration for water usage. No other forms of screening have been proposed, nor have any plans been submitted with this application. OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: Following are three (3) possible options for Council’s consideration: OPTION #1: APPROVAL

Council may choose to grant approval for a Development Permit with the following recommended conditions: PRE-RELEASE CONDITION (Condition must be complied with before the Development Permit will be signed and released): The applicant is required to enter into a Development Agreement with the municipality,

regarding but not limited to: submission of performance securities, provision for the installation and connection to site services, provision indemnifying the municipality against any damages that may occur, and recovery of professional costs incurred by the municipality in regard to this development;

The applicant is required to submit a refundable security deposit in the amount of $3,000 in order to ensure compliance with the Alberta Building and Fire Codes for the proposed use and occupancy of the development. This security will be refunded at such time that final Alberta Building Code schedules C-1 and C-2 are submitted by the professional(s) involved, and written confirmation for occupancy of the structure is provided by the Municipal Safety Codes Officer and Municipal Fire Services.

ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS

This approval is for lot development of the construction of one 12,800 sq. ft. building, and identified outdoor storage areas. Addition to, or revisions to the development approved herein may occur only upon obtaining appropriate municipal approvals;

A parking plan is required subject to the Land Use Bylaw, shall be submitted and approved by the Development Officer of the M.D. of Foothills No. 31;

Each business or lease holder for each of the additional two bays MUST apply for separate Development Permits to carry out any use and/or storage and each storage area will be evaluated based on current, approved screening and landscaping designs.

Page 62

Having this approval does not guarantee approval of renters or leaseholders, nor does it guarantee outdoor storage;

the applicant shall construct the development in accordance with all conditions of approval and plans as submitted with the development permit application and acknowledged to be appropriate. Engineered drawings for sewerage, waterworks, service connections, curbs, sidewalks, roads and approaches, and lot grading may be required and submitted for acceptance, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Engineering. Development may commence only upon completion of pre-construction requirements and under permission of the Director of Public Works and Engineering;

the applicant is responsible for providing and confirming acceptance of a stormwater management and lot grading plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Engineering;

the applicant shall obtain any necessary building and/or safety code permits applicable to use and occupancy of the structure, and is to comply with the requirements of the Alberta Building, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes at all times. It is the applicants responsibility to contact Municipal Fire Services for final inspection of the building prior to occupancy;

the applicant is to provide a Professional Engineers review and stamped design for structural, mechanical, electrical and fire protection systems (including review for sprinkler and fire alarm systems and confirmation of suitability of available flow rate for fire suppression) for the use and occupancy of the principal building under this permit;

the applicant is responsible for observing the registered documents on title to the land, as well as complying with any requirements for the development regarding use and adjacency to existing right of ways;

the development shall comply with any applicable Town of High River Water and Sewage Bylaws and must ensure compliance with any Municipal District of Foothills requirements for water servicing, permits, inspections and allotments. It is the applicants responsibility to request inspections for servicing installation with the M.D. of Foothills Public Works department;

business licences from each of the renters are not permitted until they have a valid, approved development permit, however Waddell Construction must receive an annual business licence;

the applicant is required to obtain permits from Alberta Transportation with respect to the development and any associated signage. Proof of such is to be submitted to the Development Officer;

the development must meet all requirements of Alberta Health Services, including that all waste materials must be disposed of at an approved waste disposal site. There shall be no long term storage of waste materials on the property, nor burning of waste materials on the property. All garbage and recycling materials shall be stored in weather-proof and animal-proof containers;

a screening and landscaping plan is required to be submitted and approved by the Development Officer subject to the Screening Guidelines and the screening and landscaping plan must be carried out in its entirety within 12 months of this approval. Failure to comply with this deadline will result in this permit being considered null and void;

Page 63

exterior lighting applications accessory to these operations must adhere to the guidelines and technical specifications as outlined within the M.D. of Foothills Dark Sky Bylaw;

on site address and identification signage is not approved under this permit. Each individual renter/lease holder will be required to apply for their own individual Development Permits;

water use, fixtures and appliances installed for use within the development shall comply with requirements as are identified within the Highway 2A Industrial Area Structure Plan and its associated Design Guidelines;

issuance of a development permit by the municipality does not relieve the applicant of the responsibility of complying with all other relevant municipal bylaws and requirements, nor excuse violation of any provincial or federal regulation or act which may affect use of the land;

the applicant shall be responsible for payment of any professional costs, including legal fees that may be incurred by the Municipal District with respect to the development approved under this permit.

OPTION #2 TABLE APPLICATION Council may choose to table the application and request submission of any additional information that would confirm suitability of the proposal, at their discretion.

OPTION #3: REFUSAL Council may choose to refuse in part or in whole the application for a Development Permit if it is of the opinion that the application does not satisfactorily conform to those policies that guide use of this land. Or if they feel two additional uses (not yet identified) would be too intensive for the size of property. ENCLOSURES:

LOCATION MAP HALF MILE MAP AREA ORTHO MAPS SITE PLAN

Page 64

LOCATION MAP

Subject Property

Page 65

HALF MILE MAP

Page 66

ORTHO PHOTO

Page 67

SITE PLAN

Page 68

MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING ITEM

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2nd & 3rd Reading January 21st, 2015

COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 2nd and 3rd Reading of Bylaw 26/2014

LANDOWNER: 1827438 Alberta Ltd. AGENT: Darrell Pitts

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S. 26-21-01 W5M; Plan 7510979, Block B

DIVISION: #5 – Ron Chase

EXISTING PARCEL: 41.34 Acres

EXISTING LAND USE: A – Agricultural District

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: 7 CR-A Lots & 1 MR Lot

FILE MANAGER: Samantha Payne

PROPOSAL: Redesignation of the 41.34 acre subject parcel from Agricultural District to Country Residential ‘A’ District (CR-A) to allow for the future subdivision of 7 – 2.9+/- acre CR-A Lots and 1 – 3.89+/- acre Municipal Reserve Lot, leaving a 13.5+/- acre CR-A Balance.

BACKGROUND: 1ST READING: May 28th, 2014 BYLAW: 26/2014 On May 28th, 2014, Council gave 1st Reading to Bylaw 26/2014 authorizing the redesignation of the 41.34+/- acre portion of Plan 7510979, Block B from Agricultural District to Country Residential ‘A’ District to permit the future subdivision of seven new parcels, less than 2.90+/- acres in size, and one Municipal Reserve Parcel.

The lots were designated as Country Residential ‘A’ District to ensure that all the recommendations and restrictions as outlined in the stormwater management plan, comprehensive site drainage plan, lot grading plan, high water table testing for foundation designs and septic systems, septic disposal evaluations and building envelope identification, all provided as conditions of subdivision, are complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department as conditions of the development permit. A completion certificate by a Professional Engineer verifying all aspects of the noted reports have been met will be required, as well as a $5000.00 deposit as a pre-release condition to ensure compliance of all conditions of the development permit. CONDITIONS MET AT REDESIGNATION:

All conditions of Redesignation have been met. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

Requesting 2nd & 3rd reading of Bylaw 26/2014

ENCLOSURES:

Location Map Site Plan

Page 69

LOCATION MAP

Page 70

SITE PLAN

Page 71

MISCELLANEOUS ITEM

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPT. REPORT

2ND

& 3RD

READING January 21, 2015

LANDOWNER: Teen Challenge Inc.

AGENT: Brown & Associates Planning Group (Ken Venner)

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Plan 9712215, Block 1, NW 36-22-03-W5

DIVISION: #1 – Suzanne Oel

EXISTING PARCELS: 40.80 Acres

EXISTING LAND USE: A (Agricultural District)

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: 0

FILE MANAGER: Heather McInnes

PROPOSAL: Applicants are looking to obtain 2nd and 3rd reading to Bylaw 73/2014 that had first reading on December 10, 2014 to allow the redesignation from Agricultural District to Direct Control #3 District. This provides Council with direct control over the expansion of the existing operations on the lands.

LOCATION: This property is located a half mile east of Priddis Valley Road and just south of 146th Avenue, the very north end of the M.D. of Foothills. PROPOSAL: The application is dealing with bringing the existing grandfathered use into compliance with today’s Bylaws to allow for an expansion of the facility. The current grandfathered use allows for a facility that is able to accommodate up to 23 household residents, which broken down is 12 students and 11 support staff. Alberta Teen Challenge is a 12-month, faith-based, alcohol and drug addiction rehabilitation program with residential centres located across Canada and North America. This particular site is catered towards male students who are 18 years of age and older.

BACKGROUND: 1ST READING: December 10, 2014 BYLAW: 73/2014 Council gave first reading authorizing the redesignation of Plan 9712215, Block 1, NW 36-22-03-W5 from Agricultural District to Direct Control #3 District to provide Council with direct control over the expansion of the existing operation on the lands.

Page 72

The DC #3 was amendment to incorporate this operation (Teen Challenge) under the discretionary uses. The direction of Council to staff was to hold a public meeting on any future development permit applications to allow for the input of existing landowners in the area on all future expansion plans. Council has full control over the decision of the expansion and specific uses, buildings and conditions. The applicant has now paid their final fees to complete their conditions of approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:

• Requesting 2nd and 3rd reading of the Bylaw.

ENCLOSURES: Location Map Half Mile Map Site Plan Ortho

Page 73

LOCATION MAP

Page 74

HALF MILE MAP

Page 75

SITE PLAN

Page 76

ORTHO

Page 77

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ITEM

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT SUBDIVISION APPROVAL

January 21, 2015

LANDOWNER: Alvise Doglioni Majer

AGENT: N/A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW 31-22-04 W5M

DIVISION: #4 – Susanne Oel

EXISTING PARCEL: 158 +/- acres

EXISTING LAND USE: A – Agricultural District Site Specific – Guest Ranch

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: 1 x 30.0+/- acre parcel

FILE MANAGER: Drew Granson

PROPOSAL: Subdivision of 1 x 30.0 +/- acre Agricultural Sub ‘A’ parcel from the parent parcel leaving balance of 128.0 +/- acres also to be designated as Agricultural Sub ‘A’. The Site Specific use of Guest Ranch will remain on the proposed 30.0 +/- acre parcel and is removed from the balance of 128.0 +/- acres.

BACKGROUND: 1st Reading: June 11th, 2014 Bylaw: 33/2014 2nd & 3rd Readings: December 3rd, 2014 On December 3rd, 2014, Council gave third and final reading to Bylaw 33/2014 authorizing the redesignation of SW 31-22-04 W5M from Agricultural District to to Agricultural Sub ‘A’ District in order to permit the subdivision of one 30.0+/- acre parcel. In addition, the Site Specific Land Use of Guest Ranch will remain on the 30+/- acre parcel and will be removed from the 128+/- acre balance parcel. SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ACTION REQUESTED: Requesting subdivision approval for one 30.0+/- acre Agricultural Sub ‘A’ District (A-A) parcel with the Site Specific Amendment for Guest Ranch, and the 128/0+/- acre balance parcel to be designated as Agricultural Sub ‘A’ District (A-A). One letter of concern, containing comments for conditions for Council’s consideration, regarding 162nd Avenue West, has been received. Submitted letter has been attached below. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF SUBDIVISION: Subdivision to be effected by Plan of Survey, pursuant to Section 657 of the Municipal

Government Act, or such other means satisfactory to the Registrar of the South Alberta Land Titles District;

Applicant to fully execute and comply with all requirements as outlined with the Municipal Development Agreement for the purposes of payment of the Community Sustainability Fee of $10,000.00 per new lot;

Page 78

Landowners are to provide all utility easements and agreements to the satisfaction of the MD

and the utility companies; Landowners are to pay all arrears of taxes on the existing parcel prior to finalization of the

subdivision; Submission of fees regarding reinstallation of sign as requested by the Public Works

Department; Submission of final Subdivision lot fees; It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide a Real Property Report or an “as built” drawing

signed and sealed by an Alberta Land Surveyor, certifying the location of the adjacent municipal road(s), within the boundaries of the new and balance parcel and that the site plan is surveyed according to municipal setback requirements.

Note: Public Reserve: In accordance with Section 663(a) of the Municipal Government Act,

Public Reserve dedication may not be required if one lot is to be created from a quarter section of land;

ENCLOSURES:

Location & Land Use Map Proposed Site Plan Letter of Concern

Page 79

Location & Land Use Map

Subject Parcel

Letter of Concern

Page 80

Proposed Site Plan

Page 81

Letter of Concern

Page 82

Page 83

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ITEM

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT Subdivision Approval AND Road Name Request

January 21st, 2015

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Subdivision Approval and 2. Decision Re: Road Name Request

LANDOWNER: 1827438 Alberta Ltd. AGENT: Darrell Pitts

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S 26-21-01 W5M; Plan 7510979, Blk B

DIVISION: #5 – Ron Chase

EXISTING PARCEL: 41.34 Acres EXISTING LAND USE: A – Agricultural District

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: 7 CR-A Lots & 1 MR Lot

FILE MANAGER: Samantha Payne

PROPOSAL: Subdivision of 7 Country Residential ‘A’ District Lots and 1 Municipal Reserve Parcel, leaving a Country Residential ‘A’ District Balance.

BACKGROUND: 1ST READING: May 28th, 2014 BYLAW: 26/2014 2nd & 3rd READING: January 21st, 2015

Council gave third and final reading to to Bylaw 26/2014 authorizing the redesignation of the 41.34+/- acre portion of Plan 7510979, Block B from Agricultural District to Country Residential ‘A’ District to permit the future subdivision of seven new parcels, less than 2.90+/- acres in size, and one Municipal Reserve Parcel.

The lots were designated as Country Residential ‘A’ District to ensure that all the recommendations and restrictions as outlined in the stormwater management plan, comprehensive site drainage plan, lot grading plan, high water table testing for foundation designs and septic systems, septic disposal evaluations and building envelope identification, all provided as conditions of subdivision, are complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department as conditions of the development permit. A completion certificate by a Professional Engineer verifying all aspects of the noted reports have been met will be required, as well as a $5000.00 deposit as a pre-release condition to ensure compliance of all conditions of the development permit.

In order to provide access to this subdivision, the landowner was required to construct an

internal subdivision road. A site plan identifying the location of the new internal road is attached below.

A request has been submitted from our GIS Department asking for Council’s direction regarding naming of the new internal road.

The GIS Department in consultation with both the Foothills Fire Department and Protective

Services has provided comments regarding two potential options for naming the new internal road.

Option A: Number the new Internal Road 21st Street West:

This will require changing of only 1 address on NW 23-21-01 W5;

Page 84

The surrounding subdivision roads on 274th Avenue West are already numbered; and

Protective Services and the Foothills Fire Department foresee no issues with numbering the road.

Option B: Name the new Internal Road

No addresses will need to be changed;

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Requesting Subdivision Approval for 7 Country Residential ‘A’ District Lots & 1 Municipal Reserve Parcel;

AND

2. Council is respectfully requested to either:

a) Require the new Internal Road to be numbered. Or b) Require the new Internal Road to be named. Should Council choose this option, the

road name once developed will be submitted to Council for review and approval.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF SUBDIVISION: Subdivision to be effected by Plan of Survey, pursuant to Section 657 of the Municipal Government Act, or such other means satisfactory to the Registrar of the South Alberta Land Titles District;

Completion of all pre-release conditions as noted in the executed Municipal Development Agreement to the satisfaction of the Municipality. These conditions include:

a. Payment of the $10,000.00 per new lot Community Sustainability Fee; b. Submission of all necessary engineered drawings, cost estimates and engineering

review fees for all required municipal and external improvements (this includes the internal road, grading and stormwater infrastructure), for review and approval by the Public Works Department;

c. Submission of all necessary Letters of Credit to the Municipality to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, in accordance with the Municipal Development Agreement, for all required municipal and/or external improvements;

d. Submission of Liability Insurance requirements as noted in the Municipal Development Agreement;

e. The Developer shall submit proof of all Licenses and Approvals of Alberta Environment pertaining to all stormwater facilities to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

f. All accesses to be located and culverts and approaches to be installed to current Municipal subdivision road standards to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

g. All utility right of way agreements, licenses and installation requirements to be provided to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and applicable external agencies;

The executed Municipal Development Agreement will be required to be registered concurrently with the Plan of Survey;

Page 85

Stormwater Management Plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and applicable external agencies;

Comprehensive Site Drainage Plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

Lot Grading Plan to be provided for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

Submission of a Geotechnical Report completed in accordance with MD standards to be provided for high water table testing for foundation designs and septic systems for all 8 lots to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

Submission of Septic Disposal Evaluations for all 8 lots to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

Site plan to be provided which identifies building envelopes for all 8 lots that meet the requirements outlined in Policy 9 under the Residential Section of the MDP2010 to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

Landowners are to provide all utility easements and agreements to the satisfaction of the Municipality and the utility companies;

Landowners are to pay all arrears of taxes on the existing parcel prior to finalization of the subdivision;

Public Reserve: To be provided by way of a 3.89 acre Municipal Reserve parcel; It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide a Real Property Report or an ‘as built’ drawing signed and sealed by an Alberta Land Surveyor, certifying the location of the adjacent municipal road(s), water well(s) within the boundaries of the properties and that the site plan is surveyed according to municipal setback requirements;

Submission of all required engineering review fees to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department;

Submission of final subdivision fees; ENCLOSURES:

Location Map Site Plan - Subdivision Map Illustrating Adjacent Roads & Road Names Site Plan – Internal Road Location

Page 86

LOCATION MAP

Page 87

SITE PLAN - SUBDIVISION

Page 88

MAP ILLUSTRATING EXISTING ADJACENT ROADS AND ROAD NAMES

Page 89

SITE PLAN – INTERNAL ROAD LOCATION

Page 90

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ITEM

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF SDAB ORDER NO.S03/14

January 21, 2015

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Acknowledgement of receipt of the SDAB Order No. S03/14.

LANDOWNER: James Allan Kromm AGENT: N/A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NW 29-22-02 W5M

DIVISION: #4 – Susanne Oel

EXISTING PARCEL: 145.90+/- acres

EXISTING LAND USE: A – Agricultural District

NUMBER OF PROPOSED NEW PARCELS: 1

FILE MANAGER: Drew Granson

PROPOSAL: Subdivision of one 65.9+/- acre lot from the parent 145.9+/- acre parcel, leaving a balance of 80+/- acres.

BACKGROUND: On March 12th, 2014, Council Refused an application for amendment to the Agricultural

land use rules on a portion of NW 29-22-02 W5M in order to permit the future subdivision of one additional parcel for the following reason: In their consideration of Policy 2 of the Agriculture section of the MDP2010, Council did

not find sufficient planning purpose to support the subdivision of agricultural lands into smaller agricultural parcels. Council was not supportive of fragmentation of the agricultural lands and had concerns with the impact of the development on the wildlife corridors in the area;

The landowners wanted to appeal Council’s decision of refusal. As there is no appeal process at the land use stage, the landowners had requested subdivision refusal in order to proceed with taking an appeal before the local Subdivision and Development Appeal Board (SDAB).

On September 24th, 2014 the Subdivision Approving Authority refused the subdivision application proposing one 65.9+/- acre lot for the following reasons: The application is not in conformance with the Land Use Bylaw as the application for the

Land Use Bylaw Amendment was refused previously by Council on March 12th, 2014; The Subdivision Approving Authority is of the opinion that the subdivision application is in

conflict with Policy 2 of the Agricultural Section of the MDP 2010 and therefore not supported; The Subdivision Approving Authority is of the opinion that the fragmentation as proposed will

have a significant impact on the agricultural capacity of the subject property as well as the agricultural resource of the surrounding area;

In addition, the Subdivision Approving Authority had concerns related to the impact of the proposal on the wildlife corridor in the vicinity.

Page 91

The landowners then appealed the subdivision refusal. The appeal was heard by the

SDAB on November 4th, 2014. The SDAB allowed the appeal and overturned Council’s decision for refusal.

For more information regarding the SDAB’s decision please refer to Board Order No. S03/14 attached below.

SUBDIVISION APPROVING AUTHORITY ACTION REQUESTED:

The Subdivision Approving Authority is respectfully requested to:

1. Acknowledge receipt of the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board Order No.S03/14.

ENCLOSURES:

Location Map Submitted Site Plan SDAB Order No. S03/14

Page 92

LOCATION MAP

Page 93

SUBMITTED SITE PLAN

Page 94

SDAB ORDER NO. S03/14

Page 95

Page 96

Page 97