MDP amendment brings divided vote

Sharon McLeay    

Times Contributor      

 

On April 8, Wheatland council got a slight reprieve from headaches caused by butting their heads against the new MDP servicing policy requirement of having piped services paid by the developer, for the sixth or more subdivisions in one quarter section lands designated Country Residential or Ag small holding. 

The new amendment specified municipal servicing would only be a requirement for residential developments outside urban areas. 

“Ever since this began, I have struggled with this. We should have a further look at this,” said Councillor Alice Booth.

At the public hearing, Pat Maloney for Trilogy Homes stood and asked council about billing for costs under the amendment that would now not be necessary. She also wondered if consideration could be given under the amendment to including the use of wells and septic systems, where reports show it is a viable option for new phases of home developments. The practise of using wells and septic fields was one of the things planners wanted to move away from because of contamination risks, and move towards better use of shared resources and preserving water quality and quantities in larger development plans.

The amendment changed Policy 3.11.2 (2) so residential subdivisions of six lots or more outside urban areas would be required to, at developer’s cost, have piped services that tie into existing county water and sewer service lines, or be made able to tie into them when services become available. No discussion indicated whether or not the county would be moving towards municipal servicing within all the hamlets and villages in the future.

Those residential subdivisions or re-designations applied for prior to Oct. 15, 2013 may not be required to comply with municipal servicing. Those applications were being grandfathered over as they were in the works when the new MDP was put into effect. There are 16 lots affected and once the amendments are passed the owners can come forward for consideration on their plans. 

The council voted on second and third readings for the amendments leading to a split vote, showing they were still divided on the servicing issue, but both amendments were approved by majority rule.