COUNTYOF PONOKANO. 3

COUNTYCOUNCIL1V[EEI‘1'_NG

July 16, 1984

A regular meeting of the Council of the County of PonokaNo. 3 was held in the County Council Chambers, Ponoka, Alberta onMonday, July 16, 1984with the following members in attendance:

Lucas .

1.

ReichGrigatPalechekTeeuws enEverndenDuft

Councillor H.Councillor L.Councillor F.Councillor J.Councillor J.Councillor L.Reeve W. LucasMr. J. Muza, Assistant County Administrator

The meeting was called to order at 10:10 a.m. by Reeve

The agenda was as follows:

Public Hearing — 2:30 p.m.

Utilities1 5 UTlL/30/ 84

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

B.R.

TransAltaa) N.W. 2-43-27-4b) S.W. 32—42—26—4UTIL/31/84 Chain Lakesa) N.E. 19-42-24-4UTIL/32/84 Deer Creek Gas Coopa) S.E. l2—43—4—5UTIL/33/84 ’I‘ra.nsA1taa) Lot 35, Plan 802-0814b) S.E. 17-43-1-5UTIL/34/84 Trans Altaa) Pt. 42—24—4UTIL/35/84 Town of Rimbeya) W 1/2 16 8: S.W. 2l—42—2—5

R. P. C. Subdivision Applications1)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

RP/84/11 Pt.N.W. 6-43-25-4RP/84/18 S.W. 26—42—2—5RP/84/19 S.W. 26-43-25-4RP/84/20 N.w. 36-44-4-5RP/84/21 S.E. 12—42—27—4RP/84/22 N.E. 32—42—l—5TP/84/3 Pt. N.w. 5—43—25—4TP/84/4 Pt. N.W. 9—43—25—4Subdivision UpdateRP/84/5 — Detwinetz -

RP/84/6 — Gordon —

Koh1man—TurnerBoechler, R.Bartley, D.Glanfield, F. 8. D.Pipke, A.Macintosh, J. 8: E.Haseloh, G.Dedio, G.

APB refused on appeal (Life estate)APB allowed subdivision on appeal —

Conditions required by County?refused by B.R.R.P.C.approved by B.R.R.P.C.refused by B.R.R.P.C.approved by B.R.R.P.C.letter, development agreement to Town

RP/84/13 — Muncaster -

RP/84/16 - Cline —

RP/84/17 — Danser —

RP/84/19 - Bartley —

RP/83/20 — Albers —

Miscellaneous1) Alberta Planning Board — Spring Conference2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

Development/Utilities Officer — Job DescriptionSubdivision Road GuidelinesSetback distances from section or quarter—section lines.B.R.R.P.C. Annual ReportCOMP/5/84 S.E. 11-42-27-4 McComb, B.LUB/5/84 NE 1 8: Pt. SE 1242-26-4 Northstar Dev. Ltd.Resource Inventory and Land Use StudyB.R.R.P.C. Farmsite Policy

Meeti_ng StartTimes

Minutes

Preli.minaryAgreements

Ferrybank Road

Ul‘II:/30/ 84Trans!-XltaUtilities

U1‘IL/31/84Chain lakesGas Co-op

UTII./32/84Deer CreekGas

RP/84/llPt.Nw 6-43-254:Kohlman—Turner

July 16, 1984 -2-

5. New Business

6. Adjournment

Item No. 1 (July 13, 1984Agenda) The Council discussedthe starti.ng times of meetings for the fall season due to harvestoperations. It was suggested that all Council meetings for August,September and October start at 8:00 a.m. and conclude at 12:00 noonunless the weather is not conducive to farming operations.

Moved by Councillor Evernden that the minutes of the June15, 1984Regular Council meeting, the June 18, 1984Regular Councilmeeting and the June 25, 1984Joint Council's meeting minutes beadopted as presented.

.....Carried unanimously

Mr. Palechek presented the following preliminary agreementsfor approval.

Moved by Councillor Luft that the following preliminaryagreements be approved:

Ray Winslow N.E. 26—43—27—W4$ 700.00Iavina Verhiere N.W. 36-43-27—W4 To be determined laterRoy Leighton Sec. 35—43—27—W4 $1,400.00

.....Carried unanimously

Mr. Harvey Burton, Public Works Superintendent, and Mr. JimLysons, Development and Utilities Officer, then met with the Councilwith regard to engineering of the road south of the new rivercrossing on the Battle River in the S.E. 35—43—27—W4.

Moved by Councillor Luft that the County engage Mr. JimLysons to do the engineering on this project.

.....Carried unanimously

UTILITIES

Item No. 2(1) Moved by Councillor Palechek that theextension of utilities by Trans!-\lta to the N.W. 2—43—27—W4and S.W.32—42—26—W4be approved.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 2(2) Moved by Councillor Grigat that the naturalgas pipeline road crossing application on the N.E. 19—42—24—W4beapproved.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 2(3) Moved by Councillor Luft that theapplication from Deer Creek Gas Co-op for a natural gas pipelinecrossing on the S.E. 12—43—4—W5be approved with the objection thatthe application had been made after installation and that thereforethe Deer Creek Gas Co-op will be responsible for all futuremaintenance and moving costs associated with this crossing a.nd thatDeer Creek Gas Co-op be responsible for maintaining adequate signsshowing the location and angle of the crossing.

.....Carried unanimously

B.R.R.P.C. SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS

Item No. 3(1) Mr. N. Kohlman and Mr. L. Bowman, RoadsideDevelopment Officer of Alberta Transportation met with the Council atthis time with regard to their subdivision on part of the N.W.6-43-25—W4.It was noted that the proposed subdivision and AreaStructure plans showed an access road parallel to Highway #53 on thesouth boundary of this property. Concern was expressed about the

UTIL/33/84TransAltaUtilities

UTIL/33/811TransAltaUtilities

UTIL/3A/81¢TransAltaUtilities

UTIL/35/ 81!Town of‘ Rimbey

RP/8A/18s.w. 26-42-2-5Boechler, R.

A

Noon LuncheonM

We«/5

July 16, l98Ll -3-

entrance of this access road onto the County road being too close toHighway #53. It was suggested that the access road should enter theproperty on the north side of the proposed Lot 8. Considerablediscussion took place with some alternate access road locations. Itwas generally agreed that the access road should enter the propertyon the north side of Lot 8 and then swing south to meet with thededicated portion of the access road in the south-east corner of thisproperty adjacent to Highway #53, but it was decided to leave thefinal alignment of this roadway until Lot 7 is subdivided in thefuture.

Moved by Councillor Grigat that the Council authorize thepreparation of an amendment to the Area Structure Plan Bylaw19-82-ASP. The amended Area Structure Plan is to show the realignedService Road and revised lot configurations. Furthermore, onerequirement of the proposed subdivision shall be the provision of acommon approach on the north side of proposed Lot 8, serving lot 8and the remainder of the quarter section (proposed Lot 7).

.....Carried6 in favour1 opposed

UTILITIES (continued)

Item No. 2(A.a) Moved by Councillor Grigat that TransAltapower service to Lot 35, Plan 802 0814 i_n the Rimbey RidgeSubdivision be approved.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 2(4.b) Moved by Councillor Evernden that theCouncil approve only a temporary power service to the subdividedparcel i.n the S.E. l7—ll3—l—W5due to planned new construction in thearea and the type of terrain involved in the construction and thealignment of the proposed service line.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 2(5) Moved by Councillor Evernden that upgradingof power lines by Tr-a.nsAlta in Township 42-2Ll—Wllbe approved aspresented.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 2(6) Mr. Lysons reported that a delegationrepresenting the Town of Rimbey would be arriving later in the dayand it was decided to defer this item until the delegation arrived.

B.R.R.P.C SUBDIVISIONAPPLICATIONS (continued)

Item No. 3(2) Considerable discussion took place withregard to the proposed subdivision of the S.W. 26—1l2—2—W5which wouldcreate three lots. One of the lots would contain buildings to beused for a horse breeding operation. Another lot would containbuildings and a race track operation and the third parcel would befarmland only.

During the discussions, the Reeve recessed the meeting at12:05 p.m. for the noon luncheon and reconvened the meeting at 1:20p.m. Councillor Reich was not in attendance at reconvenement.

Further discussion then took place with regard to RP/84/18.

Moved by Councillor Lucas that the application be refusedon the grounds that it is in an agricultural district and no farmsiteseparation is involved.

.....Carried unanimously

COMP/5/84S.E. 11-112-27-AMcComb, B.

UTIL/35/811Town of Rimbey

By—Law 12-84-RL

July 16, 19811

MISCELLANEOUSDEVELOPIVEENT

Item No. 14(6) Mr. Bruce McCo1mb then met with the Councilrequesting approval of his application for a Certificate ofCompliance for a hog operation. He presented letters from AlbertaEnvironment, the Wetoka Health Unit and from William Allen andHoffman Bros. who are adjoi.ni.ng landowners all expressing noobjections to the granting of a certificate of compliance.

Moved by Councillor Luft that the previous motion ofJUne 18, 1984 rejecting the application be rescinded.

.....Carried unanimously

Moved by Councillor Palechek that the application for aCertificate of Compliance for a hog operation on the S.E. l1—42—27—WLlbe approved provided that the operation is located on the mostsouthwesterly area of the property and meets all Alberta Agricultureand Department of Health minimum distance separations a.nd that themaximum number of animals be 150 sow farrowing hogs.

.....CarriedA in favour2 opposed

Item No. 2(6) Mr. Reg Dacyk of Epec Consulting Group, Mr. ,Pat Laing of Alberta Environment, Mr. Young of Rimbey and Mr. I=Ie;LH»1u~‘sf;-j;;£,,,

the Farmer's Advocate, met with the County Council withregard to a proposed ditch for storm outfall line and periodic sewagelagoon drainage purposes along the W 1/2 16 and S.W. 2lJl2—2—W5.Mr.Dacyk reported that he had studied three possible routes on behalf ofthe Town; one bei_ng the east road ditch, the second being the westroad ditch and the third being a pipeline going in a southwesterlydirection to the Blindman River. He reported that the pipeline wouldcost the Tbwn of Rimbey an additional $100,000.00 or more and thatthe east side of the roadway was being recommended.

UTILITIES (continued)

Mr. Young and Mr. Ehthrup both asked that something be donewith regard to the run—-off water from the storm sewers as his landwas being excessively flooded due to recent development i_n the town.It was suggested that further studies be carried out with regard touse of the existing drainage course and also runni.ng a ditch to thesouth along the mid—section line. The Council also wished to havethe people involved along the routes be informed and receive theirreaction before acting on the matter. The delegation thanked theCouncil for the meeting and the expression of concerns.

A by—1aw of the County of Ponoka No. 3 for the purpose ofclosing and leasi_ng a portion of a public highway i_n accordance withSections 180 and 182 of the Municipal Government Act, Chapter M—26ofthe Revised Statutes of Alberta, 1980.

WHEREAS,the lands hereafter described are no longerrequired for public travel, and

WHEREAS,application has been made to the Council to havethe highway closed and leased, and

WHEREAS,Council was not petitioned for an opportunity tobe heard by any person prejudicially affected by the by-law,

NOWTHEREFOREBE II‘ RESOLVEDthat the Council of the Countyof Ponoka No. 3 does hereby close and lease the following describedhighway, subject to rights of access granted by other legislation orregulations:

All that portion of the road allowance shown onRoad Plan 5300 C.L. 1yi_ng between 1.P.P.R.IX and1.P.P.R.XlI and lying west of the S.W. 1-44-25-WAcommencing north of the Battle River to the mostnortherly part of the quarter section.

Coffee Break

LUB/5/84N.E. landPt.S. E. 12—42—26—4NorthstarDevelopments

RP/84/19S.W. 26—43—25—4Bartley, D.

RP/84/20N.W. 36-44-4-5Glanfield, F 2;. D

RP/84/21

Pipke, A. ‘‘

‘H:

S. E. 12—47:27—4UL1

July 16, 1984

Given first reading this 16th day of July, 1984on a motionby Councillor Evernden and was unanimously carried.

Given second reading this 16th day of July, 1984 on amotion by Councillor Grigat and was unanimously carried.

Reeve Lucas recessed the meetirg for a coffee break from3:10 p.m. to 3:20 p.m.

MISCELLANEOUSDEJVELOPIVJZENI‘(continued)

Item No. 4(7) Council met with John Wells and Murray Youngwith regard to a proposed subdivision of the N.E. 1 and Part of theS.E. 12—42—26—W4containing 213.33 acres. A number of concerns werediscussed and a number of revisions to the plans requested. It wasalso noted that soil and water tests would be required beforeconsideration to the subdivision would be given. It was agreed thatparcel 4 would be reduced from 21.25 acres to approximately 4 acres;the balance of parcel 4and the eliminated MR—19are to be combinedwith parcel 12; and included with MR—18. There was no agreement withrespect to combining parcel 13 with parcel 12. Mr. Wells wished toretain it as he felt he could sell this as a parcel which could laterbe subdivided along with other areas to be subdivided in theMorningside area. It was suggested that Council look at this requestbefore a final decision is made. Some discussion took place withregard to improvements to the road allowance on the east side ofSections 1 and 12.

Moved by Councillor Luft that the Council agree i.nprinciple to a redesign of the proposed subdivision and thatCouncillors Palechek and Grigat inspect the site and makerecommendations with regards to Lot 13 and any required roadimprovements. Furthermore the administration be instructed toprepare a rezoning by—law and arrange for advertising forconsideration at a regular August Council meeting.

.....Carried unanimously

B.R. R. P.C. SUBDIVISIONAPPLICATIONS (continued)

Item No. 3(3) Moved by Councillor Grigat that the Councilapprove the subdivision of a farmsite from the S.W. 26—43—25—W4byMr. D. Bartley provided that one residence be provided on thefarmsite, that Mr. Bartley apply for a development permit, and thatland be dedicated for road widening on the south side of the quartersection.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 3(4) A request for subdivision of the S.W.36-44—4—W5by F. KcD. Glanfield was considered by Council.

Moved by Councillor Grigat that the application be refusedas there is not a sufficient setback provided.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 3(5) Moved by Councillor Luft that theapplication to subdivide a farmsite in the S.E. 12—42—27—W4by Mr. A.Pipke be approved subject to the following conditions:

a) provision for a five metre road wideningb) that the proposed boundary take in all outbuildings and pens for

hog operation without including too much extra landc) and that in addition to the farmsite being subdivided that two

additional approaches to fields be installed if required.

.....Carried unanimously

RP/84/22N.E. 32—42—l—5MacIntosh, J 8: E

TP/84/Pt. NW5—43—25—4Haseloh, G.

117/84/Pt . NW9—43—25—4Dedio ,

Subdivision

3

4

G.

Updates

Planning BoardConference

Job Descriptions

Subdivision RoadGuidelines

SetbackDistances

Annual ReportB.R.R.P.C.

ResourceInventory

Farmsite (Policy

VJ4

July 16, 1984 -6-

Item No. 3(6) Moved by Councillor Lucas that theapplication for J. 8: E. Maclntosh to subdivide a farmsite from theN.E. 32—42—l—W5be refused because the farmsite is not recognized bythe County General Municipal Plan as it was established after January1, 1980 and the subdivision is in contradiction of the Gull lakeManagement Plan as no subdivisions are to be allowed in the naturalenhancement areas. .....Carried unanimously

Item No. 3(7) Moved by Councillor Grigat that the Countyof Ponoka has no objection to Mr. Haseloh's subdivision of Pt. N.W.5—43—25—W4within the Ibwn of Ponoka.

.....Carried unanimously

Item No. 3(8) Moved by Councillor Luft that the County ofPonoka has no objection to the proposed subdivision of Pt. N.W.9—43—25—W4by Mr. G. Dedio provided that an approach is provided toLot 1 and land be provided for a five metre road widening along thewest boundary of this parcel.

.....Carried unani.mously

Item No. 3(9) Mr. Lysons reported on the action to date onthe following subdivisions:

RP/84/5RP/84/6

- Letwinetz — APB refused on appeal (Life estate)— Gordon — APB allowed subdivision on appeal —

Conditions required by County?

Moved by Councillor Teeuwsen that the County requestdedication of five metres for road widening and that standardapproaches be provided to the parcel and to the rest of the land.

.....Carried unanimously

RP/84/13 — Muncaster — refused by B.R.R.P.C.RP/84/16 - Cline — approved by B.R.R.P.C.RP/84/17 — Danser — refused by B.R.R.P.C.RP/84/19 — Bartley — approved by B.R.R.P.C.RP/83’/20- 7th Day Adv ntist — annexation.

MISCELLANEOUSDEVELOPMENT(continued)

Item No. 4(1) Information on the Alberta Planning Board'sSpring Conference was provided for Council's information.

Item No. 4(2) Job descriptions for the Development Officerand the Utilities Officer were provided for Council's i_n.formation.

Item No. 4(3) Mr. Lysons reported that the revisions hadnot been completed yet.

Item No. 4(4) Mr. Lysons recommended that a 15 metreminimum setback for side yards and rear yards i.n agriculturaldistricts should be considered. 'Ihe Council agreed that the 15 metresetback should be adopted as County policy.

Item N . 4(5) The annual report of the Battle RiverRegional Planning Commission was provided for Council's information.

Item No. 4(8) Copies of a resource inventory and land usestudy provided by the Planning Commission was available for generaluse.

Item No. 4(9) Mr. Lysons reported on a recent decision ofthe Planning Commission which provided for the addition of 270 feetof cultivated land lying between a farmyard and a section line beingincluded in the subdivision. Normally this has been considered forinclusion i:n the subdivision only if it is less than 150 feet. On amotion at the Planning Commission meeting, it was suggested that thispolicy be referred back to the County Councils for considerationwhich would be discussed at the August Commission meeting.

July 16, 1981i -7-

Moved by Councillor Evemden that the distance betweenfarmyards and the quarter‘ section boundaries be left to thediscretion of the local municipality involved and that the PlanningCommission be advised that the distance consideration for the Countyof Ponoka be 150 feet as indicated in the former policy.

.....Carr'ied unanimously

Adjournment Item No. 6 Moved by Councillor Palechek, at 5:30 p.m.,that the meeting be adourned.

.....Carried unanimously

County Administrator’