Rocky View County (RVC) council voted to approve a redesignation to facilitate two new agricultural uses on a section of land on the northwest side of the county – without any access to a County road.
According to RVC planner Meghan Norman, the applicant proposed the creation of a woodlot that will sell and deliver products to customers offsite, and a livestock operation consisting of poultry, rabbits and pigs.
“The proposed new agricultural operations meet the purpose and intent of the County Plan,” Norman said. “However, the subject lands do not have physical access to a developed County road. There are County road allowances in the area, but due to extreme topography and creeks, road construction would present significant complications.”
The land is located west of Range Road 53, on the south side of the undeveloped road allowance of Township Road 280, and according to Norman, access to the parcels is gained by a road crossing Crown Lands under the jurisdiction of Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (SRD). The owner has held a License of Operation (LOC) since 1982 with SRD that allows use of their road to access the property – however, this license must be renewed every 25 years, and the Province is able to terminate the LOC at any time.
According to co-owner Lance Taylor, who spoke at the public hearing, the landowners have consulted with Alberta Environment and Parks regarding the issue, and were informed that the Province “does not” cancel these dispositions providing sole access to private residences.
“Once a party owns a disposition on a road, it’s considered permanent,” he said.
He added the landowners have been accessing the property legally for 46 years without interruption, and continue to accept “full responsibility” for ensuring the maintenance of the road.
Taylor said council previously approved a subdivision on adjacent land that also uses the road for access, noting in the name of “fairness” and “consistency,” council should approve this redesignation as well.
“This is an isolated area, and there is no obligation for council to create a new lot,” said Councillor Lois Habberfield. “I just don’t feel safe, if people are going to build out there and live out there and be that far from our fire services. We are responsible for the lots we create and for the people who live there.”
Area Councillor Bruce Kendall moved to give first reading to the application, and said he felt the request was “reasonable” since legal access does exist on the property. The motion was carried 7-2 with opposition from Councillors Habberfield and Margaret Bahcheli.
“When I see any level of municipal government approving subdivisions that don’t have public access, to me it implies that you will be there for these people when they ask for public access,” Bahcheli said. “I’m feeling a lot of good intentions at this table, but I’m not feeling the legal pathway.”
Third reading was carried by a vote of 6-3, with Councillors Habberfield, Bahcheli and Liz Breakey in opposition. A motion arising was also carried unanimously, directing administration to provide a legal opinion on the item at a future council meeting.
