Intermunicipal relationships was a recurring topic at a Rocky View County (RVC) council meeting Dec. 10, 2019, where council adopted two documents aimed at minimizing conflict and sharing services with one neighbour, while directing administration to prepare a similar document with another.
By a unanimous vote, second reading was granted to an Intermunicipal Development Plan (IDP) and the adoption of an Intermunicipal Collaboration Framework (ICF) with Mountain View County (MVC). According to senior planner Stefan Kunz, the documents have been in the works since June 26, 2018, with a draft plan presented June 11, 2019.
“A relationship with someone on your borders or within your borders – you certainly need to have that,” said Reeve Greg Boehlke, who, at the meeting, said the IDP was the result of “good intermunicipal negotiations” with the County’s neighbour to the north.
The IDP, Kunz said, is “a document that essentially deals with planning and development matters on lands that are adjacent to a municipal boundary.” The aim, he said, is to minimize land use and development conflicts, provide opportunities for collaboration and communication, and outline processes for resolution of any issues that may arise.
Kunz noted the plan applies to lands within a half-mile of the shared boundaries between RVC and MVC, except near Highway 2, where it extends to a one-mile radius. The goal, he added, was to maintain the autonomy of each municipality and ensure the compatibility of future land use while recognizing agriculture is the primary use in the area.
The plan itself was drafted through collaborative efforts of administration and committee members from both municipalities, he said, and MVC approved its portion of the IDP Nov. 27, 2019.
As of April 2018, the Municipal Government Act (MGA) requires municipalities sharing a common border create IDPs, Kunz said. Under the legislation, the plans must be adopted by April 1, 2021. RVC is required to create IDPs and ICFs with all adjacent municipalities that are not members of the Calgary Metropolitan Region Board (CMRB).
CMRB approval is required for the IDP. With second reading granted, the document must be approved by CMRB before returning for third reading, which could take around two months.
Meanwhile, council was able to give three readings to an ICF with MVC. According to Ben Manshanden with Intergovernmental Affairs, the framework identifies how municipal services such as water, recreation and emergency services are delivered between the two adjacent municipalities.
Manshanden said, given the overlapping nature of the items addressed by IDPs and ICFs, the development of the documents proceeded in tandem. However, the approval processes for each document are different. While the approval of the ICF was originally predicated on CMRB’s approval of the IDP, the Alberta Government’s implementation of Red Tape Reduction Implementation Act Dec. 5, 2019, meant the two were no longer linked. As the ICF is not a statutory document, council was able to approve it at the meeting.
The ICF with MVC will last four years, Manshanden added.
At the same meeting, council approved a new TOR that will guide the negotiation and creation of an ICF with the Town of Crossfield. Council also granted first reading for an IDP between the Municipal District of Bighorn and RVC. The plan will be up for a public hearing later this year.
Coun. Kevin Hanson was absent from the meeting.
