ADDITIONS TO THE COUNCIL AGENDA April 7, 2021

ITEM REQUESTED PAGE

*1. Bylaw 66/2020 – Temporary Road Bylaw HRC 2 *2. Millarville Community School Walkathon JE 4 *3. Burton - Proposed Sirocco Annexation – Letter of Concern SO 6 *4. Bylaw 18/2021 – Plummers Road Speed Limit (2nd and 3rd Reading) JE 7 *5. Verkley/Haugrud – NW 06-22-21 W5M – Resolution Amendment SB 8 6. Community Standards Bylaw SO 7. Hawk’s Landing Surcharge HRC

REMINDERS

Foothills County - Town of Okotoks Intermunicipal Committee Meeting April 27, 2021 – 1:00 – 3:00 pm

BYLAW 66/2020

BEING A BYLAW OF FOOTHILLS COUNTY TO OPEN A TEMPORARY ROAD ON PRIVATE LANDS UNDER THE DIRECTION, CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT OF

FOOTHILLS COUNTY WHEREAS this Bylaw may be cited as the “Foothills County NE 35-22-05 W5M Road Project Temporary Road Bylaw.” WHEREAS pursuant to Section 26 of the Municipal Government Act, Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000, and amendments thereto, a Council may pass a bylaw to open a temporary road or a temporary right of way on private lands; and WHEREAS there is an existing gravel roadway on the private lands described below which is used by members of the public for access to their lands; and WHEREAS Foothills County deems it to be in the public interest to open a temporary road on private lands to ensure that the roadway may be used by the public until a permanent road may be opened; NOW THEREFORE the Council of Foothills County, duly assembled, hereby enacts as follows:

1. A temporary road shall be opened upon and across those private lands legally described as: MERIDIAN 5 RANGE 5 TOWNSHIP 22 SECTION 35 QUARTER NORTH EAST EXCEPTING THEREOUT ALL MINES AND MINERALS AREA: 61.37 HECTARES (151.66 ACRES) MORE OR LESS (hereinafter referred to as the “Private Lands”) Such temporary road shall be approximately 10 meter wide and shall be located on and across the westerly portions of the Private Lands all as shown outlined in red in the Attached Schedule “A”.

2. Foothills County shall maintain the temporary road as is necessary from the effective date of this Bylaw.

3. The owner or occupant of the Private Lands may be entitled to compensation from Foothills County for the use of the temporary road or for loss or damage caused by the temporary road in such amount as may be agreed upon or as determined by the Land Compensation Board.

4. The temporary road shall be open until July 6, 2021, which is a period of six (6) months from the effective date of this Bylaw.

5. This Bylaw shall have effect on the date of its third reading and upon being signed.

First Reading: December 16, 2020 REEVE CAO

Page 2

Second Reading: REEVE CAO Third Reading: REEVE CAO

PASSED IN OPEN COUNCIL assembled at the Town of High River in the Province of Alberta this

day , 20 .

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

TO: REEVE SUZANNE OEL AND COUNCIL, March 29,2021. THE COUNTY OF FOOTHILLS, BOX 5605, 309 MCLEOD TR., HIGH RIVER, AB., T1V 1M7.

RE: PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF 400 ACRE PIECE OF SIROCO LAND SOUTH OF 210 AVE. S.W. AND NORTH OF SIROCCO GOLF COURSE.

My name is Gail Burton and I have lived in Foothills County for over 40 years and am currentlylocated just south of the Sirocco Golf Course We residents have fought many annexations of our rural lands over the years. Initially when this course golf was applied for, the landowners at the hearings promised us and Foothills that there would be NO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, ONLY THE GOLF COURSE, AND THAT THE EXISTING GRAVEL PIT WOULD BE FINISHED AND RECLAIMED. Since then there was a gravel pit on the golf course lands which continued without appropriate approvals, an approved Area Structure Plan for 4 cells with a total density of 1675 residences, an attempted land swap of Cell 1 of the ASP for Spruce Meadows lands,- Sirocco also attempted to include Cell 2 and 3 in this, and NOW THIS PROPOSED ANNEXATION. A lot of broken promises! No real attempts to uphold or enforce conditions of approvals!

Apparently, according to the article in the WHEEL of March 24, 2021 on page 15, Councillor Diane colley-Urquhart said “the matter was taken to the IMC, (Intermunicipal Committee), to ensure the County might be amenable to the idea, WHERE IT RECEIVED GENERAL SUPPORT. It finally passed to take the initial steps for the annexation process and define what that will look like........The administrations with Calgary and Foothills County will start fleshing this out and then come up what the committee will look like, then there's a public consultation process. There could be other interestedparties who own surrounding land and want to jump in as well”. The city's cost of approximately $100,000 will be shouldered by the developer. Of course Foothills will face additional costs.

I am desperately pleading with all of you to reject this proposal as we rural residents do not want to lose any more of our rural land. And it is just not this piece of land that will be in the annexation bid. This is just the thin edge of the wedge where we in the rural area will lose more and more land and control over our lands.

If Foothills goes along with the procedure of the proposed annexation bid, we all will lose all our credibility in trying to fight the current CALGARY METROPOLITAN REGION BOARD'S (CMRB) DRAFT GROWTH PLAN.

We residents do not want to lose any more land or make it any easier for Sirocco to put in a major development like Heritage Pointe especially when the developers initially promised us and Foothills that there would be no housing if they were allowed to develop the golf course.

It would be nice if people who granted permission and were granted permission on that basis could keep their promises and their residents' trust.

Please stand up and fight for what we residents want as you are doing with the CMRB.

I would appreciate an appointment with you, Suzanne and with Julie McLean to discuss this matter at your convenience. My telephone number is .

Gail Burton

Page 6

BYLAW 18/2021

BEING A BYLAW OF FOOTHILLS COUNTY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA TO AUTHORIZE THE ERECTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS AND

TO AUTHORIZE THE IMPOSITION OF A SPEED ZONE WHEREAS the Council of Foothills County in the Province of Alberta deems it expedient to impose a speed limit on a portion of Municipal Roadway. AND WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of the Traffic Safety Act, being Chapter T-6, R.S.A 2000, and amendment thereto, the Council of Foothills County in the Province of Alberta, enacts as follows:

1. That Council authorize a 60 km/h speed limit zone and installation of associated 60 km/h speed limit signage (RB-5) on the portion of Plummers Road extending approximately 2.5 km in total in both directions from the Brown Lowery Provincial Park parking area.

2. This Bylaw shall have effect on the date of its third reading and upon being signed.

FIRST READING: March 10, 2021

______________________________

Reeve ______________________________

CAO

SECOND READING:

______________________________ Reeve ______________________________

CAO

THIRD READING:

______________________________ Reeve ______________________________

CAO PASSED IN OPEN COUNCIL assembled at the Town of High River in the Province of Alberta this _____ day of ____________, 20____.

Page 7

ADD-ON AGENDA ITEM LEGISLATIVE SERVICES REPORT TO COUNCIL

April 7, 2021

PURPOSE OF REQUEST

To amend resolutions 127 and 128 from the minutes of February 3, 2021 in order to correctly depict Council’s decision to the Verkley/Haugrud – NW 06-22-01 W5M land use application. BACKGROUND

On October 14, 2020, Council considered an application to the proposed redesignation of a portion of Plan 0513539, Block 2, Lot 1, Ptn: NW 06-22-01 W5M from Agricultural District to Country Residential Sub-District “A” in order to allow the future subdivision of six new 2.91 +/- acre to 2.99 +/- acre Country Residential Sub-District “A” lots, and one 2.35 +/- acre Municipal Reserve with an approximate 51.18 +/- Agricultural balance parcel. Council postponed their decision with respect to this application and requested that a revised site plan be submitted. On February 3, 2021 Council considered the revised site plan which described 8 new 3.0 +/- acre lots, one 18.33 +/- acre Environmental Reserve parcel and one 5.64 +/- acre balance parcel. The resolutions of the February 3, 2021 depict the original site plan of October 14, 2020 rather than the revised site plan presented on February 3, 2021.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS REQUEST OF COUNCIL

Council is respectfully requested to make a motion to amend resolutions 127 and 128 within the minutes of February 3, 2021 to reflect the follow changes: VERKLEY/HAUGRUD – NW 06-22-01 W5M – REDESIGNATION The public hearing in connection to the proposed redesignation of a portion of Plan 0513539, Block 2, Lot 1, Ptn: NW 06-22-01 W5M from Agricultural District to Country Residential Sub-District “A” in order to allow the future subdivision of six new 2.91 +/- acre to 2.99 +/- acre Country Residential Sub-District “A” lots, and one 2.35 +/- acre Municipal Reserve with an approximate 51.18 +/- Agricultural balance parcel was held on October 14, 2020. Council postponed their

TOPIC: Verkley/Haugrud – NW 06-22-01 W5M – REDESIGNATION

REPORT PREPARED BY: Sherri Barrett – Manager of Legislative Services

Page 8

decision and requested a revised site plan demonstrating an appropriate buffer to the existing abattoir and adequate building envelopes on each lot which would include well locations that would meet all required setbacks. The revised site plan demonstrated 8 new 3.0 +/- acre lots, one 18.33 +/- acre Environmental Reserve parcel, one 5.64 acre Municipal Reserve parcel and one 25.47 +/- acre balance parcel. BYLAW 8/2021 Bylaw 8/2021 was introduced into the meeting to authorize redesignation of a portion of Plan 0513539, Block 2, Lot 1, Ptn: NW 06-22-01 W5M from Agricultural District to Country Residential Sub-District “A” in order to allow the future subdivision of six eight new 2.91 +/- acre to 2.99 3.0 +/- acre Country Residential Sub-District “A” lots, one 18.33 +/- acre Environmental Reserve parcel and one 2.35 5.64 +/- acre Municipal Reserve with an approximate 51.18 25.47 +/- Agricultural balance parcel. In their consideration of the criteria noted in Agriculture Policy 4 of the MDP2010, Council is of the opinion that fragmentation of the subject lands would not be detrimental to the agricultural nature of the area. Further the application falls within the density provisions and lot size restrictions of the municipality’s Land Use Bylaw. The eight (8) new 3.0 +/- acre lots will be designated as Country Residential Sub-District “A” to ensure that the recommendations and restrictions as outlined in the high water table testing, septic disposal evaluations, comprehensive site drainage plan, storm water management plan, and lot grading plans (provided as conditions of subdivision) are complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works department. A completion certificate by a Professional Engineer verifying that 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 will be required.

127 Councillor Alger moved first reading THE MOTION WAS LOST

128 Councillor McHugh moved that the application for redesignation of a portion of Plan 0513539, Block 2, Lot 1, Ptn: NW 06-22-01 W5M from Agricultural District to Country Residential Sub-District “A” in order to allow the future subdivision of six eight new 2.91 +/- acre to 2.99 3.0 +/- acre Country Residential Sub-District “A” lots, one 18.33 +/- acre Environmental Reserve parcel and one 2.35 5.64 +/- acre Municipal Reserve with an approximate 51.18 25.47 +/- Agricultural balance parcel be refused. In consideration of Policy 2 and 4 of the Agriculture section of the MDP2010, Council did not find sufficient merit in the proposal to consider removing the subject lands from the Agricultural District. Additionally, in consideration of the criteria noted within Residential Policies 3 and 9 of the MDP2010, Council is of the opinion that the application does not adequately address the cumulative effects of the development and the efficient use of the land.

CARRIED APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:

Page 9