By Nikki Jamieson
Westwind Weekly News
An amended Area Structure Plan was passed following two public hearings.
The public hearing for the Stonegate Meadows ASP Amendment bylaw had resumed during Raymond town council’s regular July 20 meeting. Bylaw 1011-21 aimed to amend the ASP for the development of Stonegate Meadows subdivision.
The original ASP for that area was adopted as the statutory plan that guides development in this area, as Bylaw 1002-13 in June 2013. Since then, Phases 1-3 have obtained subdivision approval and the town has residential, public and institutional growth in this area. For more phases to be considered for subdivision in the manner proposed by the developer, as outlined in this ASP amendment — council would need to amend the ASP. Council had previously passed first reading of the bylaw during their regular May 18 meeting, and a special meeting had previously been held on June 22, during which the public hearing for it had been the sole item on the agenda. According to the minutes of that meeting, no public comments were received.
Returning to the bylaw, the town’s development officer, Mark Boltezar, said there were some adjustments that they wanted to recommend that they had made to the ASP prior to closing the June public hearing, and they wanted to get public input based on those changes. n Turn to PAGE 2 The first change pertained to section 7.3, pertaining to Fencing Adjacent to Raymond Irrigation District Canal, which now reads “The developer shall be responsible for fencing the perimeter of the development adjacent to the Raymond Irrigation District Canal Right-of-Way (Plan 9610785) with a four foot high, slatted chain link fence or other fencing as approved by the Raymond Irrigation District. A pathway along the RID rightof-way can be considered at this time, if constructed in accordance with the standards specified by the RID as attached in Appendix G. The RID will require final construction drawings to be approved by the RID prior to construction.”
The other change was that they added the Alberta Transportation comments that they had received in the June public hearing. Those comments concerned Section 3.2.1 – Highway 52 Access, as the Minister of Alberta Transportation had signed a Ministerial Order last year lowering the speed limit from 80 to to 50 km/hr approximately 400m from the easterly corporate limits and from 100 to 80 km/hr at the easterly corporate limits; Section 5.2.1 – Alberta Transportation’s Highway 52, where Catchment Area 1 will require further approval of an updated Storm Water Management Plan by Alberta Transportation and Alberta Environment and Parks; and Section 5.2.2 – Stormwater Management Requirements, where this section should state that not only will the Storm Water Management Plan meet the requirements of Alberta Transportation and Alberta Environment and Parks, it will also require endorsement by both departments prior to endorsement of the final linen by the approval authority.
“The Area Structure Plan that you see before you today, now has those amendments made to the actual document,” said Boltezar, noting they haven’t received any other public comments or concerns over the bylaw. Coun. Joan Harker asked if they would see the pathway design in council before it’s approved, to which Boltezar said that the drawing that was in the ASP was a conceptual design only, and if the RID accepts a walking trail on their land, they would like to see a final design submitted to them prior to construction, and to see fences on either side of the pathway.
“Right now, we are just considering the idea of a pathway, and there still needs to be a lot of work prior to actually going to the construction stage, before we actually see a pathway,” said Boltezar.
Mayor Jim Depew asked if it would be a narrower pathway then what their current pathways are, which Boltezar confirmed, as there wasn’t lot of space there and RID did not want the pathway on the access road. There would need to be some culvert construction as well if the pathway went forward.
Oldman River Regional Services Commission senior planner Bonnie Brunner added that while the pathway may seem small, they are recommending that it stays in the document because “who knows when the pathway will be considered”. Brunner also noted in the document it says that the concept illustrated in not intended to imply authorization of public access to the land or the use of the land as a walkway, and it states that it is a conceptual only and would need to comply with RID’s conditions.
The RID had submitted an additional comment after the June portion of the public hearing, stating conditions for approving a walking path on their right-of-way. No additional comments were received.
Following the public hearing, council passed second and third and final reading of the bylaw for the Stonegate Meadows ASP as amended.