DIDSBURY, Alta. – A three-week-old landowner group called Rural Roots Association near Calgary has succeeded in its bid to slow down controversial land-use bylaws that called for extensive residential development and strict guidelines on activities within the region.
Mountainview County, north of Calgary, is about 3,800 sq. kilometres and includes about 12,500 people.
After a noisy protest outside of council chambers Nov. 4 at Didsbury, county councillors agreed to a provincial review of the proposals by the department of municipal affairs. Costs of an inquiry are about $60,000 and would be borne by the municipality.
Read Also
August rain welcome, but offered limited relief
Increased precipitation in August aids farmers prior to harvest in southern prairies of Canada.
The association has until Dec. 15 to collect enough signatures to present to the ministry for a review. So far, more than 1,700 people have signed the petition calling for a halt to the plan. Twenty percent of the electorate must sign the petition.
Reeve Al Kemmere said there were communication problems between councillors and county residents, but people must take responsibility and get involved. In the last municipal election, four out of seven councillors were acclaimed.
“Elections are a true measure of how people feel,” he said.
Open houses were held to discuss the bylaws but few people attended. The next meeting on the issue is scheduled for Nov. 25 in Didsbury.
Kemmere said the proposed bylaws are not solidified and can be improved.
“We know we haven’t written the perfect document. We need your help to straighten it out,” he said.
Association spokesperson Paddy Munro of Sundre said most taxpayers were unaware of the proposal until mid September. A landowner group formed and sought legal advice.
The bylaw divides the county into land-use districts and provides guidelines on the types and locations of various forms of industrial and residential development.
One controversial proposal calls for clusters of residential development of 80 to 240 lots per quarter section of land.
The Rural Roots group suggests the towns be allowed to annex land and grow, but new high density communities should not be permitted.
“It is like a new town being created on county land,” he said.
Agriculture not priority
The 200 protesters claim the land-use strategy changes a traditional agricultural community to a more urbanized landscape.
At odds for many is a paragraph that says, “agriculture, extensive shall be permitted on designated land until such time as development and construction of municipal improvements commences according to the primary intent of the district.”
Many want agriculture viewed as a priority use rather than the lowest use, existing only until a better proposal comes along.
Kevin Good, who farms near Carstairs, worries about high levels of development, while services like road maintenance, snow plowing and school bus routes do not improve.
He also sees this as an erosion of property and landowner rights where decisions are made with little public consultation.
“We are in a rural county. They have to listen to the people as councillors. They have to take heed with what we are saying,” he said in an interview.
“We inherit this land from our grandchildren. We do not have the right to have a few people change what this county is about.”
Myron Thompson, a retired member of Parliament for the region, has been working with the group to help preserve its rural heritage.
“Somehow elected people forget along the line what the people who elected them expected of them,” he said.
