Bylaw 1311-19 Ranchland Intermunicipal Development Plan — full text

This is the exact embedded text of the captured official document. Snapshot 9931c6ec7e2d · verified 2026-06-08 · original document · archived snapshot · unofficial consolidation, the official version is held by the municipal clerk.

Intermunicipal D evelopment Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 September 2019 Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 © 2019 Oldman River Regional Services Commission Prepared for the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 and Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 This document is protected by Copyright and Trademark and may not be reproduced or modified in any manner, or for any purpose, except by written permission of the Oldman River Regional Services Commission. This document has been prepared for the sole use of the Municipalities addressed and the Oldman River Regional Services Commission. This disclaimer is attached to and forms part of the document. 1 Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 | INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Plan ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Plan Preparation and Shared Values ............................................................................................ 2 1.3 Municipal Profiles ......................................................................................................................... 2 Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 ................................................................................ 2 Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 ................................................................................... 3 1.4 Legislative Requirements ............................................................................................................ 3 2 | PLAN AREA ............................................................................................................................. 6 2.1 Study Area Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Key Characteristics of the Plan Area ........................................................................................... 6 Land Use and Residential Development .................................................................................. 6 Transportation Infrastructure .................................................................................................. 7 Natural Environment and Historic Resources .......................................................................... 7 Natural Resource Extraction and Energy Development .......................................................... 7 Soil Characteristics ................................................................................................................... 7 3 | POLICIES ................................................................................................................................. 8 3.1 General ........................................................................................................................................ 8 3.2 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Agriculture ............................................................................................................................... 9 Confined Feeding Operations (CFOs) ....................................................................................... 9 Resource Extraction ................................................................................................................. 9 Industry and Energy Development ........................................................................................ 10 Utilities / Telecommunications Towers ................................................................................. 10 3.3 Transportation and Road Networks .......................................................................................... 10 3.4 Natural Environment ................................................................................................................. 11 3.5 Interpretation ............................................................................................................................ 11 2 Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Table of Contents 4 | PLAN ADMINISTRATION & IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................. 13 4.1 Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee Policies ............................................................. 13 4.2 Referral Policies ......................................................................................................................... 14 General .................................................................................................................................. 14 Municipal Development Plans ............................................................................................... 15 Other Statutory Plans ............................................................................................................ 15 Land Use Bylaws .................................................................................................................... 15 Design Concepts .................................................................................................................... 16 Subdivision and Development ............................................................................................... 16 Response Timelines ................................................................................................................ 16 Consideration of Responses ................................................................................................... 16 4.3 Plan Validity and Amendment Policies ...................................................................................... 17 5 | DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICIES .......................................................................................... 18 5.1 General Dispute Process ............................................................................................................ 18 General Agreement ............................................................................................................... 18 Dispute Resolution ................................................................................................................. 18 Filing an Intermunicipal Dispute under the Municipal Government Act ............................... 19 Dispute Resolution Flowchart ................................................................................................ 20 APPENDIX A | MAPS Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 1 Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan 1 | INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of the Plan The purpose of the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 (MD of Pincher Creek) and Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 (MD of Ranchland) Intermunicipal Development Plan (IDP or the Plan) is to foster ongoing collaboration and cooperation regarding planning matters and issues of mutual interest and address and clarify land use expectations within the agreed upon intermunicipal development plan area (Plan Area). This IDP serves as a planning tool providing guidance to decision-makers through the agreed upon planning policies that apply to the land within the Plan Area. The IDP contains policy that is to be used as a framework for working cooperatively, communicating and making decisions in each municipality. Each municipality is ultimately responsible for making decisions within their own municipal jurisdiction. The intended goals of the IDP are: - To promote consultation, coordination and cooperation regarding planning matters of joint interest within the Plan Area. - To provide a framework for addressing land use concerns with regard to joint planning matters within the Plan Area. - To provide a clear policy framework that serves to guide future planning decisions for land located within the Plan Area, affording enhanced coordination of development within the Plan Area. The preparation and implementation of an IDP can result in many benefits to both municipalities including, but not limited to, the following: - To establish an approach to identify possible joint ventures for infrastructure and service sharing to promote efficient planning and potential delivery of services. - To reinforce and protect each municipality's development philosophies and goals while minimizing the potential for future intermunicipal conflict. - To provide policy addressing plan administration, amendment and dispute resolution procedures. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 2 1.2 Plan Preparation and Shared Values The formation of the Plan was guided by the IDP Review Committee which was composed of two Council members from each municipality. Senior administration and ORRSC Planners from both municipalities were also involved throughout the process as technical advisors. With respect to committee decision making, both parties agreed at the outset of the process that their chosen decision-making model would be based on reaching consensus on the issues discussed. A background analysis was undertaken which served as the foundation from which both municipalities could review the existing land use conditions and determine the relevant issues, goals and objectives. Through thoughtful discussion, it was determined that a series of fundamental shared values would inform and guide the document. These values are the foundation from which the policy of the IDP has been developed and will inform municipal decision making going forward in the Plan Area. The shared values include: - Shared Stewardship - Protecting the Watershed - both surface and groundwater resources - Supporting a Healthy Agricultural Economy A draft document was prepared with input from the IDP Review Committee and presented to each municipal Council for review prior to consultation with affected landowners, stakeholders and the general public. Upon completing the consultation phase, a refined document was prepared and a final draft forwarded to each Council for approval through the bylaw process. As required by the Municipal Government Act, Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000, Chapter M-26, as amended (MGA), separate public hearings were held by each Council and subsequent to the public hearings, the IDP was adopted by each municipality. 1.3 Municipal Profiles Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 The Municipal District of Pincher Creek covers an area of approximately 352,000 hectares (869,000 acres) with a 2018 population of 2,965 (Alberta Municipal Affairs, 2018). The MD surrounds two urban municipalities, contains five hamlets, and is bordered by three rural municipalities, a specialized municipality, national park and a First Nations. The economy of the MD is largely agricultural, with ranching predominant in the eastern slopes. Alternative energy developments, particularly wind turbine development has been locating in the municipality in the past several decades. The MD is home to the Oldman Dam and Reservoir, an on-stream storage facility operated by the Government of Alberta. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 3 Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 The Municipal District of Ranchland covers an area of approximately 250,000 hectares (617,763 acres) with a 2018 population of 92 (Alberta Municipal Affairs, 2018). The MD of Ranchland contains no designated Urban Areas, but rather encompasses vast lands of forest reserve, protected areas and open rangeland that are intended to be used for agricultural purposes and conservation. The MD of Ranchland is bordered by three rural municipalities, one improvement district and the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass. 1.4 Legislative Requirements This Plan has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the MGA, and complies with the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan (SSRP). Specifically the MGA requires: 631(1) Two or more councils of municipalities that have common boundaries that are not members of a growth region as defined in Section 708.01 must, by each passing a bylaw in accordance with this Part or in accordance with Sections 12 and 692, adopt an intermunicipal development plan to include those areas of land lying within the boundaries of the municipalities as they consider necessary. 631(2) An intermunicipal development plan a) must address i. the future land use within the area, ii. the manner of and the proposals for future development in the area, iii. the provision of transportation systems for the area, either generally or specifically, iv the co-ordination of intermunicipal programs relating to the physical, social and economic development of the area, v environmental matters within the area, either generally or specifically, and vi any other matter related to the physical, social or economic development of the area that the councils consider necessary. and b) must include i. a procedure to be used to resolve or attempt to resolve any conflict between the municipalities that have adopted the plan, ii. a procedure to be used, by one or more municipalities, to amend or repeal the plan, and iii. provisions relating to the administration of the plan. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 4 The South Saskatchewan Regional Plan came into effect September 1, 2014. The SSRP uses a cumulative effects management approach to set policy direction for municipalities to achieve environmental, economic and social outcomes within the South Saskatchewan Region through 2024. Pursuant to section 13 of the Alberta Land Stewardship Act (ALSA), regional plans are legislative instruments. The SSRP has four key parts including the Introduction, Strategic Plan, Implementation Plan and Regulatory Details Plan. Pursuant to section 15(1) of ALSA, the Regulatory Details of the SSRP are enforceable as law and bind the Crown, decision-makers, local governments and all other persons while the remaining portions are statements of policy to inform and are not intended to have binding legal effect. The Regional Plan is guided by the vision, outcomes and intended directions set by the Strategic Plan portion of the SSRP while the Implementation Plan establishes the objectives and the strategies that will be implemented to achieve the regional vision. As part of the Implementation Plan, Section 8: Community Development includes guidance regarding Planning Cooperation and Integration between municipalities with the intention to foster cooperation and coordination between neighbouring municipalities and between municipalities and provincial departments, boards and agencies. Section 8 contains the following broad objectives and strategies. Objectives - Cooperation and coordination are fostered among all land use planners and decision-makers involved in preparing and implementing land plans and strategies. - Knowledge sharing among communities is encouraged to promote the use of planning tools and the principles of efficient use of land to address community development in the region. Strategies 8.1 Work together to achieve the shared environmental, economic, and social outcomes in the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan and minimize negative environmental cumulative effects. 8.2 Address common planning issues, especially where valued natural features and historic resources are of interest to more than one stakeholder and where the possible effect of development transcends jurisdictional boundaries. 8.3 Coordinate and work with each other in their respective planning activities (such as in the development of plan and policies) and development approval process to address issues of mutual interest. 8.4 Work together to anticipate, plan and set aside adequate land with the physical infrastructure and services required to accommodate future population growth and accompanying community development needs. 8.5 Build awareness regarding the application of land-use planning tools that reduce the impact of residential, commercial and industrial developments on the land, including approaches and best practices for promoting the efficient use of private and public lands. 8.6 Pursue joint use agreements, regional services commissions and any other joint cooperative arrangements that contribute specifically to intermunicipal land use planning. 8.7 Consider the value of intermunicipal development planning to address land use on fringe areas, airport vicinity protection plan or other areas of mutual interest. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 5 8.8 Coordinate land use planning activities with First Nations, irrigation districts, school boards, health authorities and other agencies on areas of mutual interest. The above strategies were considered by both municipalities when developing policy within this IDP and will be considered when rendering land use decisions pertaining to development within the Plan Area. Other strategies contained in the SSRP should be considered in the context of each municipality's Municipal Development Plan, Land Use Bylaw or through policies found within the IDP. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 6 2 | PLAN AREA 2.1 Study Area Analysis Given the vast size of the municipalities, in order to focus on the border area and potential impacts, a series of maps was developed, with emphasis on the area approximately 1.6 km (1 mile) on each side of the shared border. The purpose was to identify opportunities and constraints which may affect land use planning as well as influences beyond the 1.6 km (1 mile) area of the shared border. The following features were displayed on the maps and considered by the IDP Review Committee: - Residences and Urban Areas - Transportation Corridors - Land Use and Natural Characteristics - Agricultural uses and Confined Feeding Operations (CFOs) - Surface Materials Extraction and Energy Development - Natural Environment and Water - Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) - Historical Resource Value (HRV) Sites After consideration of social, economic and physical features listed below, it was determined that a Plan Area of approximately 1.6 km (1 mile) on each side of the municipal boundary was adequate (refer to Map 1 for illustration of the Plan Area). 2.2 Key Characteristics of the Plan Area The MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland Intermunicipal Plan Area encompasses approximately 19,015 hectares (46,986 acres). Key characteristics of the Plan Area include the following, some of which are illustrated on Maps 2-4 in Appendix A. Land Use and Residential Development o Agriculture is the primary land use of the area, with a mix of agricultural operations including farming and ranching. There are no confined feeding operations located within the Plan Area. o A significant amount of land within the Plan Area is under control and ownership of the Province of Alberta. o The Livingstone Public Land Use Zone (PLUZ), Bob Creek Wildland, and Black Creek Heritage Rangeland encompass a significant portion of land within the Plan Area. o Few residences, approximately 14 dwellings, are located within the Plan Area boundary and no hamlets or other urban municipalities exist. Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 30 Range 4 MUNICIPALITY OF CROWSNEST PASS MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF RANCHLAND NO. 66 PIIKANI NATION MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF PINCHER CREEK NO. 9 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF WILLOW CREEK NO. 26 U V 22 Municipal District of Pincher Creek and Municipal District of Ranchland Intermunicipal Development Plan ± Plan Area Boundary Plan Area Boundary M.D. of Pincher Creek/M.D. of Ranchland Border Waterbodies Provincial Highway Municipal Roads Private Roads (No Road Plan) Map 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 29 Range 4 Township 8 Township 9 Township 11 Aerial Photo Date: 2015 Municipal District of Pincher Creek (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) & Municipal District of Ranchland (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) Range 30 Township 10 Range 29 ¹ Altalis, March 2018 Source: ² Alberta Environment and Parks Government of Alberta, October 2018 Black Creek Heritage Rangeland¹ Bob Creek Wildland Provincial Park¹ Livingstone Public Land Use Zone² Porcupine Hills Public Land Use Zone² Livingstone Range Wildland Provincial Park (Proposed)² Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 7 o The land in the eastern slopes of the Rockies has been the focus of conservation groups and conservation easements have been registered on lands within the Plan Area. Transportation Infrastructure o Road infrastructure is limited due to the mountain range that runs north and south close to the border between the two municipalities. o Highway 22 runs north and south and connects the two municipalities. o Several municipal roads travel to the west of Highway 22 towards the Bob Creek Wildland Provincial Park. Two municipal roads are situated east of Highway 22 and provide access north into the MD of Ranchland, with one containing a portion of a private road in the MD of Pincher Creek which crosses the border and travels into the MD of Willow Creek. Natural Environment and Historic Resources o Within the Plan Area, the mountains and valleys form the headwaters of many of the Province's major rivers, which are provincially significant and an important natural resource. o Portions of the Livingstone Range Public Land Use Zone (PLUZ) and the Porcupine Hills PLUZ are found within the Plan Area, which are managed by the Province. o The majority of the land is identified as environmentally significant. o Almost all of the land has the potential to contain historic resources, either archaeological or paleontological, and the DU Ranch Cabin is located within in the MD of Pincher Creek. Natural Resource Extraction and Energy Development o The lower slopes and valley bottoms consist of gravely alluvial material associated with watercourses. Sand and gravel potential has been confirmed along the Oldman River with the majority of the deposits located in the MD of Pincher Creek. o Several oil and gas pipelines connect the municipalities and both active and abandoned gas wells are located within the Plan Area. o A 500 KV transmission line is located in the southerly portion of the Plan Area near the border of the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass and runs through the northern portion of the Plan Area. A 69 KV line is also located east of Highway 22 within the MD of Pincher Creek. o Renewable energy projects, wind or solar, are not currently located within the Plan Area. Soil Characteristics o The Canada Land Inventory (CLI) indicates moderate to severe crop limitations for most of the land. o Soil classes 1 through 7 are present, resulting in a diversity of agricultural practices. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 8 3 | POLICIES The policies contained in this Plan are intended to provide direction to the MD of Pincher Creek and Municipal District of Ranchland Councils, subdivision and development authorities and administrations to manage the lands contained within the Plan Area. The policies of this Plan apply to all land within the Plan Area boundary delineated in Map 1. 3.1 General INTENT To provide administrative policies within the Plan Area which foster intermunicipal communication, consultation and cooperation. POLICIES 3.1.1 The MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland will strive to engage in effective dialogue when considering land use, while maintaining jurisdiction on lands within their own boundaries. 3.1.2 The municipalities will continue to build partnerships and foster a collaborative relationship with the adjacent municipality to promote regional interests, where deemed appropriate, including the support of mutually beneficial service agreements and shared environmental, economic and social outcomes. 3.1.3 Both municipalities agree to jointly discuss ways to cooperate with provincial and federal agencies and utility providers to help facilitate the efficient delivery of infrastructure and services that are of a mutual benefit. 3.1.4 The MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland will strive, to the best of their ability and knowledge, to refer notices of government projects to each other. 3.1.5 Both municipalities shall share with each other the results of all publicly available technical analyses required by a Subdivision and Development Authority as part of an application, where there is the potential for impacts on lands and bodies of water. 3.1.6 Both municipalities will endeavor to work together with conservation organizations and government agencies on lands within the Plan Area containing conservation easements that may impact critical infrastructure. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 9 3.2 Land Use INTENT To provide policies on land use within the Plan Area which reflect the development philosophies of both municipalities. POLICIES Agriculture 3.2.1 Agriculture will continue to be the predominant land use in the Plan Area. The impact on agricultural uses should be a consideration when determining suitability of non-agricultural land uses in the Plan Area. 3.2.2 Both municipalities will strive to work cooperatively to encourage good neighbour agricultural practices, such as dust, weed and insect control, through best management practices and Alberta Agriculture guidelines. 3.2.3 If disputes or complaints in either municipality arise between ratepayers and agricultural operators, the municipality receiving the complaint will direct the affected parties to the appropriate agency, government department or municipality for consultation or resolution wherever necessary. Confined Feeding Operations (CFOs) 3.2.4 If either the MD of Pincher Creek or MD of Ranchland are in receipt of a notice of application from the Natural Resources Conservation Board for new or expanded CFOs, they will forward a copy of the notification to the other municipality. Resource Extraction 3.2.5 The municipalities will consider the effects of visual intrusion, dust, noise, traffic, and air and water pollution when evaluating applications for new gravel pits, or other extractive activities, where they maintain jurisdiction. 3.2.6 Either municipality may require an agreement regarding the construction, repair, and maintenance of any municipal roads which may be impacted by resource development when the development requires access to come from the other municipality's road. 3.2.7 If either the MD of Pincher Creek or MD of Ranchland are in receipt of a notice or application for a new or expanded public or privately owned gravel pit, they will forward a copy of the notice to the other municipality. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 10 Industry and Energy Development 3.2.8 The municipalities may consider the location of renewable energy developments and other industrial development where compatible with existing land uses and each municipality's planning documents. Utilities / Telecommunications Towers 3.2.9 When providing comments to provincial and federal departments regarding utility development, the MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland will request that consideration be given to the establishment of utility corridors with multiple users. 3.2.10 Where there is an application for a new, expanded or retrofitted telecommunications tower within the Plan Area, the MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland will notify the other municipality to seek their comments. 3.2.11 It is the preference of both municipalities that co-location of telecommunication facilities be undertaken where technically feasible. 3.3 Transportation and Road Networks INTENT The two municipalities are connected via Highway 22, as well as local roads including the Maycroft Road, Bob Creek Road, Heath Creek Road, North Burmis Road and West Sharples Road. It is important that the municipalities take into consideration the impact of development on municipal and provincial road infrastructure. POLICIES 3.3.1 Both municipalities agree to consult and work with Alberta Transportation regarding the implementation of this Plan and, at the time of subdivision and development, consider how development may impact Highway 22, as applicable. 3.3.2 When required by Alberta Transportation, developers shall conduct traffic studies with respect to the impact and access on the Highway. Any upgrading identified by a traffic study conducted by a developer with respect to the Highway shall be implemented by the developer at its sole cost and to the satisfaction of Alberta Transportation. 3.3.3 The municipalities should endeavor to maintain open dialogue with Alberta Transportation regarding Highway 22, including any changes to the highway that may have important impacts on the municipalities. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 11 3.3.4 Current agreements are in place regarding the maintenance and upkeep of the local roads connecting the municipalities. The municipalities will continue to work together regarding these roads and will negotiate road use agreements as necessary. 3.3.5 Both municipalities should engage with the Municipal District of Willow Creek and the Government of Alberta regarding future access and maintenance of the privately owned portion of the Beaver Creek/Heath Creek road. 3.4 Natural Environment INTENT Both municipalities recognize the connection between the natural environment and quality of life and strive to protect, preserve and enhance natural systems and environmentally significant areas. POLICIES 3.4.1 When making land use decisions, each municipality will: a) utilize and incorporate measures which minimize possible impacts to important water resources; b) determine appropriate land use patterns in the vicinity of significant water resources and other water features; c) establish appropriate setbacks to maintain water quality, flood water conveyance and storage, bank stability and habitat. 3.4.2 Lands that have been identified that may contain an environmentally significant site may be required to conduct an environmental impact assessment (EIA) and the proponent should contact Alberta Environment and Parks. 3.4.3 Lands that have been identified that may contain a historic resource may be required to conduct a historical resource impact assessment (HRIA) and the proponent should consult the Historical Resources Act and Alberta Culture and Tourism. 3.4.4 Both municipalities should consider the provincial Water for Life Strategy and Wetland Policy when making land use decisions with the goal of sustaining environment and economic benefits. 3.5 Interpretation INTENT To ensure the policies and language within this Plan are communicated in the proper context to ensure the intent of the Plan is as clear and concise as possible. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 12 POLICIES 3.5.1 Unless otherwise required by the context, words used in the present tense include the future tense, words used in the singular include the plural, and the word person includes a corporation as well as an individual. Unless otherwise stipulated, the Interpretation Act, Chapter I-8, RSA 2000 as amended, shall be used in the interpretation of this bylaw. Words have the same meaning whether they are capitalized or not. 3.5.2 All references to a specific agency, body, or department were accurate at the time of writing. It is understood that agency, body and department names change from time to time. All references throughout the Plan shall therefore be considered to be applicable to the relevant agency, body or department. 3.5.3 The geographical or relative boundaries or any variable presented on the maps contained in this Plan, with the exception of the boundaries of the Plan Area, shall be interpreted as a rough approximation and not an accurate depiction of its actual or full extension. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 13 4 | PLAN ADMINISTRATION & IMPLEMENTATION 4.1 Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee Policies INTENT The implementation of this Plan is intended to be an ongoing process to ensure it is maintained and remains applicable. An Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee with joint representation will ensure continued dialogue and cooperation, as the purpose of this committee is to promote active cooperation and conflict resolution through a consensus-based approach. POLICIES 4.1.1 For the purposes of administering and monitoring the IDP, the MD of Pincher Creek and the MD of Ranchland establish the Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee (the Committee). 4.1.2 Both Councils agree the Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee will be an advisory body and may make comments or recommendations to the MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland. In its advisory capacity, the Committee does not have decision making authority or powers with respect to planning matters in either municipality. 4.1.3 The Committee will be comprised of two (2) members of Council from both the MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland. Each municipality may appoint an alternate Committee member in the event a regular member cannot attend a scheduled meeting. Alternate Committee members shall have standing. Quorum shall consist of four (4) voting members. 4.1.4 Members of the Committee shall be appointed by their respective Councils at the Organizational Meeting. If a Council wishes to appoint a new member to the Committee (including the alternate), they must do so by motion of Council at a regular Council meeting. The municipalities shall notify one another upon appointing members and alternate members to the Committee. 4.1.5 The municipalities agree that the purpose of the Committee is to: a) provide a forum for discussion of land use matters within the Plan Area, b) provide recommendation(s) for proposed amendments to the Plan, c) discuss and address issues regarding Plan implementation, d) review and provide comment on referrals under section 4.2 and any other matters referred to the Committee, e) provide recommendation(s) regarding intermunicipal issues in an effort to avoid a dispute, and Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 14 f) provide a forum for discussion of any other matter of joint interest identified by either municipality. 4.1.6 Meetings of the Committee may be held at the request of either municipality to discuss land use or other planning matters, dispute resolution, or any other matter of intermunicipal importance. Additionally, any matter in Section 4.2 may be referred by either municipality to the Committee for comment prior to a decision being rendered. 4.1.7 A municipality may call a meeting of the Committee at any time upon not less than five (5) days' notice of the meeting being given to all members of the Committee and support personnel, stating the date, the time, purpose and the place of the proposed meeting. The five (5) days' notice may be waived with ¾ of the Committee members' agreement noted. 4.1.8 The municipality that called the meeting of the Committee shall host and chair the meeting and is responsible for preparing and distributing agendas and minutes. 4.1.9 At least one (1) member of each municipality's administrative staff shall attend each meeting in the capacity of technical, non-voting advisor. 4.1.10 Any changes to the Committee format, composition, roles, responsibilities or any aspect of its existence or operation may be requested by either municipality. 4.1.11 Where a matter has been referred to the Committee and a resolution cannot be found, the Dispute Resolution process in Section 5 of this Plan should be adhered to. 4.2 Referral Policies INTENT To establish a process for consistent and transparent sharing of information necessary to make decisions in accordance with the intent of the Plan. POLICIES General 4.2.1 Where an intermunicipal referral is required by the MGA or the policies contained in this Plan, both municipalities agree to share mailing address and property ownership information for circulation purposes with the adjacent municipality and, where applicable, the municipality's processing agency. 4.2.2 Where a plan or bylaw, including amendments, or application, requires notifications to be sent to a municipality that is external to this IDP, the referring municipality shall follow the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 15 referral requirements outlined in the MGA, and where applicable, those contained in a relevant Intermunicipal Development Plan. 4.2.3 Administrative staff or representatives for the MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland are encouraged to discuss with one another forthcoming Statutory Plans and Land Use Bylaws, including amendments, which may impact the Plan Area. 4.2.4 Administrative staff or representatives for the MD of Pincher Creek and MD of Ranchland are encouraged to discuss with one another forthcoming subdivision and development applications that may impact lands within the Plan Area. 4.2.5 The municipalities are encouraged to refer to each other for comment major land use or planning matters that have the potential to impact the other jurisdiction, even if it involves lands that may not be located within the Plan Area. Municipal Development Plans 4.2.6 A newly proposed MD of Ranchland Municipal Development Plan or amendment shall be referred to the MD of Pincher Creek for comment prior to a public hearing. 4.2.7 A newly proposed MD of Pincher Creek Municipal Development Plan or amendment shall be referred to MD of Ranchland for comment prior to a public hearing. Other Statutory Plans 4.2.8 A newly proposed MD of Ranchland statutory plan (excluding a Municipal Development Plan) or amendment that will have an impact on the Plan Area shall be referred to the MD of Pincher Creek for comment prior to a public hearing. 4.2.9 A newly proposed MD of Pincher Creek statutory plan (excluding a Municipal Development Plan) or amendment that will have an impact on the Plan Area shall be referred to the MD of Ranchland for comment prior to a public hearing. Land Use Bylaws 4.2.10 All Land Use Bylaw amendments in the MD of Ranchland that affect lands in the Plan Area shall be referred to the MD of Pincher Creek for comment prior to a public hearing. 4.2.11 All Land Use Bylaw amendments in the MD of Pincher Creek that affect lands in the Plan Area shall be referred to MD of Ranchland for comment prior to a public hearing. 4.2.12 All redesignation applications affecting the Plan Area shall be referred to the other municipality for comment prior to a public hearing. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 16 4.2.13 A newly proposed Land Use Bylaw from either municipality shall be referred to the other for comment prior to a public hearing. Design Concepts 4.2.14 All design concepts in support of a subdivision or development in the MD of Ranchland that will affect lands in the Plan Area shall be referred to the MD of Pincher Creek for comment prior to Council resolution. 4.2.15 All design concepts in support of a subdivision or development in the MD of Pincher Creek that will affect lands in the Plan Area shall be referred to the MD of Ranchland for comment prior to Council resolution. Subdivision and Development 4.2.16 All subdivision applications for lands within the Plan Area shall be referred to the other municipality for comment prior to a decision being rendered. 4.2.17 The MD of Ranchland shall refer all discretionary use development applications within the Plan Area to the MD of Pincher Creek for comment prior to a decision being rendered. 4.2.18 The MD of Pincher Creek shall refer all discretionary use development applications within the Plan Area to the MD of Ranchland for comment prior to a decision being rendered. Response Timelines 4.2.19 The responding municipality shall, from the date of mailing, have the following timelines to review and provide comment on intermunicipal referrals: a) 15 calendar days for all development applications, b) 19 calendar days for subdivision applications, and c) 30 calendar days for all other intermunicipal referrals. 4.2.20 In the event that either municipality or the Committee does not reply within, or request an extension by, the response time for intermunicipal referrals stipulated in this Section, it is presumed that the responding municipality and/or Committee has no comment or objection to the referred planning application or matter. Consideration of Responses 4.2.21 Comments from the responding municipality and/or the Committee regarding proposed Municipal Development Plans, other statutory plans, and Land Use Bylaws, or amendments to any of those documents, shall be considered by the municipality in which the application is being proposed, prior to a decision being rendered. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 17 4.2.22 Comments from the responding municipality and/or the Committee regarding subdivision and development applications shall be considered by the municipality in which the application is being proposed, prior to a decision being rendered on the application. 4.3 Plan Validity and Amendment Policies INTENT This Plan may require amendments from time to time to accommodate unforeseen situations, and to keep the Plan relevant. POLICIES 4.3.1 This Plan comes into effect on the date it is adopted by both municipalities. 4.3.2 Amendments shall be adopted by both Councils using the procedures outlined in the MGA. No amendment shall come into force until such time as both municipalities adopt the amending bylaw. 4.3.3 Applications for amendments to this Plan by parties other than the MD of Pincher Creek and the MD of Ranchland (e.g. landowners and developers) shall be made to both municipalities along with the applicable fee as established by each municipality for processing amendments to a statutory plan. 4.3.4 Administrative staff should review the policies of the Plan annually and discuss land use matters, issues and concerns on an on-going basis. Administrative staff may make recommendations to their respective Councils for amendment to the Plan to ensure the policies remain relevant and continue to meet the needs of both municipalities. 4.3.5 A formal review of the Plan will occur within 10 years from the date the IDP is adopted by both municipalities. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 18 5 | DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICIES 5.1 General Dispute Process INTENT The intent of the dispute resolution process is to maximize opportunities for discussion and review in order to resolve areas of disagreement early in the process. Despite the best efforts of both municipalities, it is understood that disputes may arise from time to time affecting land use within the Plan boundary. The following process is intended to settle disputes through consensus and minimize the need for formal mediation. POLICIES General Agreement The municipalities agree that: 5.1.1 It is important to avoid dispute by ensuring that the Plan is adhered to as adopted, including full circulation of any permit or application that may affect the municipality as required in the Plan and prompt enforcement of the Plan policies. 5.1.2 Prior to the meeting of the Committee, each municipality through its administration will ensure the facts of the issue have been investigated and clarified, and information is made available to both parties. Staff meetings are encouraged to discuss possible solutions. 5.1.3 The Committee should discuss the issue or dispute with the intent to seek a recommended solution by consensus. Dispute Resolution In the case of a dispute, the following process will be followed to arrive at a solution: 5.1.4 When a potential intermunicipal issue comes to the attention of either municipality relating to a technical or procedural matter, such as inadequate notification or prescribed timelines, misinterpretation of Plan policies, or a clerical error regarding the policies of this Plan, either municipality's Land Use Bylaw, or any other plan affecting lands in the Plan Area, it will be directed to the administrators of each municipality. The administrators will review the technical or procedural matter and if both administrators are in agreement, take action to rectify the matter. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 19 5.1.5 Should either municipality identify an issue related to this Plan that may result in a dispute that cannot be administratively resolved under Section 5.1.4 or any other issue that may result in a dispute, the municipality shall contact the other and request that an Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee meeting be scheduled to discuss the issue. The Committee will review the issue and attempt to resolve the matter by consensus. 5.1.6 Should the Intermunicipal Development Plan Committee be unable to arrive at a consensus, the administration of each municipality will schedule a joint meeting of the two Councils to discuss possible solutions and attempt to reach consensus on the issue. 5.1.7 Should the Councils be unable to resolve the matter, either municipality shall initiate a formal mediation process to facilitate resolution of the issue. Filing an Intermunicipal Dispute under the Municipal Government Act 5.1.8 In the case of a dispute involving the adoption of a statutory plan, Land Use Bylaw or amendment to such, within 30 days of adoption, the municipality initiating the dispute may, without prejudice, file an appeal to the Municipal Government Board under section 690(1) of the MGA so that the provincial statutory right and timeframe to file an appeal is not lost. 5.1.9 The appeal may then be withdrawn, without prejudice, if a solution or agreement is reached between the two municipalities prior to the Municipal Government Board meeting. This is to acknowledge and respect that the time required to seek resolution or mediation may not be able to occur within the 30 day appeal filing process as outlined in the MGA. Note: Using section 690(1) of the MGA is the final stage of dispute settlement, where the municipalities request the Municipal Government Board to intercede and resolve the issue. Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 & Municipal District of Ranchland No. 66 Intermunicipal Development Plan Bylaw No. 1311-19 & Bylaw No. 2019-04 Page | 20 Dispute Resolution Flow Chart The dispute resolution flow chart presented here is for demonstration purposes only and shall not limit the ability of either municipality to explore other methods of resolution or to choose one method in place of another. Conflict Arises Adhere to IDP Policies Council meets to resolve Explore resolution options Mediation MGA Section 690(1) Resolution/Process Ends Administration meets to resolve Committee meets to resolve 21 APPENDIX A | MAPS Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 30 Range 4 MUNICIPALITY OF CROWSNEST PASS MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF RANCHLAND NO. 66 PIIKANI NATION MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF PINCHER CREEK NO. 9 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF WILLOW CREEK NO. 26 U V 22 Municipal District of Pincher Creek and Municipal District of Ranchland Intermunicipal Development Plan ± Plan Area Boundary M.D. of Pincher Creek/M.D. of Ranchland Border Provincial Highway Waterbodies Residences & Other Addressed Parcels ¹ ² Land Ownership² ³ Crown Land Map 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 29 Range 4 Township 8 Township 9 Township 11 Aerial Photo Date: 2015 Municipal District of Pincher Creek (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) & Municipal District of Ranchland (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) Range 30 Township 10 Range 29 Physical Characteristics ¹ MD of Ranchland - Alberta Municipal Data Sharing Partnership, April 2018 MD of Pincher Creek - Digitized from 2015 Aerial Photo ² M.D. of Pincher Creek - Altalis, June 2018 Willow Creek - Altalis, May 2017 ³ Altalis, July 2018 Source: 4 Alberta Environment and Parks Government of Alberta, October 2018 Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 30 Range 4 ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú úú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú MUNICIPALITY OF CROWSNEST PASS MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF RANCHLAND NO. 66 PIIKANI NATION MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF PINCHER CREEK NO. 9 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF WILLOW CREEK NO. 26 U V 22 Municipal District of Pincher Creek and Municipal District of Ranchland Intermunicipal Development Plan ± Plan Area Boundary M.D. of Pincher Creek/M.D. of Ranchland Border Provincial Highway Municipal Roads Private Roads (No Road Plan) ú Bridge Waterbodies Map 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 29 Range 4 Township 8 Township 9 Township 11 Aerial Photo Date: 2015 Municipal District of Pincher Creek (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) & Municipal District of Ranchland (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) Range 30 Township 10 Range 29 Road Network ¹ Altalis, March 2018 Source: 2 Alberta Environment and Parks Government of Alberta, October 2018 Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 30 Range 4 MUNICIPALITY OF CROWSNEST PASS MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF RANCHLAND NO. 66 PIIKANI NATION MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF PINCHER CREEK NO. 9 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF WILLOW CREEK NO. 26 U V 22 Municipal District of Pincher Creek and Municipal District of Ranchland Intermunicipal Development Plan ± Plan Area Boundary M.D. of Pincher Creek/M.D. of Ranchland Border Provincial Highway Waterbodies Map 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers Range 3 Range 2 Range 1 Range 29 Range 4 Township 8 Township 9 Township 11 Aerial Photo Date: 2015 Municipal District of Pincher Creek (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) & Municipal District of Ranchland (Bylaw No. _ _ _ _) Range 30 Township 10 Range 29 Energy Infrastructure Transmission Lines¹ 69 kv 500 kv Pipelines - Substance² Crude Oil HV Other HVP Products LVP Products Natural Gas Well - Status² ^_ Abandoned ^_ Abandoned Gas ^_ Drilled and Cased ^_ Gas ^_ Suspended Gas ^_ Undefined Source: ¹ Digitized by ORRSC, 2018 ³ Altalis March 2018 ² Alberta Energy Regulator, 2016