BARRHEAD - County of Barrhead councillors unanimously passed first reading 6-0 to its amended land-use bylaw (LUB) during their May 7 meeting in front of a public gallery of about 30 people.
Coun. Jared Stoik was absent.
In a separate motion, councillors also set June 7 at 10 a.m. as the public hearing date at a yet-to-be-selected location. However, Reeve Doug Drozd suggested that due to the expected public turnout, the municipality would likely book either the Charles Godberson Rotary Room in the Barrhead Agrena or the Summerdale Community Hall, with roughly 60 people attending.
The municipality has been working on updating the document for the better part of two years. The last time the LUB was updated was 2010. In addition to the upcoming public hearing, the municipality has hosted several public engagement sessions, the first of which was on May 3, 2023. About three weeks later, the county launched a public survey that was available online and had hard copies available from May 19 to June 10. Due to the low number of responses (18), the municipality extended the survey deadline until July and received an additional 102 responses.
County manager Debbie Oyarzun said staff then compiled all the responses into the "What We Heard" report, which administration presented to the council on Oct. 11, 2023.
She added councillors then used the report to consider further changes to the draft LUB at a workshop in early February.
The county also hosted another set of in-person public engagement sessions on March 18 and 19 in the evening, and residents were encouraged to contact development staff with any questions or concerns. Council then heard an updated version of the "What We Heard" report instructing administration to incorporate many of the recommendations into a new draft document.
Development officer Jenny Bruns added that the county started reviewing its land-use bylaw, at least partly due to provincial changes, specifically in the Red Tape Reduction Statutes Amendment Act.
"Which impacted a lot of development things, such as the requirements to do things within certain time frames," she said. "[Our current] bylaw did not have any of that language, terminology, or dates for processing, so it needed to be written in."
Bruns said much of the work was also done to clarify definitions, adding that they always want to be as "tight as possible."
Some of the changes
Bruns said they tweaked the types of developments that needed permits, specifically farm accessory buildings, based on feedback from residents and contractors.
Under the proposed LUB, a permit will be needed if the farm accessory building is over 500 square feet, except for grain storage structures. In the current land-use bylaw, permits are not required for any farm accessory building.
The reason for the change, she said, is that the county has received multiple complaints about people placing large farm accessory buildings not on their property.
"There is one property that has three buildings 80 by 120 feet on the road allowance, and if anything is ever done to that road, they will have to be destroyed," Bruns said. "We don't want people coming in every week having to get a permit, but if it is over 500 square feet, there is a more significant value, and let's make sure it is placed right," Bruns said, emphasizing the change is only in agricultural districts.
She noted several contractors also requested the change, saying that often, when upgrading farm structures over a specific size, they first need a copy of a municipal development permit to be issued a provincial safety code permit.
"So we were constantly writing letters to the safety codes officer to let them know we were OK with [the development]," Bruns said.
Non-conforming buildings and uses
Bruns said they also added regulations to deal with encroachment issues between neighbouring property owners, specifically when someone built or put something on a neighbouring property.
"We didn't have anything on the books to deal with that, and it became a civil matter, and you had to fight it out with your neighbour in court," she said. Under the changes, the municipality can request that a property owner believed to be encroaching on someone's property provide a real property report (RPR).
"A lot of things happen in our municipality without surveys, and you don't want to impose those costs on a landowner, but an encroachment is one of the reasons," Bruns said. "That's not to say the property owners can't come to an agreement, but we have that authority to ask for an RPR if there are issues."
Permissions for demolition
Bruns said this section is a new addition to the LUB to provide direction on demolition procedures and minimize environmental damage.
"[The rule of thumb] is that if you need a permit to put something up, you need a permit to take it down," she said. "You can take it down without a permit if it is an old shed or barn. With houses, there are provincial environmental standards, such as you can't bury asphalt and rules on disposing of asbestos, et cetera, and this allows us to give them that information, including proper haul routes to make sure it is going to the right place," she said.
Bruns added she knows of four cases in the past year where residents demolished large buildings improperly, and Alberta Environment and Parks came in and forced the landowner to do costly cleanups.
"In two of those cases, they corrupted their water supply," she said.
Second permanent dwelling
A new section was also added to the draft bylaw, allowing for a second permanent dwelling on parcels over acres in agricultural districts if a parcel was 150 acres or larger, without the need to subdivide the property, and there was a minimum of 49.99 metres between them. The residences must also adhere to the Alberta Private Sewage Systems Standard of Practice.
"This would allow for farm families to build on the same parcel," Bruns said.
Animal restrictions
Bruns said there was a lot of misinformation regarding the county's proposed changes, especially regarding chickens because they removed the fowl as an animal unit in non-agricultural districts.
While that is true, she said they moved chickens into the upcoming animal control bylaw for non-agricultural zones.
"A lot of people want to start raising backyard chickens, and we want to make sure that can happen," Bruns said, adding that is one of the reasons they moved the section into the animal control bylaw. The animal control bylaw is expected to be presented to the council for consideration at the May 21 council meeting.
The other change in this category is increasing the number of dogs allowed in an agricultural district to four; this is up by one. For acreages, the number remains unchanged at two.
Bruns said they also clarified the language in the section, admitting that the current language is ambiguous.
"I had a laugh with the peace officer [Shae Guy]," she said. "[He told me] I am not dealing with hamsters or goldfish, so take that word out. It just references dogs."
Sea cans
Bruns said new parameters have been limiting the number of sea cans in certain districts based on residents' feedback have been included. She said property owners can have up to four unpermitted sea cans in agricultural zones.
"After four, just come in and get a permit to ensure that you are not placing it in front of your neighbour's front window, et cetera," Bruns added."In the smaller high-density areas, one is allowed, with additional sea cans at the development officer's discretion.
Bruns said there seems to be a misconception that the LUB prohibits residents from creating living spaces, such as guest suites from sea cans.
"There are provisions where [Alberta safety and building codes] are involved," she said. "We don't want people living in sea cans that haven't been renovated."