Forgot your password?
To register please contact email@example.com
WHEREAS in most cases of subdivision Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation exercised its right under Sections 14, 15 and 16 of the Subdivision and Development Regulation; AND WHEREAS it seems of late that Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation appears to be exercising more control on subdivisions within 0.8 kilometres of a highway (including secondary roads) for such items as 30 metre frontage roads by caveat or plan of survey, area structure plans, access removals, and traffic impact assessments;AND WHEREAS Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation expects applicants to pay for all these conditions and demand that municipalities ensure Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation conditions are adhered to;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties review with Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation the manner of exercising their imposition of conditions under Sections 14, 15 and 16 of the Subdivision and Development Regulations.
There appears to be a greater use of conditions by Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation through the Subdivision and Development Regulations. This affects subdivisions within 0.8 km of a highway with a speed limit of 80 km/hr or greater.This is now causing a greater number of appeals, and traveling to Edmonton for Municipal Government Board appeals is an inconvenience to appellants and the municipality.There also seems to be inconsistency in how each of the regions undertakes requirements.As well when secondary roads were assumed by the Province, agreements were signed lessening some of the distances required under the regulation. Perhaps that agreement should also be re-addressed.There is a big difference in sparsely populated areas where one or two parcels are sought out of a quarter section compared to the major Alberta corridors.
The AAMDC has no resolutions currently in effect with respect to this issue.However, resolution 41-03F urges the Province to review its current legislation and policies regarding the subdivision of land adjacent to highways to ensure that land owners receive equitable compensation for land required for highway improvements. The provincial government responded that it does not, as a condition of approval, require that a proponent of a subdivision application dedicate right-of-way for future highway widening. Service road dedication is required to provide a means of legal access. A service road is considered to be the same as an internal subdivision road(s), and as in all cases of subdivision requiring roads to be developed now or in the future, this is the responsibility of the applicant/developer. Provincial highways are maintained to safety standards, to minimize collisions and fatalities. For this reason, access to a highway controlled by the province is considered temporary. Without the provision of a service road, lots would be created that do not meet the requirement of having a means of legal access.
In support of improved traffic safety, if an access is redundant or an alternative access can be made to a lower class roadway, AIT will request that the access be removed as part of the approval process for development applications. The department of Infrastructure and Transportation has no current plans to look at the regulations for amendment. The Province released Policy TCE-TS 509 Who pays for Highway Improvements Caused by single Developments, Multiple Developments, or in support of New Developments identified by the Department as Future Work. This policy clarifies who will pay for improvements when a development generates high traffic volumes on provincial highways. The AAMDC is looking at the development of a policy paper in response to this policy. Resolutions 9-07F and 3-08S also deal with this issue.