Public vs Private ALR Application
I am concerned with the ALR Exclusion Application that has been filed by Robin Agur's agent on the 57 hectare parcel in West Prairie Valley. Permission for this application was given by Evan Parliament prior to the May 4th Open House. These are municipal lands. An application filed by a private developer does not follow the same process as that filed by a local government. I have included information from the ALC website:
Application by a Local Government
A local government may apply to include land into or exclude from the ALR for land within the local government's jurisdiction. The Applicant (the local government)
- Must hold a public hearing.
- Ensures that notice of the public hearing and the procedure at the hearing follow the requirements outlined in section 13 and 14 of the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation.
- Completes the Application by Local Government form .
Submits the application and fee (if applicable) to the Commission.
Application by Landowner
A landowner may apply to: include land in the ALR, exclude land from the ALR, subdivide land in the ALR, use land in the ALR for non-farm purposes
The Applicant:
- Completes the Application by Landowner form.
- Completes the notice of application requirements if applying to exclude land.
- Submits the application, fee and proof of notice (if applying to exclude land) to the local government.
The most notable difference is the lack of a public hearing for applications by a private land owner. I question the intention of the Municipality allowing a private party to make this application on behalf of public lands. I feel the public should be given the right to attend a public hearing to discuss the specific reasons for an Exclusion Application at this time, as well as what specific plans have been made for the use of this land. It is currently designated Future Residential. Has this changed?
I am concerned with the process here, as well as the apparent close ties between Municipal staff and the Proposed Golf Course Development. I believe our local government should remain at an arm's length from any private development proposals.
posted by Amie |
Permanent Link
1 Comments:
Definitely, there appear to be all sorts of problems with the way this application has been promoted. Only the landowner or his agent should be making an application for exclusion of property that they own from the ALR. Is Mr. Agur acting as the agent for the Municipality? If that is the case he should be so identified in the public application.
There seems to be all sorts of hidden agendas with this council and its staff. As we found out at the last two open houses, the left hand hasn't got a clue as to what the right hand is doing. I would hope that the half-hearted attempt at a democratic process, by having the 200 or so members in attendance at the last open house raise their hands in a yea or naa vote for or against a whole series of ALR exclusions is the method at which these types of decisions are going to be made in the future. This is no substitute for a full-fledged meeting and vote to remove a particular property from the ALR. As we have found out since, the recent amendment by council to change the variance of a group of homes in the downtown area from single residential to duplex residential was apparently not favoured by a majority of the homeowners themselves. Council simply went ahead with the notion that if it was good for one of the residents then it was good for the rest.
In this last case we should demand the right of, at the very least, a petition, and time enough to garner the necessary names, for a full hearing into the ALR exclusion. We should also demand a clarification of the legality, or lack thereof, of the method used by Council to move ahead with what is very obviously a devious method to subvert a democratic process of accountability.
Frank Martens
May 15/2005
By
Anonymous, at 1:29 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home