MGA Review Comment - Environment

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/12/2019 MGA Review Comment - Environment

    1/1

    February 12, 2014Com ment subm itted for discussions relating to the Municipal Governmen t Act Reviewcurrently in progress:Kneehill County has recently given third reading to a direct control land use b ylawestablishing a district encom passing approximately 3 quarter sections for the BadlandsM otorsport Resort. A substantial portion of the p roposed uses, including the race trackitself, will occur in the Rosebud River Valley which had earlier been identified as anenvironmentally significant area pursuant to environmental studies undertaken andapproved by the mun icipal council pursuant to the Provincial Land U se Policies. Themunicipal council seems to be und er the impression that once the env ironmental studieswere com plete the resulting reports and recomm endations need only be put into the locallibrary, but otherwise ignored.The land use approval was g iven despite both the mun icipal MD P and Provincial LandUse Policies that go to great lengths to encourage environmental protection inEnvironmentally Significant Areas. A com plete and independent Environmental ImpactAssessment for the proposed M otorsports Resort has not yet been done and qu iteobviously should have been done before the A rea Structure Plan, let alone the land usedistrict, for this development was approved. Denial of racetracks weaving amongwetlands and on the slopes of an unstable riverbank should, quite frankly, be a nobrainer . There are other locations where racetracks can be built with few environm entalimpacts.The A lberta Go vernment seem s to have end less rhetoric which leads Albertans and therest of the world to believe that they value environmental protection highly. The currentM GA is heavy on protecting the rights of Municipal Councils to make local decisionsbut light on actually directing and educating Municipal Councils as to the process theymust follow to evaluate developments on an environmental basis. This development is ablatant example of how Provincial environm ental policies have failed to be effectivelyincorporated into the M unicipal Government A ct or implemented.Please have a careful look and decide what changes need to be made in the MG A toensure the decision Kneehill County has made will not be repeated. Municipalities needa M GA and a set of L and U se Policies that clearly direct decision makers to enforceenvironmental protection. Developers should not assume they can purchase any piece ofland and m assage we ak environm ental policies to suit their desires. Please refer to thewebsite savctherosebud.com for more information on this particular example.In addition to the foregoing, the project was universally opposed by directly affected andneighboring property owners. Over 100 people spoke in opposition to the approval, butto no avail. I understand that planning is not simply a matter of plebiscites. But, if publichearings are of no consequence, then why are they required? Why ask for the publics'opinion if you are g oing to ignore it.Sincerely,Wendy Clark