THE ALBERTA GAZETTE, DECEMBER 14, 1985 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF PINCHER CREEK NO. 9 Order No. 17320 File No. 609(A)1 Before: The Local Authorities Board for the Province of Alberta IN THE MATTER OF TH? "Municipal Government Act": AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by the Council of the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9, in the Province of Alberta, to annex certain territory lying immediately adjacent thereto and thereby its separation from The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass. Pursuant to Section 20 of the Municipal Government Act, the Council of the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No, 9, in the Province of Alberta, petitioned the Local Authorities Board for the Province of Alberta, for the annexation to the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 of all that territory described as follows: SECTION TEN (lo), SECTfON ELEVEN (111, WEST HALF OF SECTION FOUKTEEN (14), SECTION FIFlEEN (15) ,BEAST HALF OF SECTION TWENTY-TWO (221, SECTION TWENTY-THREE (23). EAST HALF OF SECTION TWENTY-SEVEN (27) AND SECTION THIRTY-FOUR (341, ALL WITHIN TOWNSHIP SEVEN (71, RANGE THKEE (3), WEST OF THE FIFTH MERIDIAN. SECTION THREE (3) AND EAST HALF OF SECTION FOUR (41, ALL WITHIN TOWNSHIP EIGHT (a), RANGE THREE (3), WEST OF THE FIFTH MERIDIAN. ALL GOVERNMENT ROAD ALLOWANCES INTERVENING AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TERRITORY. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LANDS CONTAIN TWO THOUSAND SEVENTY-ONE AND NINETY-NINE HUNDREDTHS (2,071.99) HECTARES (5,120 ACRES), MORE OR LESS. (hereinafter called "the said territory") which lies immediately adjacent to the Municipal District, and thereby its separation from The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass, and in respect to which the Board held a public hearing into the matter on May 10, 1985. Representing the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 were Reeve 11. Pharis and K.E. Phillips, Municipal Secretary. Mayor Dr. J. Irwin and J. Kapalka, Municipal Administrator, appeared 011 behalf of The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass. E. Nicholson and W. Fisher, Planners, presented the position of the Oldman-' River Regional Planning Commission. Ovners and leasehold owners A. and E. Cervo, C.H. Milvain, I.. Block, L. Green and M. Dziedzic were present and made submissions. A presentation was made on behalf of the Board of Trustees of the Crowsnest School Division No. 63 by Trustee W. Price and W. Terriff, Superintendent. F. Grills and G. Lind, Assessors with the Assesement Services Ilivision of Alberta Municipal Affairs, appeared to give information in respect to assessments and taxes. On January 1, 1979, the five coal mining communities of Hillcrest, Bellevue, Frank, Blairmore and Coleman, together with portions of Improvement Uistrict No. 5 which included thirteen present and former hamlets were amalgamated by The Crowsnest Pass Mbnicipal Unification Act into a single municipality. While "The Crowsnest Pass Amalgamation Study" conducted prior to amalgamation by Alberta Municipal Affairs recommended that the municipality contain some 78 square miles of territory, the Unification Act reduced the total area to approximately 60 square miles. This total area has eince been increased by 3,108 hectare8 (7,680 acres) through annexation by Order in Council No. 14/79 4064 ated January 4, 1979, and Board Order No. 16334 dated May 19, 1983. None of he lands annexed by Board Order No. 16334 involved the said territory or the ast sector of the Municipality. The Crowsnest Pass Amalgamation Study" contains the following suggestion: "With regard to boundaries it is suggested that all urban communities and industrially developed land be included, together with such additional undeveloped areas which would accommodate an approximate doubling of population.'' e study does not provide bhe criteria or fationale used in deciding why the said territory was included in the Municipality. It is noted, in Board Order No. 16334, that The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass in applying to annex a similar type of non urban territory, suggested that as the Municipality ' provided municipal, health, educational and other services to such lands, the lands should be contributing to the cost of these services. The Oldman River Regional Planning Commission submitted the following as the main reasons why Alberta Municipal Affairs proposed such a large area €or the new Municipality of Crowsnest Pass: - much of the Crowsnest Pass proper is undevelopable for conventional urban land uses, - The population, though mainly co8centrated in a number of urban communities, was nevertheless scattered over a large area, and - The Pass proper's urban communities were assessment poor. Most of the area's existing or anticipated industrial assessment was located in the outlying areas." With respect to the present boundaries of The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass, the Oldman River Regional Planning Cowission also submitted the following: "It is noteworthy that the present boundaries of the Crowenest Pass are not a carryover from the early part of the century. They have been determined very recently on the basis of extensive study and discussion. As will be seen later however, a minor adjustment or some "fine tuning" of the present boundaries along Highway 3 may have some merit." Prior to amalgamation, all the said territory was within Improvement District No. 5 and is now located in a strip of a varying width along the east boundary of The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass. The major portion of the said territory lies to the north of the Crowsnest River Valley and Highway No, 3 from where it rises, through various mountain terrains from an elevation of 4,000 feet to 6,000 feet. In the northern portion of the said territory are located electrical transmission lines, the interprovincial twin Nova gas lines and is where a 500 kv interprovincial electrical transmission line is now under construction. The said territory, containing Class 6 and 7 soils, is mainly used, where possible and practical, for summer pasture. However, the steep topography, heavy forest cover and lack of water and access limits even summer grazing in much of the said territory. The Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 advised that the application for annexation was instigated at the request of some 13 landowners and leaseholders within the said terfitory. Approximately 15 112 quarter sections of the said territory are Crown owned and leased to ranchers in the area. The remaining 14 112 quarter sections are owned by 9 landowners including four quarter sections owned by three coal companies. Only one rancher, E. Cervo, resides within the said territory and, owning approximately 6 quarter sections, is the largest private landowner in the said territory. 4065 THE ALBERTA GAZETTE, DECEMBER 14, 1985 The Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 submitted that as the owners and leaseholders of lands within the said territory are engaged in agricultural activities, the Municipal District, being a rural municipality, i8 in a better position to service their requirements than The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass. Services the Municipal District could provide include weed and livestock disease control and soil conservation, It was also submitted that the area is more accessiblafrom the rural municipality through its system of existing roads and that property taxes on the various lands would be lower if situated in the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9. The owners and leasehold owners of land within the said territory distinguished the said territory from the rest of The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass by reason of it being on the east slope of the Livingstone Range. It was pointed out that they are all engaged in agricultural activities whereas the Crowaneat Pass area is mainly oriented to the resource extraction industries. As a result, the owners mainly travel to the Town of Pincher Creek for such services as seed cleaning, farm machinery dealerships and veterinary services. There are complaints that, as farmers and ranchers, they do not receive the same services they would receive if in a rural municipality such as the programs to control the warble fly, predators and pests. It was noted that the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 provided its residents with snow plow&g of roads and school bussing. Further, it is estimated that the property taxes would be reduced to less than half of what is now paid to the Municipality. Concern was expressed that urban oriented by-laws may restrict some agricultural activities such as the keeping of livestock or the use of firearms. Proportionally, it is estimated there are only 200 rural residents of the total population of approximately 7,500 persons in the Municipality. This, it was claimed, made it difficult for the rural residents to pressure Council to respond to their needs. The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass opposed the separation of the said territory from its jurisdiction and its annexation to the Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9. This objection, it was submitted, is based on history, topography of the area, land use, ownership, development, urban fringe control and because annexation would deteriorate the Municipality's tax base. When incorporated, the enabling legislation provided assessment consideration for farmlands, which still apply. Because of the rugged mountainous terrain, the said territory has only limited agricultural uses. A number of historical sites are situated within the said territory such as the Old Passburg Townsite, Leitch Collieries Historical Site and a cemetery. All of the historical sites are closely related to the Municipality and, it was submitted, should remain in the Municipality. The said territory also contains a number of improvements, such as the twin Nova gas pipeline, the 138 kv and 25 kv TransAlta Utilities transmission lines and a 500 kv transmission line now under construction. The Municipality has a much lower per capita assessment than has the Municipal District and, it was submitted, the retention of this assessment and tax base is essential for the Municipality's viability.