The need to assess all infrastructure as it relates to new development, in light of an Alberta Court of Appeal ruling, is needed more than simply developing a policy as it relates to trails, St. Albert city council decided Monday night.
Coun. Len Bracko had originally served a notice of motion asking administration to develop a policy to have trails in new developments in place before the sale of new homes begins. The motion stems from recent troubles in Kingsway and Erin Ridge in which parks have not been built or trails were added after homes were sold, which led to public opposition to their location.
But on Monday Bracko tried instead to substitute that motion with one calling for a review of how all hard and soft infrastructure in new developments will be built and funded, as well as address issues of timing of construction and who will pay. The motion itself asked administration to report back to council what it would need to conduct such a study that could be presented to council by the second quarter.
There was procedural wrangling due to the fact the substitute motion was so different from that spelled out in the original notice of motion.
“This is not a trail motion,” Mayor Nolan Crouse said.
“I expanded it to the bigger picture, Mr. Mayor,” Bracko replied.
In effect, Bracko’s new motion encompassed the thrust of an administrative backgrounder on the issue of trails. The document said that, rather than look at trails alone, administration should instead examine how items like transit locations, parks, playground equipment and school sites should be dealt with, as well as trails. The city typically uses capital recreation contributions from developers to build recreational amenities, but a Court of Appeal ruling against the town of Okotoks has made council reticent to pursue “cap rec” levies any further.
Landrex is also suing the city for the return of levies it paid for the first two stages of Erin Ridge North and doesn’t want to pay the required amount of $7.7 million for stage three.
As committee of the whole last month, councillors voted against submitting new cap rec guidelines to the Urban Development Institute (UDI) because of the ruling.
Bracko instead withdrew his motion and council debated the original motion dealing solely with trails. Despite two amendments put forward by Coun. Cathy Heron to further shape the motion to add parks and school sites to it and address the timing of construction, council passed a motion to postpone the amended motion indefinitely.
According to legislative officer Chris Belke, a motion postponed indefinitely can only be resurrected by the next council or by a super-majority of the current council, requiring two-thirds of council to vote in favour of bringing it back.
Only Heron voted against postponement.
“Rather than try to figure it out and add amendments here or there, why doesn’t Coun. Bracko bring this one back and I think we’ll be in a much superior position,” Coun. Cam MacKay said. “ If Coun. Bracko doesn’t bring his motion back, I will.”
