RM Lumsden - Council Meeting Jan 20 2022
January 20, 2022
Council for the RM of Lumsden met for their second meeting of the new year. There were no conflicts of interest declared.
High-Speed Snow Plow Purchase
There was an error made with purchasing a plow. Public Works Manager Leighton Watts reported to Council that he had asked for quotes on a plow, but when the plow arrived, it wasn’t the V plow that he had told Council he was buying. He sent it back and asked for new quotes based on the V plow. The new quote was $23k more than the basic plow. Councillor Jordison asked Watts for clarification on the plows as he was concerned that people would see that there were already plows on two of the graders. Watts clarified that this plow is a high-speed snowplow, not a dozer blade used for other purposes. Watts said the difference in purchasing a high-speed plow was having two plows instead of one, covering the RM faster. The high-speed plow can go 20 mph, whereas the regular plows have to slow down to minimize a washboard effect. A V plow allows the operator to maintain their speed without slowing down. A V plow also throws snow across the road rather than putting it into windrows. The vote was unanimous in purchasing the plow.
Planning and Development Report
Planning and Development Report Manager Aimee Bryck brought forward two subdivision applications. The applications have been winding their way through the process and have come before Council previously. Bryck brought the Chobanik application to Council for discussion. Reeve Farago and Council complimented the applicant on the professionalism and thoroughness of the application. However, the Reeve said it didn’t change what would happen in 20-30 years and therefore didn’t change his mind.
The Reeve had concerns over access issues. Councillor Glenda Schlosser brought up her preference for individual lanes rather than access near the rail line. Bryck provided information on her consultation with CN rail agreeing with Councillor Schlosser. After Councillor Jordison asked for clarification, he said he would disapprove because the Ministry of Highways told the RM to shut others down. Councillor Andrew also said he would disapprove based on their decision on another access.
Reeve Farago asked if Council were to deny the application if the applicant would need to wait six months before reapplying. Director Bryck said that the RM would forward the recommendation to deny to Community Planning. They would ultimately decide which would allow the applicant an opportunity to appeal. Bryck said she would take the information back to the applicant and bring a recommendation to the next meeting. Reeve Farago wants to see easements because the RM needs to set a standard.
The second application was from Dakine Home Builders. The RM had asked for road widening from the developer. Bryck said the developer considered this a hardship as it would incur additional and substantial survey fees. The applicant appealed to Community Planning, who Bryck said held that it was within the RM’s right to ask but also thought the applicant could negotiate the costs with the RM. Bryck noted the
applicant had proposed an easement. The easement would provide the RM with the land to widen the road when ready.
Councillor Jordison asked for a quick in-camera session to discuss related legal matters associated with the discussion. After returning from the closed session Councillor, Glenda Schlosser made a motion for the RM to enter into an easement agreement with the applicant for future road upgrades.
Annexation Committee
Council went into a closed session to discuss the annexation report. After returning from the closed session council passed a motion to forward the annexation compensation package to the Town of Lumsden and the traffic impact assessment.
Other than Reeve asking that cost of living to be included like it is for Administration staff, there were no further details on the council remuneration agenda item. The motion was not read aloud before Council passed it.
Little Church Bridge Update
The CAO said that SGI had informed them that the maximum compensation is $200,000. However, she said that they will depreciate the asset due to its age which will “be unfortunate for us.” She added the bridge wasn’t insured because SARM doesn’t insure bridges. There is the possibility of pursuing civil litigation against the driver. The CAO noted the RM of Longlaketon had already committed to 50% of the bridge, estimated to be approximately $700,000. She explained the bridge needs a new foundation which is why the price is so high.
Councillor Jordison complimented the RM of Longlaketon - the Reeve, CAO and Councillors, noting how good it was to work with them. Council passed a motion to contribute 50% to the project. The engineers will now receive direction to prepare the tender documents.
Councillor Jordison also provided some laughter to the meeting over his “earbuds.”
Jennifer Argue, Local Journalism Initiative reporter
Note: These reports are abridged for content
