Subdivision decisions dominated the latest MD of Bonnyville council meeting, with councillors approving several applications that did not meet the municipality’s own land use bylaw — sparking repeated concerns about consistency, fairness and future planning.

In total, council approved four subdivision applications, including two 10-acre parcels, one six-acre parcel and one three-acre parcel. Administration had recommended against three of them due to conflicts with municipal planning documents.

Concerns over “ad hoc” decision-making

Throughout the meeting, councillors returned to the same issue — whether approving exceptions undermines the integrity of the land use bylaw.

“My only concern is we have a few here that are not within the land use bylaw requirements and for us to approve things that are not within the bylaw creates ad hoc approvals which has no consistency or rhyme or reason to the development,” said Councillor Caroline Palmer.

She warned that continuing to approve applications outside the rules risks creating inequity across the municipality.

“Otherwise, it’s not an even playing field for everybody else in the MD.”

Other councillors echoed those concerns, questioning what the purpose of the bylaw is if it is not consistently followed.

“If the land use bylaw has the regulations set out in it… then the numbers in the bylaw don’t mean anything if we’re just going to approve anyway,” said Councillor Malia.

Real-world pressures behind the applications

Despite those concerns, each application brought forward its own rationale — often tied to practical or economic realities.

In one case, council approved a larger parcel size after hearing it was required to bring a septic system into compliance.

“They currently have a non-compliant pump-out system… it’s simply too close to their water well,” the applicant’s representative explained.

“6.27 would not allow for an open discharge… they would have to go to a field system.”

He added that 10-acre parcels are commonly used and more practical.

“10 acres generally is deemed to be a nice round number and most saleable.”

Industrial subdivision flips from refusal to approval

Another application triggered one of the most debated moments of the meeting.

Council initially moved to refuse the subdivision because it did not meet the land use bylaw.

“I’d like to make a motion to refuse this application… based on the fact that it doesn’t fall within the land use bylaw,” said Palmer.

However, the applicant told council the subdivision was necessary to complete a sale.

“They do not want to rent… they have indicated they will be purchasing.”

“The reason for the subdivision is to allow that.”

They also emphasized that no new development was being proposed.

“Nothing would be changing from what’s happening right now except there’ll be a new title.”

Following further discussion, council reversed course and approved the application.

Balancing growth and policy

Councillors acknowledged the tension between following planning rules and supporting development.

“We’re always trying to promote industry and economic development,” said Councillor Deshaine.

Others noted that not every proposal fits neatly within existing regulations.

“This is a business that’s wanting to do stuff here and not every business fits an exact box.”

Conditions and exceptions continue

Another subdivision was approved despite exceeding allowable parcel limits, with council attaching conditions such as future rezoning and planning requirements.

The applicant acknowledged the non-compliance but argued the subdivision would not require new infrastructure.

“We are not looking at any extra infrastructure. Roadways are there… the property is tied into municipal water and sewer.”

One application meets the rules

Only one subdivision application fully complied with all planning documents and moved forward without debate.

“I have no exception,” one councillor said before the vote.

Calls to revisit the land use bylaw

By the end of the discussion, it was clear council may need to revisit its land use framework.

“Maybe we need to go back and revisit it so that everybody has an opportunity to be in compliance of the bylaw,” said Palmer.

Others agreed, though noted the process would take time.

“That’s a long process… public hearing, multiple readings… it takes quite a while,” said Councillor Crick.

For now, council chose to move forward with the applications — but the broader question remains unresolved: whether the current land use bylaw still reflects how development is happening across the MD.