Today marks the closing day for public input to Rocky View County to inform the draft version of the proposed Glenbow Ranch Area Structure Plan (ASP).
The new ASP would pave the pathway for the build-out of a community of around 14,000 along the south side of Highway 1A and has been stirring up a commotion across Cochrane media channels.
“Quite frankly, I don’t think the county is listening. This will change the landscape of our little town and it’s time for our councillors to change gears,” said resident Miles Chester, questioning the county’s apparent transformation from a protector of agricultural life and values to taking the approach of a “hungry developer”.
The former Cochrane councillor is angry about the potential development – which he feels will add far too much pressure, when future county developments such as Cochrane Lakes, Monterra and Harmony are considered.
The current scenario is reminiscent of the ongoing battle between Chestermere and the county – where Chestermere is appealing the county’s push to grow the bordering community of Conrich from its current 1,300 to 10,000, citing fears for the short-term (infrastructure pressures, rising costs) and the long-term (impacts on Chestermere’s own real estate market, ability to grow).
Chester is concerned that Cochranites have no idea of what lies ahead if this development moves forward.
County resident Janet Ballantyne and former Div. 8 hopeful and Bearspaw resident Samanntha Wright echoed his sentiment.
“Nothing like asking the foxes to determine how to manage the chicken coop,” remarked Ballantyne,” with specific reference to the portion of the draft Glenbow Ranch ASP that states the document is developer-funded.
“Why is it such a burden on the public to prove what they don’t want and so easy for developers to prove what they do want?” posed Bearspaw resident and former Div. 8 candidate, Samanntha Wright in an interview last week with the Eagle.
The Eagle interviewed each Cochrane councillor this week with respect to the proposed development.
The overwhelming consensus was one of serious concern for the impacts this would have on Cochrane’s tax base and already lagging infrastructure.
“I’m not a fan of the plan, period. We can’t just sprawl forever, it’s not sustainable from a financial or environmental perspective,” said McFadden.
McFadden referred to the draft as “short-sighted,” noting how the county pulled out of the Calgary Regional Partnership, which has now prompted the government to push for a growth management board much like in the Edmonton area, so that everyone will play at the same table.
Coun. Ross Watson also expressed serious concern.
“I’m quite offended by the proposed development to the east of us,” he said, highlighting the negatives this would likely have on the bordering Glenbow Ranch Provincial Park.
Coun. Jeff Toews emphasized how little the county has contributed to the $45-plus million price tag on the town’s aquatic centre/curling facility slated to open next year.
“The county is not contributing their fair share,” said Toews, a sentiment reiterated by all other councillors.
Estimates indicate that based on use by county residents, contributions should be around one-third; the county has only committed to $2.1 million – far less than what Cochrane requested or anticipated.
The Town of Cochrane is currently finalizing its feedback on the draft plan to present to the county.
Members of administration have acknowledged that the concerns for the impacts on the town are many – from the pressures on the tax base to the informal nature of inter municipal agreements between the town and the county to the added pressure on roads, schools and other infrastructure.
“We are currently work with the county to respond to (the draft) and gain a better understanding of its potential impacts upon our community,” explained Drew Hyndman, senior manager of development services for the town.
“We are also exploring all our options in order to ensure we protect the long-term interests of the Town of Cochrane and its residents.”
Div. 2 (Springbank) county Coun. Jerry Arshinoff said it is of utmost important for the county to keep the concerns of neighbouring municipalities at the top of the list.
“There are concerns I hope and expect will be addressed at the public hearing, if not before.”
The county is looking to have a final plan before council by the end of 2016 or early January 2017. A public hearing should be expected to take place around that time.
All comments regarding the draft GRASP should be directed to Stefan Kunz, municipal planner for the county, [email protected].
