Emotions were flying at the last Cochrane council meeting on Dec. 14 during the discussion of the Quarry planning and designed framework.
With two potential tenants for the Quarry, councillors debated the vision for the future space. The original plans outlined a desire to lease to local small businesses and other community-based resources, while the potential tenants are big-box stores that have requested to change some of the design requirements to suit their business needs. Coun. Tara McFadden posted to social media, over the weekend, urging locals to email the local councillors voicing their opinions on the future of the Quarry.
“I am tired of the cookie-cutter stuff that has been happening,” Coun. Jeff Toews stated at the meeting.
“All we do is give in to developers.”
According to the council agenda, by the end of the year, a significant portion of the Quarry will be open for business with the majority of development already completed, with a few sites still under construction with an anticipated openings in early 2016 – leaving the northwest portion of the site as the only undeveloped area.
Mayor Ivan Brooker said the town is at the stages of actual tenant interest and the town should be looking into moving forward with development of the space.
“I pushed very hard to get us to this point (and) the comments from the public … I don’t think they know the big picture,” Brooker stated.
“There is a mistrust that is unwarranted and in my opinion, (the offer) is better than what we had on the table.”
Coun. Tara McFadden expressed her disagreement saying she is confused at how the town got this point.
“We wanted to create something unique with mixed-use and that is being replaced with big-box stores,” McFadden said.
“Administration should be defending our plan. Development is welcome but on our terms. I want Cochrane to have a unique landscape and I want to make sure that Cochrane stays unique – I do not think this is what Cochrane is about.”
In the original Quarry planning and design framework, the vision outlined in the document was as stated, “An attractive new shopping area that integrates with, and contributes to the success of, the wider downtown of Cochrane. The retail-led development will also include some housing and community facilities, for example, a community arts centre.”
Town staff said that the interested tenants expressed interest in the space but needed additional parking for their businesses – a deviation from the original design requirements.
Coun. Ross Watson said he was surprised that the request was being defined as an update, when in his words Watson said 75 per cent of the area differed from the original framework.
“To me it looks like more than an update. I am not prepared to pass this,” Watson said. “It is not a nice heritage interface.”
Toews expressed his frustrations very clearly saying he apologized in advance.
“I am so mad – for the garbage that is the Quarry,” Toews exclaimed.
“We had an opportunity and we dropped the ball. We wanted to make it look scenic and we got crap.”
Toews expressed his dissatisfaction with the developers saying council needed to stop giving in and if the developers cannot make their businesses fit into the requirement, then too bad. Toews had town staff show photos of businesses in other cities that had adapted their store look to fit the requirements, showcasing a historical, small-town feel despite being a big-box store.
“I am so damn tired of their scare tactics! It is garbage,” Toews said.
“It doesn’t matter what stores come in, just make it fit! I don’t want to kill everything but take it back to the drawing board.”
Members of the historic downtown committee attended the meeting and, at one point, business owner Karrie Peace attempted to express her frustrations, apologizing to council because she said she knew she was allowed to speak but tried to continue on discussing the historical downtown before Toews cut her off.
Coun. Gaynor Levisky echoed other councillors when stating her desire to work with the historical downtown committee, saying she feared the knee-jerk reaction is to disapprove of big-box stores.
“The Quarry doesn’t need to be the ugly sister – we need to work with the historical downtown,” Levisky said.
“We want you to hear that council wants to support the downtown (and) we need to think of this piece as a long-term strategy.”
Peace attempted to talk again, although the meeting was designated for a first reading and not public hearing. Peace was immediately quieted by Gaynor who reminded her that Peace could not speak publicly at the meeting.
Coun. Mary Lou Davis-Eckmeier got emotional when she began to speak her opinions.
“This was a surprise to me. At no point did we discuss changing from retail to big-box store,” Davis-Eckmeier said.
The councillor spoke about her background in retail and said she saw how big-box stores could destroy a town, but she also recognized how much regional traffic is brought in due to those types of stores.
“Things grow and things change – but we need to make the (design requirements) their problem, not ours,” Davis-Eckmeier said.
“There are more than two sides to this – (and) we need to defer to have public input. And if this doesn’t happen in two years, you need to know I will fight hard to get back on council to make sure it happens right.”
In the middle of the debate, Brooker spoke, apologizing for the confusion surrounding the discussion saying they needed to have further consultation.
McFadden moved to reject the request for the proposed amendments saying the town had to defend its policy.
“We should defeat this and send a clear message,” McFadden stated.
Coun. Morgan Nagel mirrored McFadden’s statements at the meeting.
“I am worried about this happening and I want to prove a point by saying no,” Nagel stated.
At the end of the meeting, Brooker stated that this was not all the developers’ fault.
“In all fairness, part of this was me. The developer did not instigate all of this,” Brooker said.
After a vote, the request for proposed amendments to the Quarry planning and design framework was rejected with a 4-3 decision. Councillors McFadden, Levisky, Watson and Nagel voted to refuse the proposed amendments.
“Historical downtown doesn’t want to be challenged or replaced. We need to be talking about how historical downtown fits into the future,” McFadden stated.
“We need to do our absolute best for this piece of land and historic downtown.”
