Despite the recent release of a financial analysis indicating a potentially positive impact from the proposed Gardner Ranch development, Rocky View County (RVC) council denied a land use redesignation application after a lengthy public hearing June 23-24.
The application proposed a community with 1,800 residential units, a private recreation facility, health and wellness facilities and commercial space to be built north of Highway 8 down to the Elbow River. According to Guy Buchanan, who represented developer Western Securities at the public hearing, the development would have been a benefit to the area and to the county as a whole, while keeping with the rural country feel currently established in the area.
“We want to make sure this area is developed appropriately,” Buchanan said. “We’ve tried to remain respectful of the agricultural heritage of the area, to preserve our history for future generations.”
Administration recommended the application be refused because it is inconsistent with the County Plan. According to administration, not only is the development proposed in a part of the county not identified as a growth area, the application was also missing a number of updated technical reports, notably a traffic impact assessment and a Master Drainage Plan.
Prior to the opening of the public hearing, Springbank residents Gloria Wilkinson and Kim Magnuson, as well as Rocky View 2020 executive director Eric Lowther, requested council evaluate a potential conflict of interest and issue of bias, specifically relating to an alleged lack of objectivity from councillors Jerry Arshinoff, Earl Solberg and Greg Boehlke.
Council moved to an in-camera (private) session to discuss the issue with legal counsel, eventually deciding to proceed with the hearing. According to the code of conduct policy adopted in January, it is up to each individual councillor to disclose any bias, and all councillors stated they were unbiased.
The public hearing gave Buchanan the opportunity to discuss the merits of the project, which were echoed by a number of residents and developers who spoke in favour of the development, especially the funding promised by Western Securities to help push forward much-needed upgrades to Highway 8.
According to a 2014 report from Alberta Transportation, average daily traffic on the highway is approximately 7,000 vehicles. RVC’s general manager of infrastructure Byron Riemann said twinning the highway would increase capacity to 25,000 vehicles, which would still likely be insufficient to accommodate the projected population growth if Gardner Ranch was approved.
However, the upgrade to the highway ultimately depends on Alberta Transportation and many residents conveyed concerns with the impact of increased traffic along a highway with a history of fatal crashes.
Residents also spoke about the importance of preserving land for agriculture and for the country residential type of development common in the area.
“Many of the current residents have chosen this area for its beauty and rural character, as I did,” said nearby landowner Marlene Dusdal. “This massive development will destroy that rural character forever, solely for profit. This will affect a lifestyle that present and future residents desire.”
Arshinoff made a motion to refuse the application, stating he couldn’t give all his reasons for his decision because “it’s a long list.” He did say he agreed with administration’s evaluation of the application, especially with the necessity of the lacking traffic impact analysis.
“What happens the next time someone comes forward and says they don’t want to submit what administration wants, either? It’s circumventing our planning and engineering department,” he said.
Arshinoff’s motion passed 5-4, with councillors Rolly Ashdown, Bruce Kendall, Solberg and Boehlke voting in opposition.
According to Buchanan, Western Securities is now “evaluating” its next steps. He said he was disappointed to see the application denied.
“The acreage owners out there were very influential and organized, and they want to keep those fields open,” he said. “The county needs to decide if they want to take leadership in the growth of their own area. If they leave these large parcels open, they are inviting the City of Calgary to come in and annex it.”
