Priest and Others Speak Out

A public hearing for the Rockyview Official Community Plan was held last evening in the Manual Training Building. The hearing also involved the OCP for the Wycliffe area. Four presenters addressed the Rockyview Plan which at this time has significant relevance to Cranbrook Community Forest and direction to the east.

• Ben Gibson spoke of being in favour of higher density zoning for the area in which he lives on the West side of Cranbrook.
• Roy Catherall, Community Forest Society and Sharon Cross, Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook both addressed concerns around the removal of a clause from the plan and at the City’s request which stated, ‘The development of roads through the Cranbrook Community Forest for the purposes of providing access to development lands in the Cranbrook East subarea is not supported'. Both groups asked for its reinstatement.
• Sharon Cross in her presentation stated:

The Cranbrook Community Forest is a sensitive issue. The Mayor himself stated in the Townsman newspaper (Nov. 16/09) following the defeat of the referendum on the East Hill that “We will not be proceeding with the inclusion of the East Hill lands as part of our community. It’s over.” This position is supported by conclusions within the City’s recently released Growth Management Study, which makes the following statement in Volume 1 page 22 '. . . it is surmised that the current City boundary has the capacity to house a population of approximately 36,000 or approximately double the current population. At an average annual growth rate of 1.2%, it would take 57 years for the City to reach a population of 36,000. The only need identified was for commercial lands, which of necessity would be along major traffic corridors, none of which exist through the East Hill'.

• Ross Priest recommended for RDEK directors and staff that wording within the Rockyview Plan which states, ‘development is not generally be supported’ be reversed. Priest stated, “The suggestion is here that development is not generally supported. Well, it's generally not supported unless there is some compelling reason to go the other way. I would suggest that wording be reversed that development be supported because directors who want development to happen will then go against the consistent wording that’s in this plan”

On several occasions Mr Gay had to ask Mr Priest to adhere to comment on the Rockyview OCP and not comment on other presentations. One of Mr Priest’s comments was in reference to the presentation made by Sharon Cross. He did say, ”Although I don’t intend to speak for Mayor or Council,” but he went on to say that he knew why the City wanted the clause about ‘no roads through the Community Forest’ removed. He said one reason was that it was, “not what the Provincial Government originally envisioned”. Unfortunately there were times when it was not easy to clearly understand Mr.Priest. He went on to say in a second attempt at speaking, ”When the Mayor said it was over, he’s referring to the results of the East Hill Boundary. Nobody is projecting a hundred years.” Again Mr. Priest was reminded to respect the hearing protocol and just address the Rockyview OCP. 

The remainder of the hearing concerned the Wycliffe Area.