RDEK Ignores Public Concerns

Joseph Cross, Director, CCF Society (after the RDEK meeting Nov. 5, 2010)


"It was disappointing that the Rockyview OCP amendments were passed with only RDEK Director Norm Walter asking questions. The City of Cranbrook deleted wording that stated there would be no roads through the community forest. They did that without any consultation with the Cranbrook Community Forest Society, which holds the management plan for the Community Forest. We have a good indication of where the current Mayor and most of city Council stand on the community forest. For an important RDEK planning document such as this to permit wording that would affect Crown Lands without any prior consultation or consideration of the recommendations made by the Cranbrook Community Forest Society, is disturbing.

At the Public Hearing of the OCP the Chair allowed Mr. Priest, former Mayor and agent for an East Hill landowner, to make 'countering points' to the presentations. This makes a mockery of the public hearing process. Some of Mr. Priest’s statements were put into the Public Hearing report.

At today’s RDEK meeting when asked if there was great concern by the public hearing attendees, Mr. Gay lead the Directors to believe that most of the people in attendance were concerned with other matters, diminishing the importance of the presentations and the importance of this matter to the citizens of Cranbrook.

Of the three delegations who spoke to the issue of the Community Forest at the Public Hearing, two represented much larger groups of people and both were against this wording being removed.

Mr. Gay did point out that they have no authority over the Cranbrook Community Forest because it is crown land. This is a relief. "

CLC Society’s comments:

The Rockyview OCP is a long term strategic planning document. The City of Cranbrook’s Growth Management Strategy document is an important planning document that the citizens paid $500,000 for. There seemed to be no consideration given in the Rockyview OCP for linking statements in these two documents around transportation corridors. Now the two documents are contradictory around language pertaining to the Community Forest, transportation corridors and the East Hill. Section 19.3 (2) (b) in the Rockyview OCP which states: “This plan recognizes the potential for all or portions of the East Hill lands to be incorporated within the City of Cranbrook.” is not supported by the East Hill Boundary Expansion referendum, the Mayor’s comments, or the City’s Growth Management study.

We are disappointed with the approval of the Rockyview OCP without the changes recommended by CLC Society and the Cranbrook Community Forest Society.