Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society provides grassroots leadership and an inclusive process, with a voice for all community members, to ensure that our community grows and develops in a way that incorporates an environmental ethic, offers a range of housing and transportation choices, encourages a vibrant and cultural life and supports sustainable, meaningful employment and business opportunities.

Saturday, October 1, 2011

Back to the East Hill

On Monday, October 3rd, Cranbrook Council will be asked to comment on a proposal before the RDEK to amend the new Rockyview OCP in order to accommodate a subdivision proposed by Sheldon Isaman on the East Hill Lands. Despite several ‘World Cafes’ where local residents were asked for input should a rural subdivision go ahead the proposal looks more like a village with provision for apartments, mini storage unit, commercial and mixed-use development. The initial phase, with lots as small as one hectare calls for 200 residences, 400 if you include the permitted ‘Carriage Houses’. The total area under scrutiny is 983ha (2429.2acres).

We should not be surprised that this has come forward. However a referendum in 2009 resulted in opposition to this kind of density development close to Cranbrook. The referendum itself worded around a boundary expansion was opposed for several serious reasons - sustainability, connectivity to Cranbrook, integrity of the Community Forest and need.

With many subdivision developments sitting vacant where is common sense? Smart Growth or Sustainability is certainly not the motivation here and with money as the most likely driver one must ask for reason in our local government to prevail.

The City’s Official Community Plan Bylaw 3550

Subdivision of parcels under 8 ha should be restricted within a ten kilometre radius of the City of Cranbrook to reduce the continued fragmentation of land in the interests of ensuring economic and orderly growth and development over the long term as well as promoting sustainability of the City’s public works, facilities and services.
This proposed development falls well within that radius.


The recommendation from the Cranbrook's CAO is "That Council not object to approval of proposed Bylaws 2341 and 2342" (i.e the Isaman proposal)  even though a referendum opposed such a development and even though to not oppose it, would go against Cranbrook’s own city bylaw and would be precedent setting.

To view in more detail go to : https://cranbrook.civicweb.net/Documents/DocumentList.aspx?ID=1746
Posted by at

1 comment:

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)