An “interim” land use redesignation within the High Plains Industrial Park was refused by Rocky View County (RVC) council at a meeting on Nov. 25.
The intent of the application was to create an approximately 40-acre equipment storage yard, to facilitate ongoing development within the High Plains Industrial Park near Balzac, adjacent to Highway 566 and Range Road 290.
According to Ken Venner of Brown & Associates Planning Group, the development is proposed as an interim land use, with new outline plans and land use applications to be submitted in the future to allow for the ultimate development of the entire quarter-section.
Venner said the suggested use does not require full municipal water and wastewater servicing, and that these connections would be provided in the future when the area is redeveloped.
Administration recommended refusal of the application, as it does not comply with the High Plains Industrial Park Conceptual Scheme (HPIPCS). The conceptual scheme requires both a comprehensive plan for the development and full water and wastewater servicing, in order to ensure future development remains consistent with the area.
“Through the process, administration met with the applicant to discuss the nature of the application and how it could meet some of the intent and requirements of the conceptual scheme,” said RVC Senior Planner Ben Mercer.
“Ultimately, administration does not support what’s being proposed, and we didn’t necessarily look for alternatives that we would recommend approval of.”
However, area resident Kit Rowley, retired manager of the Wagon Wheel Industrial Park, spoke in favour of the concept of an interim use.
“The Balzac Industrial Park is 5,000 acres,” he said.
“Our little park is only 300 (acres), and ten years later, we still have 25 per cent that’s not built on. It’s going to take a long time to build up that 5,000 acres of industrial land, so I’m in strong support of some kind of interim uses.”
Deputy Reeve and area councillor Lois Habberfield said that while she does agree interim uses are something for RVC to consider, any proposed use needs to be compatible with the area it’s in.
“This is not what’s intended for Balzac East,” she said.
“We have areas in Rocky View that are ideal for non-serviced land where we don’t have municipal services and where we are not trying to collect levies and so on, and this is not one of them.”
According to Councillor Al Sacuta, the proposal had some merit, but he said he would vote with Habberfield since she has a better understanding of the intent for the area.
“I think there could be an advantage to having heavy construction equipment that will be required to build out this area on site in what could be a properly managed, controlled facility,” he said.
However, since RVC has no “interim” use type of development permit, Councillor Greg Boehlke said he would have liked to see the bylaw receive second reading, with council directing administration to come up with an amendment.
“To defeat something at this point without looking at some other means and ways to do this, I don’t think that makes sense,” added Councillor Rolly Ashdown.
“If we are looking for temporary use, I’m sure other jurisdictions have the means and ways to do that, and I think we should as well.”
Habberfield’s motion to refuse the application was carried 5-3, with Ashdown, Councillor Earl Solberg, and Boehlke voting in opposition.
