Rocky View County council’s decision to move forward with the Bingham Crossing development in Springbank, which was made Nov. 1 after a 20-hour public hearing that spanned over two days, may not go ahead as planned.
Two Rocky View residents have filed an application for a judicial review of council proceedings during the 12-hour Sept. 11 public hearing, which ended after 2 a.m.
According to court documents, Douglas Bulger and Nancy Desai, both residents of Springbank, were the co-applicants of the claim, made at the Judicial Centre of Calgary, Oct. 22.
The neighbours made several accusations to support their claim. The court documents stated “two councillors who voted on the approval of the motion (Sept. 11) failed to disclose a pecuniary interest… and failed to recuse themselves from the votes.”
Reeve Rolly Ashdown said he received $200 from the Bingham Crossing developer during the 2010 election campaign, adding the information is public.
The duo also claim council took into account irrelevant considerations while not addressing relevant considerations during the vote to approve Bingham Crossing’s Conceptual Scheme, which took place Sept. 11 and 12.
The document also stated “council erred in law or jurisdiction or otherwise exceeded its jurisdiction by failing to hold the September meeting within regular hours, or failed to adjourn the public hearing at a reasonable hour, thereby depriving individuals who opposed the motions of their right to heard…”
Desai and Bulger are looking to have the September decision overturned and are seeking the County and Rocky View council, both named on the court documents, to pay legal fees.
The duo sought a court injunction to halt the Oct. 30 public hearing for redesignation of the 80 acres of land that would make the Bingham Crossing project possible, which will include a multi-level senior’s housing complex and village centre with office and retail space.
A decision was made by a judge on Oct. 29 to not allow an injunction, but the judicial review of the Sept. 11 meeting will go forward at a yet to be determined date.
Ashdown commented on the case on Oct. 26, after an emergency in-camera council meeting, saying the municipality determined it would go ahead with the Oct. 30 hearing.
That hearing was recessed until Nov. 1 to ensure all members of the public could speak.
“We feel we have followed proper procedure,” he said.
