Skip to content

Conrich residents oppose proposed development

Many Conrich-area residents are angry after finding out a development company is seeking a to start building business infrastructure near their homes.
conrich web
Conrich residents gathered outside of Rocky View County Hall to demonstrate their opposition to a proposal by Amar Developments. Photo Submitted/For Rocky View Weekly

Many Conrich-area residents are angry after finding out a development company is seeking to build business infrastructure near their homes.

A public hearing during a Rocky View County (RVC) council regular meeting June 23 saw more than 100 residents gather outside County Hall, with signs indicating their opposition.

“This is literally my backyard we are talking about,” said Aaron Chatha, a resident and community spokesperson opposed to the proposal from Amar Developments.

According to council’s agenda report, Amar Developments is seeking an amendment to the South Conrich Conceptual Scheme (SCCS) and a land redesignation that will allow the company to develop six business-commercial lots in the hamlet.

The report indicated that when the SCCS was originally adopted, four zones were intended to be developed in phases as residential areas. However, subsequent to its adoption, the Conrich Area Structure Plan (ASP) designated one undeveloped cell – Cell D – as a highway business area.

Because of that change, an amendment to the SCCS is required for it to be consistent with the ASP.

Meanwhile, the redesignation – on a 68.2-acre parcel – would rezone the land for business, allowing Amar Development to build a strip mall.

Rani Durha, owner and director of Amar Developments, said the company feels it has successfully accomplished a comprehensive design that can be integrated with both existing residential uses and future development.

A strip mall consisting of a daycare, convenience store, medical centre and car wash would be a great amenity, she added.

“Our goal is to introduce commercial type uses that will not only benefit Cambridge Park residents but also adjacent communities,” she said.

However, Chatha said opposition to the proposal is widespread and more than 170 residents "that felt lied to" signed a petition against the application. He added residents were sold on “country living.”

Although Durha noted the ASP was modified to allow highway business in 2015 and the company tried to communicate the upcoming changes through two open houses, Chatha said the first open house didn’t take place until November 2019, which is the earliest residents would have learned about the change.

“My parents took possession of their house in 2018. They were lied to,” he said. “These guys had four, almost five years, to tell potential buyers what is going on.”

Chatha added residents have sent more than a dozen emails to Area Coun. Jerry Gautreau, which have gone unanswered.

“We approached him for help before the council meeting as well and he kind of brushed us off,” Chatha said.

Chatha also pointed out Amar Developments was a significant contributor to Gautreau's election campaign in 2017. According to a disclosure statement available at rockyview.ca, the company contributed $2,500 – more than 20 per cent of the total contributions Gautreau received.

Gautreau declined to be interviewed for this story.

According to Durha, not everyone in the community is opposed to the proposal – she estimated 80 to 85 per cent of residents love what the development company is doing.

“It’s only the few individuals who were speaking [during the public hearing],” Durha said. “A majority of the residents are neutral.”

Once council closed the public hearing, some questions persisted about water servicing to the area. Gautreau moved to table the matter sine die – meaning no date was set – to allow additional information on water solutions to be brought back.

The motion passed 5-3, but was opposed by Reeve Greg Boehlke and Couns. Crystal Kissel and Samanntha Wright. Coun. Mark Kamachi was absent from the meeting.

Administration said the information could be presented July 14, at which time another public hearing would be held.

However, at a special meeting June 25, Coun. Gautreau sought to rescind the tabling motion and move ahead with the SCCS amendments and redesignation by adding them to the agenda as emergent items.

As rationale for moving ahead, Gautreau said "land use" was not the time to address water issues. In a press release following the meeting, RVC added “[a report on water service] is not a part of the land use redesignation process under the Municipal Government Act.”

Kissel said she had a huge problem with Gautreau trying to expedite the process.

“The public understood that it was tabled, and there would be a new hearing coming,” Kissel said. “Now today you’re going to rescind that without them knowing? For you to ask to rescind that and carry on, I think is unfair to the public.”

“I agree with Kissel that there was a big enough presence of the public. They deserve a chance to know what is going on here,” said Boehlke, who indicated he would support rescinding the tabling motion but nothing else.

Council voted 6-3 to rescind the tabling motion – Couns. Kevin Hanson, Kissel and Wright were opposed, and Kamachi could not participate as he was absent during the public hearing.

Council then voted 5-3 against second reading for the amendments to the SCCS. This triggered some confusion, with Deputy Reeve Al Schule pointing out the vote meant the application failed entirely, and Amar Development would need to submit a new application.

Coun. Kim McKylor, who was on the prevailing side, then moved to reconsider the vote. Her motion was adopted 5-3, with Kissel, Hanson and Wright opposed.

Then, council moved to table both bylaws until a regular meeting July 14. Council voted 5-3 to table the conceptual scheme amendment, with Wright, Hanson and Kissel opposed. Only Wright and Kissel opposed the motion to table the redesignation, which was also carried.

According to Chief Administrative Officer Al Hoggan, no new information will be presented at the July 14 meeting and a public hearing will not be held.

Jordan Stricker, AirdrieToday.com
Follow me on Twitter @Jay_Strickz

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks