Rocky View County council approved a rezoning application to allow for a 71-acre gravel pit and rock crushing operation, May 10.
The business, located on the south side of Highway 1A about one kilometre west of Grand Valley Road, will be developed in six phases, with remediation occurring before subsequent phases begin.
“It’s the inherent right of the landowner who has a gravel or oil reserve to get it out,” said Councillor Lois Habberfield. “The whole community benefits. If we aren’t going to get gravel from agricultural areas, where on earth are we going to get it?”
Habberfield’s comments reflected the controversial nature of the application, which has been in the works for a number of years and originally had its public hearing, which was conducted and recessed by council, on Oct. 6, 2009.
Since the hearing date, the applicant, David Dutchik of David H. McDougall Ranches Ltd., a ranch that has been around for more than 130 years, has provided County staff with more information to address concerns about groundwater, traffic, setbacks, landscaping, storm management and archeologically significant areas within the property.
The proposed gravel operation raised the ire of area residents, who spoke out about potential nuisances, such as noise, dust, traffic and a possible decrease in land values.
“I am totally against rezoning… leave it as it is,” said longtime resident Dorothy Edge, of Bar 50 Ranch. “It’s ranching country out there… the cows don’t like it (the noise). It’s just difficult to make these commercial things tie in in the middle of a cowherd.”
Ann McNabb, a local resident and relative of the applicant, was also opposed, saying the operation would negatively affect her household and ruin the sensitive landscape in the area, which is situated within the Bow River Valley amongst mostly unsubdivided farmland.
“It’s not just the one parcel we are considering… it’s the whole area,” said McNabb. “If you start to do one parcel, there is exposure to all of them.”
Dutchik argued that his land will have greater agricultural potential after the rock and sand, visible on the surface, is removed. He said any concerns would be dealt with as they were raised.
“(The land) will be reclaimed as we go and made to look like a natural valley,” he said. “I am going to put it back into agriculture.”
Area Councillor Paul McLean made a motion for split zoning, which he later retracted after it became obvious there was little support for it from other councillors. If accepted, the motion would have granted rezoning phase-by-phase, giving the County more control.
“It doesn’t change much, other than it is less convenient for the developer,” said McLean. “I am trying to respect the area residents as well as the (environmental) area, as well as allow some opportunity.”
The majority of the councillors were against McLean’s motion, saying concerns would better be dealt with at the development permit stage.
“A 17-acre gravel pit, given road improvements, is not financially feasible,” said Habberfield.
“Yes, there are concerns…that’s why we have development permits and conditions. There’s a demand for gravel and I think we should give (the applicants) a clear indication.”
Councillor Rick Butler agreed, saying council shouldn’t change “the very nature of the application on the fly.”
Habberfield made a motion to rezone the entire six phases, which was endorsed by all the councillors except McLean, who voted in opposition.
The gravel pit operator still has to apply for and be approved for a development permit prior to commencing phase one, which is about 17 acres. Dutchik also has to get approval from Alberta Environment. Those in opposition can appeal to the Development Appeal Board.
