Group questions why City of Calgary is selling parkland near Glenmore Landing
The city recently advertised its intention to dispose of the land on two sides of Glenmore Landing, which it acquired in the 1980s. At the time, it signed an agreement with the then owner of the 10-acre shopping area, who agreed to maintain the city's land.
City declared land to be surplus near SW shopping area as major redevelopment planned
A group in southwest Calgary is raising questions about why the City of Calgary wants to sell land that it designated as park space four decades ago.
The city recently advertised its intention to dispose of the land on two sides of Glenmore Landing.
The city acquired the land in the 1980s and, at the time, signed an agreement with the then owner of the 10-acre shopping area, who agreed to maintain the city's land.
Several years ago, the city declared the 5.5 acres of land on the south and east sides of the shopping area to be surplus.
In 2015, city council voted to explore disposing of the land with the owner of Glenmore Landing, RioCan. Now, the company is planning a major redevelopment of the site.
RioCan envisions a major transit oriented development project at that location which would ultimately include several residential highrises as well as more commercial and mixed-use spaces.
A group calling itself Communities for Glenmore Landing Preservation said the city's 1983 agreement with the former owner of the site stipulated the land would only be used as park space.
"The city undertakes to utilize the parklands only for park purposes and for the purpose of roads, sidewalks, paths, street lamps, signs, traffic control devices, bus shelters with commercial signs, and underground utilities," reads the agreement on the land title.
A member of the group, Karen Pauling Shepard, said the city's original deal included maintaining the park space around Glenmore Landing to allow it to blend in with nearby areas, including the Glenmore Reservoir, and several city parks.
"We are opposing the land-use amendment change to sell the parklands, dedicated in perpetuity, because it will vastly change the character of the shopping centre in concert with the surrounding communities," said Pauling Shepard.
She wondered how the city could decide to turn the park space over for development.
"That is a question we have asked and we don't have an answer to it. How can parkland all of a sudden become surplus?
The area's city councillor, Kourtney Penner, said the land was retained 40 years ago as greenspace because the city was unsure of the potential for future road development around the site.
At one time, an interchange at the corner of 14th Street and 90th Avenue S.W. was contemplated, but ultimately, it was not built.
Once the city decided to proceed with a bus rapid transitway station near the busy corner, Penner said the land was deemed no longer necessary to retain in city possession.
Instead, the city feels giving up the land allows it to meet other municipal needs, including greater density and transit- oriented development.
In that regard, selling the land is hardly unique, said Penner.
"We have a lot of sites like this across the whole city, where we kept land for future interchanges and now we're reviewing that and if we still need to hold on to that land," said Penner.
She said once the city reaches an agreement with RioCan to transfer the land, city council will have the final say on the deal.
RioCan has applied for a land-use change for its redevelopment plans. It intends to hold an open house session on Oct. 25 at Heritage Park to gather public input on its proposal.
Its application will ultimately go to the Calgary Planning Commission for a vote and then to city council, where a public hearing will be held, likely next year.
Pauling Shepard said her group has a number of concerns about RioCan's proposal.
She said it will increase traffic on nearby roads. "How are they going to accommodate 3,000 people in a small shopping centre with two points of ingress and egress?"
Pauling Shepard said the group isn't opposed to increased density at the site. Rather, its members want to know how so much growth will be managed.
"What we are opposed to is density in a compact area like Glenmore Landing where the downstream effects of a large development are going to be very, very hard, in regards to safety, traffic and changing the character of the Glenmore Reservoir and the parklands," she said.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
