It will likely cost about $8 million to create a berm around Cochrane Lake and invest in new pumping infrastructure to raise water levels and improve water quality, local developer Macdonald Communities reported to Rocky View County (RVC) council in a special presentation at the Feb. 21 meeting.
And Steve Seroya, the company’s development manager, said it would be helpful if RVC agreed to pay for some percentage of that.
Seroya tried to make Macdonald Communities’ case to RVC council with mixed success. He said his company envisioned a revitalized Cochrane Lake as a regional amenity that all residents of the county could ultimately enjoy through swimming, boating, and other water-based activities.
But some on council and among RVC staff felt the most benefit would be for the developers themselves or perhaps largely to existing hamlet residents, and others, in a narrow swath around the lake.
Seroya argued the County had an obligation under its existing water licence to stabilize water quality in the provincially owned lake.
Division 2 Coun. Don Kochan asked RVC staff if this was really the case.
“The actual requirement or rationale behind some of that licence is contributed toward the stabilizing of the lake, but it is to keep it at a certain level,” explained RVC operations director Byron Riemann. “I think council is well aware that lake has been above that level for many years… so there hasn’t been the requirement or need for us to bring any fresh water into the area.”
Riemann later confirmed in RVC’s current lake management agreement with the province, there is no provision for “quality” per se.
Seroya stated as part of his presentation to council that the County may be able to raise some portion of the $8 million required through seeking out provincial grants that private developers do not have access to, an outright amount paid from the County’s Tax Stabilization reserve, or a combination of grants and special levies from existing and future residents at Cochrane Lake.
Riemann responded that any type of special levy proposed for the work would have to done using the correct processes, and could not be decided without due consideration of all the factors to justify it. The process should also be developer-driven, Riemann added.
“Macdonald Communities wants to advance the strategy around the lake and around the amenity,” he said. “Administration right now does not have anything inclusive in the area under the recreation master plan for this area because that would be developer-driven. So if there is a need to develop a funding, and look at a soft services levy, we would have to back up a step and starting ingraining some information into a recreation master plan, and to actually understand the levy benefit or call it the regional benefit to the area.”
Division 4 Coun. Samanntha Wright asked Seroya what percentage of the $8 million Macdonald Communities would be looking for the County to pay.
“That is something we would like to bring forward to the next meeting of council – maybe what a proportionate share would look like,” Seroya replied.
However, RVC Chief Administrative Officer Dorian Wandzura suggested bringing such an ask to council would be premature at this point.
“Our advice to council around development opportunities is growth pays for growth, as a foundational principle,” he explained; “in that amenities onsite or offsite are funded by either developers front-ending the cash, by levies applied to an acreage that are then transferred to the County and invested by the County. Even then, those levies have to be supported by studies that demonstrate their need, whether a local need or a regional need.”
Wandzura also cautioned council about being too eager to dip into municipal reserve funds to pay for the revitalization effort outright.
“I would just like to temper that we are happy to work with Macdonald Communities to look for grant opportunities and see if we can unlock some additional revenue,” he said. “But I just want to caution council that when I heard the word ‘Tax Stabilization reserve’ that there is this foundational principle of growth paying for growth, which we would always advise council to be mindful of.”
This caution from Wandzura drew a strong response from Seroya.
“If we were to kind of talk about ‘growth pays for growth,’” he argued. “Macdonald Communities owns the (west) side of the lake. So if growth pays for growth, our obligation is only to put a pathway on our side. We have been reaching out to the (existing) community to work with them, get their input, and see what’s right for the community also.
“We want to make sure this is an amenity for everybody in the area. If we were just to pay for our growth, it would be on ‘our’ side, and it would leave an incomplete berm, an incomplete pathway, and still a poor recreational amenity and no clean water for the residents in the area.”
Coun. Kochan then drew a comparison between what Macdonald Communities is asking for in Cochrane Lake and what Harmony’s community developers in nearby Springbank did in that subdivision without any contribution from the County.
“Harmony is expected to grow to a 12,000 population, and so far we haven’t done anything to contribute to any type of lake quality or recreational funding for the (water) features they have got out there,” he argued.
Seroya said the difference was the Harmony developer built and paid for a local lake that is only accessible to Harmony residents, but what Macdonald Communities is proposing for Cochrane Lake would be open for all county residents and visitors to enjoy.
“This is a public amenity,” he argued.
Mayor and Division 3 Coun. Crystal Kissel then put forth a motion directing RVC administration to “work with Macdonald Communities to investigate all funding models that would financially contribute to the improvement of the revitalization of Cochrane Lake project.”
Kissel argued her motion would help get the ball rolling on directing administration to work more closely with the developer on the issue. The whole issue would then have to come back to council after that process for final approval of any sort of cost-sharing agreement or County contributions to the Cochrane Lake Revitalization Project.
Council approved the motion unanimously.
