The Growing Smarter survey came about through a request by Council to gauge public opinion towards increasing residential development adjacent to urban centres such as the City of Calgary and the Town of Okotoks. In addition, Council wanted to address the issue of investigating alternative planning measures to allowing First Parcels Out in Agricultural areas.

This information will be used by Council in an upcoming review of the Municipal Development Plan to take place later this year. On behalf of Council, thank you to everyone who took the time to complete the yellow questionnaire which was sent to all landowners in the MD in January 2006. We have received 1850 surveys back into the office, which represents a 24% response rate, the largest response rate to an MD wide survey to date.

We have compiled the results of the Growing Smarter Survey. The data from questions A1 to B2 is shown in graphs for easy comparison of the answers. The additional comments under each of the graphs were provided by the landowners in response to the “other, please specify” category of each question. Question B3 only asked for comments, therefore no graphs are shown for this question.

Printed copies of the survey results are available for pick up at the front desk of the MD administration building in High River.

 Additional Comments as provided in answering the (g) “other,” please specify category:

·         21 respondents thought that Residential development should occur where roads, water and sewer, and transportation corridors such as highway 2 can support it;

·         21 respondents thought that Residential development should occur only in areas of non productive farmland;

·         20 respondents thought that Residential development should occur anywhere in the MD and dealt with on their own merits on a site specific basis, based on all information gathered at the public hearing;

·         18 respondents thought that Residential development should occur adjacent to urban centres and rural hamlets such as Cayley, Blackie, Priddis and Millarville;

·         8 respondents thought all development should consider protection of wildlife, river valleys and environmentally significant areas;

·         7 respondents thought all development should be restricted to specific sizes of parcels, such as, but not limited to 2 acres;

·         4 respondents thought that Residential development should only occur where a comprehensive long range plan is adopted by Council;

·         3 respondents thought that Residential development should include community amenities, schools, recreational areas, commercial areas;

·         1 respondent thought that Residential development is not desirable in any rural area, it should only be permitted within urban areas or established hamlets;

 Additional Comments as provided in answering the (e) “other,” please specify category:

 ·         100 respondents thought Residential development should occur adjacent to urban centres and rural hamlets;

·         19 respondents thought that Residential development should be dealt with on their own merits on a site specific basis, based on all the information gathered at the public hearing;        

·         13 respondents thought that Residential development should occur on non productive farmland;

·         8 respondents thought Residential development is not desirable in rural areas, it should only be permitted within urban area, established hamlets and/or annexation areas;        

·         8 respondents thought Residential development should only occur where appropriate servicing infrastructure exists such as water and sewer facilities;

·         7 respondents thought Residential development should consider impacts on environmental issues such wildlife corridors, river valleys, creating open space networks;

·         4 respondents thought Residential development should occur along major transportation networks and growth corridors such as Highway 2;                                  

 Additional Comments as provided in answering the (e) “other,” please specify category:

 ·         15 respondent though Residential development may be acceptable as a buffer or transition zone between urban development and surrounding Country Residential and Agricultural lands;

·         15 respondents thought that agricultural lands and/or open space is best suited adjacent to urban areas within our MD;                                                                     

·         15 respondents thought that Country residential development is best suited adjacent to urban areas within our MD;

·         10 respondents thought Residential development is not desirable in rural area and should only be permitted within urban areas, established hamlets, and or annexation areas;

·         7 respondents thought applications should be accepted and dealt with on their own merits on a site specific basis, based on all information gathered at the public hearing including the public input by area landowners;                                                                                   

·         6 respondents thought Country residential development, which was 4-acres and under would be best suited adjacent to urban areas within our MD;

·         4 respondents thought that Country residential development, which was larger than 5-acres would be best suited adjacent to urban areas within our MD;

 Additional Comments as provided in answering the (f) “other,” please specify category:

·         168 respondents indicated concern with increased water use, water table depletion, water resource allocation;

·         67 respondents indicated concerns with loss of agricultural production;

·         64 respondents indicated concern regarding sewage disposal;

·         15 respondents indicated concerns with nuisance and conflict, dogs, noise, traffic;     

·         12 respondents indicated concerns with Increased use of infrastructure such as roads, police, fire, ambulance, schools;                                                                    

·         11 respondents indicated concerns with development without the benefit of a comprehensive plan;

·         4 respondents indicated concerns with increase in taxes and lands values;

Additional Comments as provided in answering the (d) “other.” please specify category:

·         14 respondents thought no Country residential development should occur in outlying areas;

·         11 respondents thought Country Residential development in outlying areas should only be permitted in areas where appropriate servicing and infrastructure exist, ie. water, sewer, roads;

·         10 respondents felt that Country residential applications should be reviewed on a site specific manner with input from area landowners upon public hearing;

·         7 respondents indicated that the preservation of agricultural lands was paramount;

·         7 respondents thought Residential development should only occur adjacent to urban areas and rural hamlets;                                                                                   

·         7 respondents thought Residential development is not desirable in any rural area, it should only be permitted within urban areas or established hamlets;             

·         4 respondents had concerns with ensuring fairness for all applications for development throughout the MD; 

·         3 respondents thought that a decrease in the size and density of CR lots in outlying areas would be appropriate;                                                                                    

·         3 respondents felt that all development should consider the impacts on environmental concerns such as wildlife corridors, river valleys, creating open space networks;

·         2 respondents thought that an increase in the size and density of CR lots in outlying areas would be appropriate;

Additional Comments as provided in answering the (f) “other,” please specify category:

·         53 respondent indicated concern regarding loss of productive agricultural lands;

·         32 respondents indicated concern with increased water use, water table depletion, water resource allocation;

·         26 respondents indicated concern with sewage disposal;

·         22 respondents indicated concern with nuisance and conflict, dogs, noise, traffic;

·         19 respondents indicated no concerns;

·         15 respondents indicated concerns with loss of country ambiance;

·         8 respondent indicated concern with development without the benefit of a comprehensive plan;         

·         5 respondents indicated concern with increased use of infrastructure such as roads, 

·         4 respondents indicated concern with increase in taxes and land values;   police, fire, ambulance, schools;

·         3 respondents indicated concerns with respect to the environment, wildlife, open space;        

 Additional Comments as provided in answering the (d) “other,” please specify category:

·         34 respondents indicated that further exploration is a good idea, they would be interested in learning more;

·         23 respondents indicated that agricultural lands should not be subdivided; 

·         19 respondents agree with some form of compensation for not subdividing;

·         19 respondents indicated that farmers should be allowed to subdivide at least a first parcel out;   

·         9 respondents indicated that compensation should not be provided;

·         7 respondents suggested using conservation easements or density bonus transferring as incentives for
       not subdividing;                                                         

·         6 respondents indicated concerns with feasibility of alternatives;

·         6 respondents suggested using tax strategy as incentive for not subdividing;
 

 Additional Comments as provided in answering the (f) “other,” please specify category:

 ·         32 respondents indicated that there should be no restrictions on first parcels out;

·         23 respondents indicated that first parcels out based on estate, retirement planning, compassionate reasons should be permitted;                                                 

·         13 respondents indicated that first parcels out should be permitted where no productive farmland exists;

·         12 respondents indicated that first parcel out should be restricted to specific sizes, such as 5 acres;

·         8 respondent indicated that consideration must be provided to groundwater resources, roads, wildlife, and compatibility of farming operation when considering applications for first parcels out;  

·         6 respondents indicated concern with fairness across the MD;

·         5 respondents indicated that first parcels out should be restricted to areas where existing dwellings are situated;

·         3 respondents indicated that no subdivisions should be permitted anywhere in the MD;

Question B3

The pressure to develop will continue to increase in our municipality if the provincial projections for population growth are realized. Here we’d like you to write to us about your vision of the future of the MD, particularly with respect to future development. What is important to you? Where should the majority of development be?

 Comments provided for question B3:

 ·         425 respondents indicated that Residential development should be located adjacent to urban centres and hamlets;

·         344 respondents indicated that the preservation of Agricultural lands is important, and that the MD should provide incentives for not subdividing agricultural lands;            

·         210 respondents indicated that the protection of the environment, river valleys, wildlife corridors, open spaces was critical;

·         169 respondents indicated that the protection of the country ambiance, views, peaceful settings was critical;                                                                                   

·         158 respondents indicated concern with increased water use and increased sewage disposal;

·         132 respondents indicated that comprehensive planning is required in the MD, and is the prevention of sprawl through out the MD;

·         116 respondents indicated that Residential development is not desirable in the rural area and should only be permitted within urban areas, established hamlets and/or annexation areas;

·         111 respondents indicated that Residential development should occur adjacent to urban centres and hamlets where there is the ability to use existing infrastructure such as water, sewer, roads;

·         106 respondents indicated that development should occur anywhere in the MD and be dealt with on their own merits on a site specific basis;

·         67 respondents indicated that development should occur along major transportation corridors;          

·         59 respondents indicated that development should occur where infrastructure is sustainable;

·         55 respondents indicated that no further development should be permitted in MD;

·         19 respondents indicated that 1st parcels out is an acceptable practice;