Attachment 3
Proposed Sale – Comments Submitted June 17, 2014
(comment removed) We are adamantly opposed to the sale or lease of any part of the parkland which has been encroached upon for
many years by the applicant - with the City turning a blind eye. I distributed about twenty orange signs "Stop The Sale of Parkland" in our
neighbourhood and I did not meet one person who objected to putting up a sign. That's 100% AGAINST the sale or lease. The
negotiated transfer or city-owned parkland to a private individual is completely unacceptable. This section of parkland belongs to the
citizens of Calgary, period. The City is fortunate to have tracts of land donated by philanthropists like Eric Harvie, who expected nothing
in return, and other early landowners like the CPR. Such gifts were made and accepted on the basis that the land would remain for public
use in perpetuity. The City is proud of its open spaces, as are we who use them today, and we should continue to steward them all large or small - for the benefit of future generations. In his letter to the communities, the applicant referred to "undesirable activities"
taking place on the parkland. In my opinion, the applicant’s proposal and its endorsement by city administration are a far greater
"undesirable activity". Rather than taking the applicants proposal forward to Council, the City should rectify its many past transgressions
on this file and take back and restore the encroached lands at the applicant’s expense, forthwith. It will look a lot better and be enjoyed by
the community at large when it is restored to parkland.
In 2014 as in 1981 when I moved to Calgary, non-Calgarians believe that Calgary is an ugly city full of drab, concrete buildings and only
cook-cutter houses. Until discovering small gems such as Hillcrest Park, I held that negative image. In an almost Los Angeles styled
spread out city, Hillcrest Park offers respite and peace. Hillcrest Park has been "discovered" by TV camera crews that often use this site
as a backdrop (free publicity for the City). As well, it is a popular cycling destination (cyclist stop and admire the view then zip down to
trendy 4th Street for a latte), a must-stop for visitors and a serene place to sit and admire the ever-changing skyline of a city hoping to
leave its mark on Canada and indeed the world. There are many issues regarding the possible sale of this iconic park that "smell" (i.e..
lack of transparency, no community consultation, encroachment, troubling tax assessments of 638 Hillcrest Ave SW, etc) but there is only
one issue that really matters: this park was gifted to the citizens of Calgary as a PERMANENT park. Shame on The City for even
entertaining short sighted thoughts of selling. For all the hype about making this city more "friendly" and interesting to live in (i.e.. bike
paths, food trucks, street beautification projects, allowing some street facing house patios), it is shocking to discover how Calgarians are
constantly at risk of losing access to public spaces. Please carefully examine all the ramifications of such a sale not only in the immediate
but for future generations
We do not understand why the City is selling this parkland? Indeed we do not understand why the City would sell any parkland. CP had
donated this park to the City of Calgary in perpetuity with strong caveats that the City looks after the park for the enjoyment of all
Calgarians not just one private citizen. How bad a precedent would this set up for the City when future donors of parkland realize that
their wishes maybe disregarded at the whim of the City? Maybe Calgary citizens would stop donating land for use as public parks! Does
this further create a precedent that any citizen may ask to purchase any piece of parkland the City owns and expect to receive a
favourable response? Furthermore, we are appalled that we have to spend so much time and effort to defend out rights as citizens of
Calgary; a right which should be protected by the City.
I am a resident of Calgary since the early 1970's when I "married into Canada" after falling in love with one of Alberta's brightest and best
(comment removed). Many of our fondest meals have been shared picnics in a park or on a mountain peak. We seek the emotional
serenity and physical challenge of public open spaces, often all in the same day. (comment removed) From a modest apartment on 14th
Street down in the Beltline, we would walk up into Mt. Royal, carrying a packed picnic, to sit in one of the parks amongst the mature tree
canopy of this spectacular inner city community. The viewpoint and ridge of Hillcrest Hill was one of our favourite spots. The
encroachments on this spectacular piece of land were not very intrusive back in the early 1970's. Sometimes we drove up Hillcrest Ave,
1
Please note editing took place to remove identifiers and inflammatory comments only
Attachment 3
after shopping down in the Mission, for a quick bite to eat at the top, and we even parked our car on a dirt parking lot on the subject
parkland. There was heavy use of that entire piece of land back in those days, not just the sliver of land that is now Evamy Ridge and not
just at Stampede fireworks time. Over time, as the encroachments grew bigger, we were perplexed and wish now that we have more
access to information and have been more savvy about what was happening. I have never ceased walking the Hillcrest escarpment and
long for the day when a proper walking and biking path can connect it to the Glencoe Hill escarpment and the many walking paths in the
Elbow River valley. Surely, there is no need to defend or explain the human desire to sit on a high spot and contemplate the sublime
panorama of nature above and below. It's simply in the nature of man. These moments have always been the most precious of my
married life. My mind, my body and my relationship are more healthy for it. Soon to enter my seventh decade of life, I will continue my
regular, robust walks through the communities of southwest Calgary. I hope to see more benches atop Hillcrest Hill and, with
encroachments removed, an easier access to the crown jewel of Calgary's viewpoints, the sweet spot just north of the basketball court
encroachment where the entire city skyline, the eastern sunrise horizon and the historic community of Cliff Bungalow-Mission comprise
the magnificent view. This land speaks for itself. Before you consider your vote, dear Councillors, visit this land and think what a grand
place this will be to bring your grandchildren for a sit on a park bench while you enjoy your morning coffee bought just down the hill in
Mission. Calgary is now a world class city. Great cities do not dispose of their most valuable public assets, at any price. While I stand
with all of Calgary in appreciation of Mr. Don Taylor's generous philanthropic donations, I am unwilling to give up to him the CPR legacy
gift of spectacular land needed and beloved by Calgarians. If you sit on the bench at Evamy Ridge and see how many people from
across Calgary come to "tarry awhile" and enjoy the view, you will realize how much Calgarians love this place and how much more
popular it will be, once the encroachments are removed. What I think would be a successful and win/win solution to this issue is a fenced
and gated park, like many lovely parks and estates of Europe and Canada's own Halifax Public Gardens. Such an arrangement only
requires the willingness of the surrounding communities and Mr. Taylor. I feel certain the communities would be on board for this solution
to ensure privacy and security to the Taylor home. And most importantly, reasonable public access to public parkland will be preserved.
As a successfully managed park, the Hillcrest lands would rest secure as a vibrant and stewarded park for the future. Mount Royal has a
strong cooperative relationship with the Parks Dept and has repeatedly demonstrated its proactive stewardship for the public open spaces
through volunteer care of park gardens, traffic circles and splitter islands, and graffiti removal. Calgary is the city in which to do such a
project, and Mount Royal, with its partner Cliff Bungalow, will be steadfast in the stewardship and fund raising to make it happen.
In regards to the sale of this property, without getting into all the possible legal and ethical irregularities, I would like to approach this as
someone who has grown up using the hill as a place of enjoyment through my life. My grandmother bought a home on Hope Street in the
early 20's and my mother and aunts grew up there playing on and around the hillside. My father bought a lot on Hope Street and built our
home where we grew up. I too played endless hours on that hillside watching the grouse, looking for wild asparagus, and we along with
generations of Calgarians have enjoyed walking to the hill on warm summer evening and watching the Stampede fireworks. My family
history on that block is well over a hundred years. This property does not belong to any one individual or family, it belongs to all
Calgarians now and in the future.
Park and green space is precious. Please preserve this for our use and for generations to follow. This piece of property is not a remnant
but "firmly attached" to parkland
It appears that the City wants to sell the land only to Mr. Taylor, who has knowingly encroached on public parkland for years. Mr. Taylor
has been given preferential treatment over the years via low tax assessments of his adjacent property, no penalties for deliberate
encroachment on public land despite being fully informed of the encroachment, in addition to the extremely low evaluation for the
proposed sale of the parkland. If the City sells the parkland to Mr. Taylor, this sends the message to owners with properties next to public
2
Please note editing took place to remove identifiers and inflammatory comments only
Attachment 3
space, like a park, can encroach onto public land for their own personal use without penalty. Eventually, they will be rewarded for their
property line violation and be able to purchase public land for a low cost. This is not the kind precedent that the City should be setting
(comment removed) The land that Don Taylor wishes to purchase always looked as part of the house lot. Never ever looked like parkland
and was never used as parkland. Any other home owner would do exactly as Don is doing….and protecting their interest. This has been
blown up to great proportions. We, at Mount Royal, would be better off with someone having eyes on this piece of land and looking after
it then leaving it unattended
In Dec of 2012 - the two communities became aware of the possible sale of this parkland. Since then - over 1300 people have signed a
petition against the sale, hundreds of signs have been put up in the communities and both community association executives have
unanimously voted against this sale. The question for the City of Calgary representatives here tonight is - "WHEN DOES ALL THIS
STOP". When can the communities reclaim and reconfigure this parkland for use by the residents? When can we get back to planning
our 100 years of Parks in Mount Royal and our pathway which could run from behind Christ Church all the way to Western Canada High
School - and which would include the parkland in question here. Please advise how we can put a stop to one private landowner holding
two communities hostage.
The conclusion that the Mount Royal community association board came to, was that the right thing to do is to return the parkland to
public usage. The parkland should not exist behind a fence for the benefit of one family. Finally I want to say the Taylor family are valued
members of this community and we absolutely support them in the building of their new home. We understand the challenges of living
next to a park and will do our best to find solutions which do not involve the loss of access to the parkland. We want to be good
neighbours. (comment removed)
As a citizen and landowner in Calgary, I want to express my full support for the Mt. Royal Community Association and Cliff
Bungalow/Mission Community Association to stop the sale and/or lease of city parkland to a private citizen. As the City of Calgary moves
toward the much needed densification of the inner city, parkland becomes an even more essential attribute most notably in the Cliff
Bungalow/Mission area. It is difficult to comprehend, that this issue has come to this point. I am grateful to Mayor Nenshi for requesting
this meeting and hope that our strong objection to this sale and to the lack of transparency thought the process will be given serious
consideration. While the proposed sale of parkland deserves serious attention a far more critical issue is the process and the extreme
lack of transparency and enforcement. These issues are indicative of a much more serious and widespread problem related to land use,
and land development in the City of Calgary. Many communities associations including, Bowness, Richmond Knob Hill, Altadore,
Britannia and Elbow Park have found themselves in similar situations in trying to defend the rights of existing landowners against
controversial development. In most cases, concerns relate to the lack of transparency and lack of enforcement. It would appear that
landowners and in fact community associations which focus on the best interest of entire communities have little influence over the
arbitrary decisions of the development authority and other City of Calgary departments. Given the lack of accountability I believe serious
consideration must be given to establishing an Ombudsman position in Calgary specifically to deal with development and land issues.
I was at the Mount Royal/Cliff Bungalow/Taylor meeting this evening. I have never been so disappointed in the democratic process in my
over 50 years as a Canadian. If I had attempted to quell debate as was done this evening during my thirty years as a University
President, academic and civil servant there would have, and should have been a rebellion. I have led many community processes
relating to heritage preservation that were highly controversial, but every voice even in a large group was heard. Democracy is a difficult
process, making it easier reduces transparency. I was upset more than I thought I might be. I had to walk out - it was the only way I
could register my disgust. I expected more from you and from the Mayor.
Please can we have the land back for our park. Lots of people like to walk up there and watch the fireworks and view. I like the park.
3
Please note editing took place to remove identifiers and inflammatory comments only
Attachment 3
This is the City's fault not Mr. Taylor. The City could acquire additional land for green space sold to Mr. Taylor
Use the lands & energy to improve the existing space - purchase additional green space in the area versus fighting over 2000 square feet
that has not been used
I have always understood that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Similarly, not knowing the boundary of one's property is no excuse for
appropriating public land. I assume that Mr. Taylor has paid taxes on this land, or will pay back taxes.
Mr. Taylor wants to build close to east side of his property. He needed the retaining wall
You can "fix" past mistakes. If the proper process/the law - was not followed then the legal process should follow, to fix it.
It appears to me that the City has made numerous mistakes in the past in dealing with both the Taylor's and the citizens of both
communities. It is time now to "do the right thing", admit errors and preserve this as parkland till eternity
It is clear that there is a huge amount of opposition to the sale of this and any parkland in the city. When are the public figures going to
start listening to the overwhelming ground swell of opinion? If mistakes have been made, they need to be corrected and questionable
decisions need to be looked into.
This sale does not set a precedent; nor does it threaten the rest of the parkland. The City is now reforming its process to become more
transparent. As Calgarians, we ought to be able to trust our City and if we make an agreement, the City should follow through. The land
has been considered to be private land for the last 70 years. Mr. Taylor is only asking for the chance to maintain it as such - which on
balance would be of more benefit. The land is so small and would not be useful as a park. I wonder how many people in the community
have actually used the parkland in question as parkland
Taylor's investment to date
Mr. Taylor is concerned about a buffer from a park that existed when he purchased 638 Hillcrest, he can simply build the house a distance
from the actual park boundary that satisfies his desire for a buffer
Ignorance is no excuse, so his own problem that he didn’t know where his property line was - it was to his advantage not to request RPR
For a smart business man, why did you not read the survey report. You cannot assume you own the property just because!
Mr. Taylor does not need the few feet of parkland when he already has 3 large city lots. With the right architect, his new 11,000 foot
house should have no problem capturing the view. The rest of us can enjoy the park - that is supposed to remain as a park in perpetuity.
It would be nice to have view for the many, not the few.
I grew up in Mt. Royal and currently live there. When I purchased my home (comment removed) I had the property surveyed. Why didn’t
Don Taylor survey his property, there is no excuse for his ignorance. I am vehemently opposed to the sale of public parkland to Mr.
Taylor. I am also opposed to leasing public parkland, this sets a very bad precedent. If Mr. Taylor values his privacy so much, why did he
purchase a home next to a public park? The City of Calgary should not enter into deals like this one without community involvement. I
think the outcome should be decided by the residents of Mt. Royal and Cliff Bungalow. There has been no regard for community input.
Please do not sell this public parkland! Why did Mr. Taylor buy a home next to a park if he doesn't want "undesirables" next to him? City
council should not approve this transaction which the residents don't support
As members of the community we want to express our disagreement with the proposed plan. We frequently use this vantage point to
take in views, especially during the fireworks at Canada Day and Stampede. We are disappointed the City has considered forging ahead
with this sale without consulting the community. This is a special place for community members to meet together and would be very
disappointing to lose such a unique and popular space.
4
Please note editing took place to remove identifiers and inflammatory comments only