A decision on a fire hall being constructed in Dead Man’s Flats could become clearer next week when developers will be given the opporunity to provide a written response regarding the proposed development’s fate.
River’s Bend Development Inc. are expected to forward a written statement regarding its willingness to proceed with lobbying for the fire hall to the MD of Bighorn’s finance and economic development committee meeting on Tuesday (June 23).
Council passed a motion put forward by Councillor Paul Ryan on June 9 to refer the matter to the June 23 meeting.
“I would like to see this come to some sort of finale. Either go forward or go away,” Ryan said.
River’s Bend is in the midst of developing 32 acres of land in Dead Man’s Flats, including 77 residential lots, 25 condos and 15 light industrial/commercial lots.
Construction of a fire hall in Dead Man’s arose after it was found that the hamlet is outside an accepted 10-minute response time by Canmore Fire Rescue. Without a fire hall in the hamlet, new construction would be required to install firefighting infrastructure within homes, adding to their cost.
Bighorn replied to River’s Bend terms and conditions for the fire hall proposal and, specifically, on one point, the two parties didn’t see eye to eye.
River’s Bend proposed the MD shall determine the 10-minute response radius of the fire hall in accordance with the provisions of the STANDATA, using the time trial provision set out for new subdivisions and a chute time of five minutes. STANDATA allows for an initial fire response attack such as two firefighters in a small fire truck on scene. It also allows 90 per cent of the time fire crews have to meet the 10-minute response.
“The STANDATA recognizes the intent. The intent is that you have trained crews with the capability of 90 per cent of the time being under 10 minutes,” said Frank Kernick, River’s Bend partner and owner of Spring Creek Mountain Village.
The MD responded that it will maintain its current policy – Limitations to the Provisions of Fire Protection Services – and the municipality’s position is that it cannot provide assurance to any of the MD areas serviced by a volunteer fire department that a 10-minute response is achievable on a regular basis.
“My advice was given to (council) back in March and I haven’t wavered from that,” said Martin Buckley, MD chief administrative officer.
In an initial feasibility report from March, administration stated it believes a fire hall is feasible in the long run, but also believes that a full understanding and careful planning is required, such as a full study by a qualified consultant be done before the MD fully commits to establishing a new level of expenditure and service.
River’s Bend developers said if that term couldn’t be negotiated, it would likely be a “deal breaker.”
“We can accept some of the non-commitment, but we’re working together on language in council’s responses other than the 10-minute response time,” said Shane Jonker, River’s Bend partner and vice-president of operations for Downer Contracting.
“That’s the driver. That was our original driver and I think council should hold their administration accountable to achieving that because we’re not really interested in erecting a building and putting our effort into making sure we’ve got a great response to the recruitment and training and volunteer and community effort if it doesn’t have the support of administration and council to be successful.”
Earlier this year, River’s Bend proposed to construct a first response, two-bay fire hall, that would be a 1,200 square foot, two-level facility located on an undeveloped space at First Street and First Avenue.
Late last year it was discovered that Dead Man’s Flats, as well as Harvie Heights, fall outside the 10-minute fire response zone. Bighorn and Canmore have an agreement where Canmore provides fire response services to the hamlets for an annual service fee.
Developers began to lobby for a volunteer-based fire hall for safety and to offset additional fire protection measures under the Alberta Building Code for structures outside a 10-minute response window. The proposed hall is expected to cost in the $200,000 range for the building alone, which the developers have indicated a willingness to construct at their expense.
