Editor: I am proud and pleased to see that the Town of Canmore will appeal the Dead Man’s Flats ASP (RMO, Nov 19).
As a former resident of Dead Man’s and one who still maintains connections there, it’s great that someone else is finally taking notice of development and is trying to do something about it.
There is a perception that the residents of Dead Man’s are in favour of additional development in the hamlet when, in fact, the opposite is true. The miniscule population of the hamlet (less than 60 of us) tried for several years to protect that environment and wildlife corridor/habitat patch space, but no one seemed to want to listen, or even help us.
I personally attended all the public hearings and whatever open houses or public forums were held from 2007 through 2014, and we residents were the only ones in the room. We couldn’t even gain media attention for those plans, and thus a well-used habitat patch disappeared under River’s Bend development, and no one else seemed to notice or care.
But what we residents learned from all those hundreds of hours trying to ‘fight City Hall’ was that MD Bighorn council has plans for they want to do, and input from others is neither welcome nor considered unless it supports their plans. As just one example, not one element of feedback provided by hamlet residents to the 2009 River’s Bend conceptual plan was incorporated – including the ones regarding maintaining wildlife corridors, connectivity to the underpass and habitat patches.
Now, we have also learned over the years that the MD is facing major financial issues due to the imminent closure of a Shell gas plant (a major source of their tax revenue), so we also clearly came to understand why development at Dead Man’s was going to go ahead no matter the feedback.
In a meeting with me as early as 2008, Councillor Montgomery made it clear that the goal of the MD was to maximize the tax base, so it had to develop every single square inch of land they could in the way that would maximize the tax base. Dead Man’s has been in the crosshairs ever since. What’s next, I wonder?
While we feel for the MD, residents have learned it is a waste of our breath to argue for wildlife corridor protection. The MD’s response to Canmore’s challenge in the 2015 hearing was to hire a consultant (Golder) who would write a report that would say the MD is right – which is exactly what they did.
The MD will probably fail to mention that the Golder Report’s author also said that, in his opinion, it would be better if there were no development in the ASP space. That’s what the residents have also been saying.
That was the feedback at the a previous open house. But that, too, has fallen on deaf ears. The MD hears what the MD wants to hear to satisfy the MD’s plans. Wildlife doesn’t speak, and even if it did, the MD would ignore it anyway.
So it is welcoming that the Town of Canmore is finally taking notice of a fight we’ve been having for almost a decade, and supporting us in that fight.
I hope the weight and knowledge of Town experts on the Municipal Government Act, the ASP process and other nuances will bring strength where the input of the residents has not. I doubt it will, but it remains my fervent hope.
Derek Ryder,
Harvie Heights
