Editor:
I am writing to provide some further explanation of the Framework Agreement that council recently agreed to with the receiver (PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)) for Three Sisters Mountain Village (TSMV), and to address some of the issues raised in recent letters to the editor on this subject.
The Framework Agreement represents the outline of a public process that will be followed in the review of new planning documents for TSMV. It does not represent any decision of council. All of the matters outlined in the agreement will be subject to the normal public processes, information sessions, and public hearings as well as council consideration in public meetings.
The agreement does outline the proposed application that PwC is planning to submit, and provides advance notice of the content of those applications. The Town does not and cannot dictate what a landowner chooses to submit; every landowner has the opportunity to place any application it chooses before the Town.
Providing advance notice of an application is a way to be fully transparent and open. As no application has been formally submitted, there was no debate at the two public meetings on this issue (held on Nov. 13 and 20). There will be every opportunity to debate and discuss these issues at upcoming public meetings. Council will publically consider any applications that PwC submits.
The detailed Framework Agreement document was not made available at the public meeting on Nov. 13 as it was still being completed, and our intent was to focus on the big picture. We have made every possible effort to be entirely open to public scrutiny on this matter.
There are suggestions in recent letters that the existing plans approved in 2004 took years to complete, and that the proposed timeline to complete the new plans by April 2013 is too short. Much of the work on the prior plans took place between administration and TSMV outside of public review. The formal process started in July 2004, and was completed in September 2004. This timeline is not dissimilar to the one proposed in 2013.
The Town is not giving up the setbacks previously established on the partially constructed golf course. TSMV is proposing reduced or eliminated setbacks – this is a request. The Town will review the request, principally through the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process, and decide based on recommendations from wildlife experts and public comments, what any setbacks will be. A decision has not been made on this matter.
The agreement also does not bind council to any decision. We have made this clear to PwC and its legal counsel and at two public meetings. If any changes are made to the existing plans for TSMV, those changes would be made at a public council meeting via formal council approval. This would occur only after considerideration of PwC’s applications and information provided by experts and the public. The agreement only binds the Town to reviewing and processing applications promptly. It in no way binds council to any pre-determined decision. The agreement has been the subject of no less than two legal reviews by the Town’s lawyers, who also assisted in the preparation of the final document.
Finally, recent letters have hinted that there will be no further public consultation on the new plans. Nothing could be further from the truth. Every plan and bylaw that PwC submits will be the subject of review at council meetings. There will be public hearings associated with every plan.
One issue that both the residents and the larger community need to come to terms with as part of this process is that the golf course has not and will not be completed. The Town cannot force a business to operate. We cannot force the golf course to be completed. TSMV is asking to take a different direction. Sometimes businesses fold and new uses seek to replace them.
I want to personally encourage the community to continue to stay involved and interested in this issue. Public engagement and input will be essential as we move forward.
Gary Buxton,
General Manager of Municipal Infrastructure, Town of Canmore
