CANMORE – A polarizing hotel and spa development proposal in the Rundleview neighbourhood of Canmore could come to council early in 2025.
Residents expressed concerns at a Dec. 5 open house on possible impacts to wildlife, undermining concerns and added traffic to the residential area.
The hotel and spa, proposed off Spray Lakes Road and Rundleview Drive, is aiming to come to council before the end of the first quarter in 2025 for amendment considerations to the Town of Canmore’s Municipal Development Plan (MDP) and land use bylaw.
“By the time we hope to go to council early next year, we’ve done engagement and listened to the community as well as possibly can,” said Frank Kernick, one of two proponents of the project.
Serge Ouimette, a partner in the project with Kernick, said an application was made to the province under the Public Lands Administration Regulation (PLAR) to use Crown land. In 2023, they received a 60-year lease and an option to renew for a subsequent 60 years with Alberta Environment and Parks, now known as Alberta Environment and Protected Areas.
The land comes with an annual lease fee as well as a requirement to pay property taxes and local improvement charges.
The provincial government has offered certain parcels of public land since 2011 for lease under the PLAR. Amendments to the regulation in 2019 by the Jason Kenney government allowed for tourism and commercial recreation on public land for a maximum term of 60 years.
Ouimette, who has helped develop spas in other parts of Canada and lived in Canmore for a decade, applied for the lease and received provincial approval for a long-term lease agreement with Alberta Environment and Parks in 2023.
“It’s a very diligent process,” he said of steps that took more than two years.
Kernick called it “the perfect parcel” because it lies within the urban growth boundary, is available to existing water and wastewater lines, and zoned for future development.
In addition to an open house in May that had two sessions and 163 people attend, Kernick said the development team has met with the Chiniki, Goodstoney and Bearspaw First Nations of the Îyârhe Nakoda First Nation in recent weeks. He noted public engagement and consultation in the community will continue.
As part of the planning phases, the lands are undergoing technical studies, mapping and models for the property. Among the studies are an undermining assessment, wildfire mitigation strategy, recreation trail study, environmental site assessment and environmental impact statement.
A 10-page What We Heard report from the proponents at the May open house indicated the majority of concerns were related to wildlife and impacts on residents in the Rundleview neighbourhood such as increased traffic, noise and light pollution. Issues on undermined lands, preferring to leave the lands and unnecessary development were also expressed.
Kernick said the initial engagement was to hear from people and provide information on what work was being done. He said an emphasis was placed on hiring consultants and completing studies before getting into a detailed design for the project.
“We didn’t want to design it and then try to make the studies to fit. We came up with a list of necessary studies we needed to do to get here now,” Kernick said.
RESIDENTS' WILDLIFE CONCERNS
Among concerns expressed by residents at both open houses were related to wildlife, undermining and added traffic.
Ian Robinson, a long-time Canmore resident and member of the Protecting our Futures group opposed to the development, said the potential hotel and spa would create additional risks for wildlife and undermining impacts.
“It’s questionable whether another hotel will add value since there’s many more planned for Three Sisters and Silvertip,” he said. “The spa services are a duplication that are provided elsewhere. It's hot tubs with a different view, but that’s it.”
The Town’s MDP states resort centres “shall generally be located” in the Three Sisters and Silvertip areas.
Diana MacGibbon, a member of Protecting our Futures and a long-term resident, said the Bow Corridor Ecosystem Advisory Group’s (BCEAG) Wildlife Corridor and Habitat Patch Guidelines for the Bow Valley should be strictly followed in this scenario.
In the guidelines, the site is near the Three Sisters Along Valley and Georgetown – Quarry Lake corridors as well as the Georgetown – Canmore Nordic Centre regional habitat patch and Quarry Lake habitat patch.
When development isn’t exempted from the BCEAG, proposals “shall have regard for the BCEAG … and most recent principles of wildlife conservation to ensure the values and function of the corridor or habitat patch are not compromised,” according to the Town’s MDP.
“This parcel of land is squeezed between the corridor and the habitat patch. They need to follow those guidelines and we’ll be looking for the Town to apply them,” said MacGibbon.
“We know wildlife move more at night to avoid people. To put a hotel where people will be coming and going at all hours, it’s going to place a physical impediment on wildlife but also activity at night will likely have them go into the Rundleview neighbourhood … or go out onto the highway and that’s a concern.”
MacGibbon and Robinson both raised concerns on possibly removing open space will have on wildlife.
“I feel like we’re taking more and more from wildlife and we need to stop doing it. … If they end up getting squished into a small area, it’s not good for wildlife,” she said.
Robinson noted with significant amounts of development having occurred for several years in Canmore and more to come in areas such as Three Sisters and Silvertip as well as redevelopment throughout the Bow Valley, it was important to take time to evaluate the impact on wildlife movement.
“There are experts who say the modifications will cause real problems with the wildlife, so we need to stop compounding the problems and give wildlife the chance,” he said.
Kernick said the intent would be to not have the area fenced off and allow it to be “fluid and open just like the residential community.”
"We’re trying to keep wildlife in their designated corridors and habitat patches. … We’re not going to do anything like fencing it off,” he said.
The project aimed to have road access off Highway 742, but Alberta Transportation didn’t want to add more accesses than existed on the provincial highway.
Kernick said their traffic engineer has recommended the potential for a roundabout the highway and Rundleview Drive. Both he and Ouimette said it may not immediately happen, but they’d be open to exploring the idea.
“Another comment was transportation in possibly advancing the roundabout quicker than 2037 and maybe that’s something that goes into the planning right away to be a win-win for everybody,” Ouimette said.
UNDERMINING CONCERNS
A 36-page undermining review by Thurber Engineering Ltd. noted the area had Mine No. 1, with the No. 1, 2 and 4 seams.
The report recommended further site investigation, including an electrical resistivity tomography survey, and drilling at certain locations to better understand the “presence and depth of underground voids.” The report added a 3D model should be developed and a further report completed.
“If the shallowest underground workings are indeed ~200 ft (~60 m) below the surface, the geotechnical risks are somewhat lessened, especially given the No. 1 Mine was abandoned over 100 years ago and subsidence should have already occurred,” stated the initial report. “However, the actual distribution of void spaces below the site should be explored by a site investigation program especially since these seams are steeply dipping, which adds a major source of uncertainty to void size and migration.”
Kernick and Ouimette said they hope to have the 3D undermining map early 2025.
“It’ll give us a really good understanding if the mapping that was done in phase one is accurate or if we’re missing undermined areas or some areas were never mapped properly. It will give us a full 3D map of the property,” Kernick said.
A Sept. 6 letter from Municipal Affairs Minister Ric MvIver to Canmore Mayor Sean Krausert noted the ministry is “exploring the possibility of engaging on the Canmore Undermining Regulation in 2025.”
The letter stated when the ministry begins the work, they’ll reach out to all stakeholders for engagement.
A Sept. 16 letter in response from Krausert indicated the Town was satisfied with the undermining regulations and not wishing to re-open the regulations other than supporting updating the map to include undermined lands that aren’t subject to undermining regulations.
Robinson said the undermining concern for residents should be considerable, particularly when factoring in the long-term implications several decades down the road.
“Those are real risks. … There’s a lot of technical issues and I hope we get some very detailed and conservative engineers who take the risk very seriously,” he said.
THE PROJECT
The hotel is intended to have just under 100 rooms, with employee housing for ___ in addition to the spa and parking.
If amendments to the land use bylaw and MDP are approved, it will take about a year to do detailed design on the architectural and engineering schematics. Construction is anticipated to take one to two years per phase, with geo-exchange and passive solar design being used.
Staff housing is a requirement for the project to move forward, which would be determined by the ultimate size and scope of the Nordic spa and hotel. The province didn’t provide housing as an option for the site, said Kernick.
When the project is applied for, it will need an amendment from Canmore council for both the Town’s MDP and land use bylaw. The intent would be to create a direct control district to have specific site regulations and uses.
Passing of first reading would trigger a statutory public hearing.
The existing property is designated as community open space and recreation, but an amendment would seek to have it changed to tourist services.
The current zoning under the Town’s land use bylaw is future development district and it’s designated as community open space and recreation.
The site is 18.28 acres, but development is planned for between nine and 12 acres. The remaining six acres are open for ideas, Kernick said. He noted attendees at the Dec. 5 open house raised several ideas ranging from giving it to the Town of Canmore, giving it to a community association or having it remain as part of the hotel and spa.
“We got some good ideas from people on potential changes. … We heard people wanted us to keep that six acres and protect it for the future and it stays natural,” Kernick said, adding trail connections to the Canmore Nordic Centre were frequently expressed. “We’re not the only ones who decide since there’s the province, the Town.
“I heard from people they didn’t 100 per cent support the project, but if those six acres were protected it would go a long way for the community.”
ALL-SEASONS RESORT ACT PASSED BY PROVINCE
The UCP government passed the All-Seasons Resort Act earlier this month after it was proposed in November.
The act allows privately-owned resorts through long-term leases on Crown land to expand tourism in the province.
In a November interview with the Outlook, Minister of Tourism and Sport Joseph Schow said a key part of the act and provincial tourism strategy is to expand options to entail all four seasons.
“Expanding shoulder seasons is really important for our success overall in the tourism sector, so that we can see the visitation we need throughout the entire year and not just in small segments,” he told the Outlook Nov. 7. “This will also help us disperse visitors throughout the course of the year so they can have more things to do at one time. … We want to have something for everyone.”
Crown lands comprise about 60 per cent of Alberta and serve a multitude of purposes ranging from outdoor recreation to helping conservation.
The Alberta government estimates an all-season resorts policy will help bring in an additional $2 billion in visitor spending each year and an extra $4 billion in GDP in the first 10 years.
Tourism Industry Association of Alberta released a study in 2021 that indicated outdoor recreation contributed to $2.8 billion in GDP each year as well as $376 million being spent on outdoor equipment and accessories. The study also stated $551 million in tax revenue was generated through outdoor recreation at the time.
The provincial government has aggressive tourism economic goals, aiming to grow the industry to $25 billion annually by 2035.
In 2022, the province’s visitor economy was worth $10.7 billion. The 2024 provincial budget forecasted tourism spending would grow to $13.2 billion in 2025-26 and $14 billion in 2026-27.
In the legislature Dec. 4, Banff-Kananaskis MLA Sarah Elmeligi said she was “gravely concerned” with the bill, saying she had received more than 3,400 emails in opposition. She said the act “creates space for mistakes” and the risks for Crown land are too great for impact.
She highlighted concerns about the amount of power it puts in the hands of the tourism ministry as well as emphasizing the priority people throughout Alberta place in Crown land.
“Albertans want to know that developmental activities on Crown land are appropriate and fit within what they envision Crown land being good for,” she said Dec. 2. “Albertans also want to know that municipalities and municipal districts are directly engaged in that decision-making, and I think the other thing we’ve seen through the Defend Alberta Parks campaign, for example, is that if people feel that their parks and protected areas are being threatened, they will fight those developments coming forward.”
Both Robinson and MacGibbon highlighted their concerns raised far outweigh positives in the project.
“I feel like we’re taking more and more from wildlife and we need to stop doing it. … If they end up getting squished into a small area, it’s not good for wildlife,” MacGibbon said.
“It doesn’t seem like the benefits are here for the community. It’s clear what the damage will be, but I don’t see the benefits,” Robinson said.
