After a lengthy debate between members of the public and councillors regarding a proposed development on Stewart Creek Golf Course, Canmore Town council did not approve a required Sustainability Screening Report (SSR) application due to the site’s location adjacent to a wildlife corridor and its lack of providing an overall benefit to the town.
Canmore council held a special meeting on Tuesday (Feb. 12), where it heard presentations from the applicant as well as members from the public concerning the plan to develop 20 cabins, or houses, near the golf clubhouse.
According to the agenda package given to council before the SSR hearing, the proposed land use development is in accordance with the existing Three Sisters Mountain Village Stewart Creek Area Structure Plan (ASP) from 2004.
The ASP includes provisions for the development of low-density visitor accommodation units within the golf and recreation area just north of the clubhouse to create use of the golf club on a year-round basis.
James Scott from Stantec Consulting delivered a report to councillors on behalf of the applicant and pointed out the land in question for where the proposed development would be located is already part of Stewart Creek Golf Course.
“This supports priorities in economic development and tourism strategy. The potential is to get use out of this facility in shoulder season,” Scott said, adding it will also increase value to other events in the Valley such as meetings and weddings.
Scott pointed out the development would be at least 120 metres away from the existing Stewart Creek wildlife corridor and if the project proceeds, educational components through the use of signs, for example, would be put in place for human-wildlife mitigation.
The applicant also suggested having the development would attract long-term tenancy and 95 per cent local trades would be used for the construction process.
Following a question from Councillor Jim Ridley concerning minimizing the interactions between people and wildlife, Scott indicated a Biophysical Impact Assessment (BIA) would be conducted and would specifically look at the risks associated with wildlife while also noting there is a wildlife human interaction plan already in place for the golf course.
One of the pertinent questions asked by various members of council dealt with conservation easements set to take place on Three Sisters and the fact an agreement has not been reached with the province on the transfer of lands.
Mayor John Borrowman also questioned Scott about the idea that the golf course was seen as a seasonal wildlife corridor and the impacts wildlife would face if the development encouraged more people in that area during the off-season.
“The requirement is to study this,” Scott said, noting again mitigation techniques will be developed in the BIA to address this issue as well as the amount of noise that would come with an increase in visitors.
During the public comment period, all members who chose to speak indicated they were not in favour of the proposed development, citing various reasons such as its pinch point location to the Stewart Creek corridor and the applicant’s ability to shy away from mitigation techniques.
In addition to the lack of benefits to the town – the applicant said only three full-time jobs will be created – as well as the issue of undermining, residents pointed out there will be added stress brought to animals using the adjacent corridor to survive.w
One Three Sisters resident also noted the amount of wildlife such as grizzly bears, elk, deer and bighorn sheep he’s seen on the course while playing golf. Moving the maintenance facility for the golf club to an area within the wildlife corridor was referenced as a negative impact as well.
Council debated the motion to approve the SSR at length. Coun. Hans Helder was the only member not present as he had excused himself before the hearing due to a perceived conflict of interest.
“I will support this reluctantly,” said Ridley about the motion. “I believe there is some economic benefit to the community. I also believe the downside with respect to the environmental issues can and must be mitigated appropriately”
Coun. Gordie Miskow also indicated he was “51 per cent” in favour of the SSR, noting the undermining issues are a concern, however, there did seem to be an economic benefit to the town in bringing commercial tourism to the area.
Borrowman was first to announce his decision to not support the motion to approve citing the maintenance facility’s proposed placement inside the corridor and its overall benefit to the community.
“I’m not convinced these units would be used as short-term rentals,” he said. “I believe it’s more likely those will be purchased and used as family weekend homes.”
Having 20 expensive homes next to the golf course would not provide a benefit to the tourism economy, he added.
Echoing Borrowman, Coun. Joanna McCallum said “ostentatious monstrosities on a golf course” will have a negative impact on the functionality of the corridor and therefore would not support the motion.
McCallum also indicated this was not the right move with the issue of the conservation easements not resolved.
Coun. Sean Krausert vowed not to support the motion after calling it “premature” and “lacking detail.”
“I think we have to be taking a holistic approach to the area. I’m not comfortable with the mitigation foreseen or required,” Krausert said, adding the 95 per cent number for local workers is wishful thinking.
Referencing the Town’s strategic plan to be an environmental leader in stewardship, Coun. Vi Sandford said she would not support the SSR because it sets people coming from the city who are not aware of the elements on a “collision course” with wildlife.
The motion was defeated 4-2 with Ridley and Miskow the only two councillors in favour.
