Developers say the property rights court’s ruling in favor of two projects rejected by the town of Canmore because of environmental issues paves the way for them.
Three Sisters Mountain Village Properties Ltd. (TSMVPL) is the regional structure of TSMVPL, where the Land and Property Rights Court (LPRT) of Alberta’s decision on Tuesday will develop two projects with regulatory approval 30 years ago. He states that he has approved the plan.
“The Three Sisters ASP is consistent with the approval of the Natural Resources Conservation Commission (NRCB), and the LPRT has ordered the town to adopt the Three Sisters Village Area Structural Plan submitted and considered by the city council,” the court decided. Says.
If built, development would almost double the town’s current population, which would now happen with the approval of the state’s quasi-judiciary, the company said.
“LPRT has decided that the policies outlined in the two structural plans are in line with the NRCB’s decision to allow the development of Three Sisters’ land,” the company said in a press release.
“TSMVPL looks forward to carefully reviewing the decisions and proceeding with the development of these projects as outlined in the LPRT decision using the submitted currently approved area structure plan.”
The court’s decision dismissed the town’s objections and had very limited ability to appeal, said Chris Olenberger, director of strategy and development at the company.
A town spokesman said they had booked comments.
“At this point, we’re taking the time to review the decision and will provide more updates when appropriate,” Robyn Dinnadge said in an email.
The company sued the town of Canmore and individual councilors for $ 161 million last March for refusing to approve the development of real estate in Three Sisters Village and Stewart Creek.
It also launched an appeal for the decision with LPRT to overturn the council’s decision.
The Canmore Council overwhelmingly rejected them a year ago, after hearings that garnered considerable opposition to the proposals, primarily for environmental reasons.
Canmore’s council rejects second proposed housing development
The council rejects one of the two controversial Canmore developments
Day 1 of the proposed Canmore Mega Development Hearing hears enthusiastic opposition from residents
However, the developers claimed that after the state’s NRCB approved the proposal in 1992, members of the council improperly declared it in the public interest and in the interests of all Albertans.
Both sites are located on the south side of the Three Sisters Parkway and will be built over the next 10 to 30 years, accommodating more than 12,000 residents and covering more than 300 hectares of land.
Development includes residential and commercial units such as resorts and spas, pedestrian villages, and indoor recreation centers.
Opponents of the project said that the plan approved by the NRCB 20 years ago is not the same as the current plan, which causes traffic congestion, disrupts wildlife corridors and is already endangered by coal mining. Claims to hurt.
Conservationist Harvey Locke, who opposed the proposal at the 1992 NRCB hearing, said the court’s decision could be subject to judicial review and should be appealed for environmental reasons. ..
“The Bow Valley has been very well built over the last three decades and the area around Canmore is under great pressure,” Rock said.
“This decision does not eliminate concerns about the Bow Valley wildlife corridor.”
The project has been updated many times since 1992, and the state’s environmental authorities have approved them, according to Olenberger.
“We have studied (these concerns) very carefully in many reports over the years, which has been endorsed by third-party reviews,” he said.
“And LPRT doesn’t really agree with (their environmental critics).”
In that decision, the court agreed with the company and called it important to upgrade to the proposal.
“The ASP has taken a huge amount of work. It has its own considerations regarding NRCB decisions, wildlife corridors, and the use of previous coal mines, with a scale and level of detail research that goes beyond regular ASPs. I needed a report. “
“The scale and scope of the amendments proposed to the Three Sisters ASP was almost a rewrite of the entire plan.”
According to Olenberger, TSMVPL is still considering whether to proceed with the proceedings against city council members and the judicial proceedings filed in the Queen’s Bench Court for each project.
Court Rules Supporting Canmore Three Sisters Resort Development
Source link Court Rules Supporting Canmore Three Sisters Resort Development