Connect with us

Community

Attention City of Red Deer; “It is best to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it”

Published

5 minute read

Now that it has been acknowledged, at least by one, that the Molly Bannister Extension is not about the wildlife corridor, as 19 Street and 32 Street have grown to the point of being a barrier to animals. The emphasis is on hikers, cyclists and skateboarders not having to cross a road and 24 families backing onto Molly Bannister.

32 Street is a much broader issue than ever given credit for. It splits neighbourhoods; it creates hardships for seniors and children in Mountview and Sunnybrook for example.

32 Street will run from Highway 2 to the proposed ring road (20 Ave). The church just south of 32 Street decided to expand but the city declined any expansion on the north side due to future expansion of 32 Street. So the city has plans to widen 32 St.

There are, as previously mentioned, 24 families backing onto Molly Bannister. My last count showed 292 families backing onto 32 Street. This is a larger number of families, than discussed, backing on to Molly Bannister.

The issue about the road east of Piper Creek is a smoke and mirrors game. That road will be built, anyways, with or without the Molly Bannister connection. Without the connection the road will be built with 50 houses on the west side backing onto Piper Creek.

With the connection, a busier road will be built, but with only about one lot being used for entrance onto a bridge. The bridge will actually be less intrusive on the park, than the road without the connection.

The trail will remain in the field on the other side, west side, of the creek, and I am sure the city can put in a crosswalk with flashing lights for hikers, cyclists and skateboarders to cross the road.

Air quality has to come into this equation. The developer wants to build 600 to 1,000 homes on the east side of the creek. Their only entrance/exit will be 40 Ave. So instead of going 500 metres to Gaetz Ave they will now have to drive over 2 kilometres each way, as they have to drive on 19 Street or 32 Street. The extra distances also apply to all current and future neighbourhoods along 22 Street.

The $10 million estimated to build the bridge is nothing compared to cost of compensating for not building a bridge. The proposed traffic circle on 19 St will be twice that. The widening of 32 Street will be many times that. Widening of 19 Street will cost more. The toll on 40 Ave from 19 Street to 32 Street will be costly, to maintain and expand.

This bridge will not be built for decades. It is meant for the time of the city having a population of 188,000. The city has grown by 195 residents since 2015, so it is a long way off.

I believe that the right of way should be kept, and left as green space until the bridge needs to be built. That gives everybody decades to adapt.

The Mayor and city council knows this extension is needed or will be needed. If not this issue would have quietly disappeared, long ago. The city should keep the option open and not handicap further development.

The environment has been tossed to the curb after being abused. Habitats will be inundated with fences, fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, lawns, foreign non-native weeds, trees, shrubs and plants, if 50 houses are allowed to be built along Piper Creek.

It has now become about numbers. It has become about profits for a few, pain for the many. The 1,000 out of 1800 submissions supporting the extension cannot be discounted because the question was troubling, the city staff compensated for that and studied the responses to ensure of intent.

I think that allocating a lot for a bridge is less intrusive on our parks than 50 lots for houses. Would you not agree?

I think it is better to have it (right of way) and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Follow Author

Community

SPARC Red Deer – Caring Adult Nominations open now!

Published on

Red Deer community let’s give a round of applause to the incredible adults shaping the future of our kids. Whether they’re a coach, neighbour, teacher, mentor, instructor, or someone special, we want to know about them!

Tell us the inspiring story of how your nominee is helping kids grow up great. We will honour the first 100 local nominees for their outstanding contributions to youth development. It’s time to highlight those who consistently go above and beyond!

To nominate, visit Events (sparcreddeer.ca)

Continue Reading

Addictions

‘Harm Reduction’ is killing B.C.’s addicts. There’s got to be a better way

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Susan Martinuk 

B.C. recently decriminalized the possession of small amounts of illicit drugs. The resulting explosion of addicts using drugs in public spaces, including parks and playgrounds, recently led the province’s NDP government to attempt to backtrack on this policy

Since 2016, more than 40,000 Canadians have died from opioid drug overdoses — almost as many as died during the Second World War.
Governments, health care professionals and addiction experts all acknowledge that widespread use of opioids has created a public health crisis in Canada. Yet they agree on virtually nothing else about this crisis, including its causes, possible remedies and whether addicts should be regarded as passive victims or accountable moral agents.

Fuelled by the deadly manufactured opioid fentanyl, Canada’s national drug overdose rate stood at 19.3 people per 100,000 in 2022, a shockingly high number when compared to the European Union’s rate of just 1.8. But national statistics hide considerable geographic variation. British Columbia and Alberta together account for only a quarter of Canada’s population yet nearly half of all opioid deaths. B.C.’s 2022 death rate of 45.2/100,000 is more than double the national average, with Alberta close behind at 33.3/100,00.

In response to the drug crisis, Canada’s two western-most provinces have taken markedly divergent approaches, and in doing so have created a natural experiment with national implications.

B.C. has emphasized harm reduction, which seeks to eliminate the damaging effects of illicit drugs without actually removing them from the equation. The strategy focuses on creating access to clean drugs and includes such measures as “safe” injection sites, needle exchange programs, crack-pipe giveaways and even drug-dispensing vending machines. The approach goes so far as to distribute drugs like heroin and cocaine free of charge in the hope addicts will no longer be tempted by potentially tainted street drugs and may eventually seek help.

But safe-supply policies create many unexpected consequences. A National Post investigation found, for example, that government-supplied hydromorphone pills handed out to addicts in Vancouver are often re-sold on the street to other addicts. The sellers then use the money to purchase a street drug that provides a better high — namely, fentanyl.

Doubling down on safe supply, B.C. recently decriminalized the possession of small amounts of illicit drugs. The resulting explosion of addicts using drugs in public spaces, including parks and playgrounds, recently led the province’s NDP government to attempt to backtrack on this policy — though for now that effort has been stymied by the courts.

According to Vancouver city councillor Brian Montague, “The stats tell us that harm reduction isn’t working.” In an interview, he calls decriminalization “a disaster” and proposes a policy shift that recognizes the connection between mental illness and addiction. The province, he says, needs “massive numbers of beds in treatment facilities that deal with both addictions and long-term mental health problems (plus) access to free counselling and housing.”

In fact, Montague’s wish is coming true — one province east, in Alberta. Since the United Conservative Party was elected in 2019, Alberta has been transforming its drug addiction policy away from harm reduction and towards publicly-funded treatment and recovery efforts.

Instead of offering safe-injection sites and free drugs, Alberta is building a network of 10 therapeutic communities across the province where patients can stay for up to a year, receiving therapy and medical treatment and developing skills that will enable them to build a life outside the drug culture. All for free. The province’s first two new recovery centres opened last year in Lethbridge and Red Deer. There are currently over 29,000 addiction treatment spaces in the province.

This treatment-based strategy is in large part the work of Marshall Smith, current chief of staff to Alberta’s premier and a former addict himself, whose life story is a testament to the importance of treatment and recovery.

The sharply contrasting policies of B.C. and Alberta allow a comparison of what works and what doesn’t. A first, tentative report card on this natural experiment was produced last year in a study from Stanford University’s network on addiction policy (SNAP). Noting “a lack of policy innovation in B.C.,” where harm reduction has become the dominant policy approach, the report argues that in fact “Alberta is currently experiencing a reduction in key addiction-related harms.” But it concludes that “Canada overall, and B.C. in particular, is not yet showing the progress that the public and those impacted by drug addiction deserve.”

The report is admittedly an early analysis of these two contrasting approaches. Most of Alberta’s recovery homes are still under construction, and B.C.’s decriminalization policy is only a year old. And since the report was published, opioid death rates have inched higher in both provinces.

Still, the early returns do seem to favour Alberta’s approach. That should be regarded as good news. Society certainly has an obligation to try to help drug users. But that duty must involve more than offering addicts free drugs. Addicted people need treatment so they can kick their potentially deadly habit and go on to live healthy, meaningful lives. Dignity comes from a life of purpose and self-control, not a government-funded fix.

Susan Martinuk is a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and author of the 2021 book Patients at Risk: Exposing Canada’s Health Care Crisis. A longer version of this article recently appeared at C2CJournal.ca.

Continue Reading

Trending

X