Connect with us

Community

Molly Bannister Ext. may be history on Monday and certain developers will be smiling.

Published

4 minute read

The city will be expanding 32 Street to six lanes in the next 5-10 years. At huge cost to the taxpayers.

The city will be expanding 19 Street to six lanes in the next 5-10 years. At huge cost to the taxpayers.

The city will build a traffic circle on 19 Street. Last I heard it would be in the 10s of millions.

The city planners are recommending removing the right of way for the Molly Bannister Extension. One item they talked about was that 19 St. will be widened anyways. That the traffic on 32 Street did not increase as much as they thought since 2006. Isn’t the city spending millions, now re-inforcing 32 Street near 47 Ave, because of a shifting foundation?

The population has only increased by 195 residents in 5 years. The Molly Bannister Ext. was meant for when the population increases by 88,000.

Are the city planners predicting stagnant growth or declining populations?

They want to remove a road allowance that may be a quiet road for many decades, when we hit 188,000 so that the developer can build “now”50 houses where the road allowance is supposed to be.

There will be no turning back,, then, if the city does rebound from this period of stagnant and decline and does see a population of 188,000 then sorry. We are out of luck.

300 families along 32 street would see traffic go from 23,500 per day to 45,000 per day.

For every hiker, biker and skater who won’t have to use a crosswalk, there will be thousands of motorists driving 4 extra kilometers every day.

You can imagine how much emissions will be spewed over the years before they change to electric. 8,000 kms per day minimum at 20 kms per liter of fuel, 400 litres extra of fuel burned every day so hikers don’t have to use a crosswalk. Very environmentally friendly.

There is a very small chance for animals to cross 32 st. now at 23,500 cars per day. What chance will they have 45,000?

The same can be said for 19 Street.

10 years ago I would have supported removing the Molly Bannister Ext. but things have changed. My grandchildren won’t walk in those woods, homeless camps, needles, garbage take something away from the experience.

Seniors, not being able to cross 32St, to socialize, get a hair cut and the convenience store. Children, not being able to cross, as easily to go skating or use the park.

300 families will hear more traffic, see homes devaluate due to traffic. Ask the realtors.

I am repeating what has been said many times already. I know I don’t donate to election campaigns, host parties or socialize with planners and politicians, I am just a tax payer who thinks homeowners should be able enjoy their homes.

Many people have said the city cannot afford to maintain the infrastructure we have now, and our population is stagnant. Our assessment values have been depreciated.

Perhaps we are on the wrong track, now. Maybe we should not tie future councils’ hands.

I am asking the Mayor and Councillors to vote against removing the road allowance, when you vote on Monday September 14.

We are not in a rush to build 700+ houses and we don’t need 50 houses backing onto Piper Creek.

Will we continue down this road and appease a few at the expense of the many?

 

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