Badland Motorsports developer responds to Save the Rosebud concerns

Laureen F. Guenther
Times Contributor

 

In the Rosebud River Valley, south of Highway 9, five kilometres northeast of Rosebud, James Zelazo of Calgary proposes to build Badlands Motorsports Resort (BMR). The site is in Kneehill County, bordering Wheatland County, south and west.
Residents in both counties oppose the development, expressing concerns about environmental destruction and noise disturbance. Zelazo to respond to their concerns.
The BMR would be “a controlled, full resort and the motorsports activities are the focal points,” Zelazo said in a telephone interview. “I wouldn’t define (the BMR) as a racetrack. It’s a road course.”
The resort would include two courses totalling 5.8 miles, one in the valley and one on the plateau above, according to documents provided by Zelazo. The 425-acre resort would include a 12-acre paddock, 12-acre karting facility, clubhouse with commercial spaces and condominiums for 433 residents, states the BMR website, with a daily capacity of 1,400 people.
“A road course is a regular type of road, but built to safety standards,” Zelazo said. “You can navigate your vehicles through higher speeds that (are) under control. There’re not a lot of cars on the tracks at one time.
“There may be three or four cars going at the same time in that particular event,” he added. “All it involves is a street car and a helmet. And it doesn’t require race cars or anything like that.”
According to the BMR’s Area Structure Plan: “(The courses) could support approximately 100 drivers at one time … 400 drivers on one day.
The BMR website states: “Members will likely drive a broad range of cars such as Mustangs, Subarus, Miatas, S2000s, Corvettes, Porches, BMWs, exotic cars and dedicated track cars like Radicals, Ariel Atoms, Formula cars and Sports Racers. There also will likely be … events where members can compete side-by-side in a drag race type event.”
Wendy Clark, who farms near the site and is a member of the Save the Rosebud group, noted the site is an Environmentally Significant Area (ESA). ESAs are ranked ESA-1 to ESA-4, and the site contains ESA-2 land, of “high significance.”
“Generally, development within an ESA-1 or ESA-2 should be avoided or minimized,” says an ESA report adopted by Kneehill County in 2010.
“The key that Kneehill County has missed is, ‘if it’s avoidable,’ ” Clark said. “In whose world is it not avoidable to put a racetrack in the river valley? Kneehill County has approved something which they have adopted a report that said they wouldn’t do.”
Patricia Maloney, a professional planner, reviewed the BMR ASP at Kneehill County’s request.
“The (ASP) plan shows no consideration for environmental protection,” Maloney’s report states.
It lists 33 inconsistencies between Alberta’s land use policies and the Municipal Development Plan (MDP), and the ASP, including MDP’s recommendation to develop commerce without risking the environment.
Zelazo said the ESA-2 will remain untouched.
“The part that’s in the valley, which is rated as number 3 (ESA-3), will only have the roads in it, our road course,” said Zelazo
During CBC’s Homestretch radio program on July 4, naturalist Brian Keating mentioned the BMR proposal.
“A racetrack in a valley. Right next to the water,” Keating said. “They’re going to have up to 400 cars a day, racing. And this is all in an unbelievably beautiful, pristine valley. There’s probably nothing wrong with a racetrack in the right area, but not in the Rosebud valley.”
So, why the Rosebud River valley?
“Where else?” Zelazo said. “First of all, why? Because it is a resort, because it is to be a recreational area. Again, it fits the majority of our development because it’s up on the plateau, it’s not in the river valley. All the buildings, our major biggest track and all the facilities are up on the upper plateau. Why would anybody think that we would be able to proceed by an area that’s flat?
“I don’t think we would be able to find a more isolated area than we have. There’re really very few residences around. If we were to establish this beside another community, beside Three Hills, do you think Three Hills would not have some objection?
“The Save the Rosebud valley – it’s not their valley,” he added. “I would say there is a valley part of it in where we are located. But that valley will not be decimated in any way.”
BMR’s Environmental Impact Assessment and Protection Plan (EIA), provided by Zelazo, lists 41 bird and animal species on the site, including six birds with a status of sensitive, threatened or endangered. Geoff Holroyd, Canadian Wildlife Service emeritus research scientist, did further observation, identifying 61 birds, including 27 sensitive, threatened or special concern.
Alberta’s Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Selected Wildlife Species and Habitat recommend specific habitat setback distances. Golden eagles, peregrine falcons and prairie falcons, for example, which are on the site, require a 1,000-metre setback, year-round.
“This is in the report (EIA) from our environmental thing,” Zelazo said, “I think the closest sighting they had was about two kilometres away. It’s all in this report, and I think there’s also this part of the measures that during construction there’d be a certain season that we would have to abide by.”
The BMR EIA specifies a setback of 1,000 metres from peregrine or prairie falcon nests, but only from April 15 to July 15. If special status species are observed, the EIA says, construction should be scheduled outside of April to July. Construction should be limited to daylight hours. Wildlife would be protected by a 2.4 metre-high fence around the tracks. The report recommends sensitive areas be fenced or flagged.
The BMR EIA is now awaiting Alberta Environment approval.
“When you see this (EIA), you can learn very well that there is really not any, any reason, to think that we’re going to ruin this valley,” Zelazo said.