Two Proposals That Prove Canmore’s Election Isn’t Boring

When Canmore’s election candidates meet to talk about housing, growth, and the environment, most ideas stay within familiar lines: densify existing neighborhoods, improve transit, protect wildlife corridors, and expand affordable housing. But every so often, a proposal lands that catches the room off guard, not for being reckless, but for daring to redraw the town’s mental map. Two of the most unconventional ideas so far have come from recent all-candidates forums.

From Housing to Recreation: Strickert’s Sports Complex Vision

At the environmental forum hosted by the Biosphere Institute on October 2nd, James “Strickly” Strickert, a first-time council candidate, said he opposed the Palliser lands rezoning for housing and believes the site should instead become a community sports complex powered by solar energy.

“I might be one of the few people here that is actually against that Palliser rezoning for low-income housing,” Strickert said. “I believe it should be a sports complex. It might be the sunniest spot in all of Canmore and the largest piece of land we have left.”

The Palliser lands, a large undeveloped stretch along the Trans-Canada Highway, have been at the center of Canmore’s growth discussions for years. The town’s long-term plan envisions a mixed-use neighborhood with affordable and sustainable housing as part of a broader effort to ease Canmore’s housing pressures while reducing its environmental footprint.

Strickert’s idea would flip that plan entirely. He argued that the land should serve a different kind of community need, one that brings people together for recreation and wellness rather than adding more density to an already stretched housing market. In his view, the site’s open exposure and size make it ideal for large-scale solar installations that could power the facility and potentially offset its operating costs.

His comments also fit within a broader argument he made throughout the forum, that Canmore should “build up, not out.” Strickert called for taller residential buildings in existing neighborhoods instead of further outward expansion. The idea, he said, is to preserve remaining open land while meeting housing needs through smarter urban design.

Though the proposal drew no direct rebuttal during the event, it marked a rare moment of sharp contrast. Most candidates, including council candidate Rob Murray and Mayor Sean Krausert, spoke favorably of the Palliser housing project. Murray described it as “a model community of both affordability and sustainability,” while Krausert referenced the town’s progress on climate and housing as part of his record.

Strickert’s idea, by comparison, offered something more unconventional, part recreation, part renewable energy, and part land-use rethink. It was less about opposing housing outright and more about questioning whether Canmore’s large parcels should serve a different civic purpose.

A Parkade on Elevation Place: Finlay’s Fix for Traffic

A few days later, at the Bow Valley Builders and Developers Association forum on October 9, another unexpected idea surfaced.

It came when Laura Finlay, a longtime Home Hardware employee, was asked to name the biggest problem facing Canmore. Most of her colleagues talked about housing. Finlay talked about roads.

“The number one [problem] right now are roads,” she said. “I live in Canmore…the traffic is very tight. I would have to say a parkade is our only solution. I said initially at another forum that I think it should be out of town, but then I got to thinking why don’t we put a car park right on top of Elevation Place, make it five levels high.”

Her comment broke through the usual policy rhythm of the night. While other candidates focused on affordability, zoning, or provincial funding, Finlay focused on something much more tangible: the gridlock residents face and the lack of parking near downtown.

No other candidate endorsed or expanded on the suggestion, but Finlay’s proposal offered a rare concrete infrastructure idea. She did not, however, outline cost, design, or feasibility.

What Do You Think?

Both ideas might be long shots, but they sparked some of the most interesting moments in this election so far. What’s your take? Share your thoughts in the comments.