Begin forwarded message:
Leduc Nature Valley - Saunders Lake Area
Join the conversation with our group, to communicate about protecting our natural jewel near Leduc, AB, the Saunders Lake Area: https://www.facebook.com/groups/LeducNatureValleySaundersLake. Proposed changes to the Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan are being rushed through by Leduc County, changes that would extend the heavy and light industrial areas nearly to the western shore of Saunders Lake, with only a small green belt zone next to the lake.
Saunders Lake
March 29, 2017
Colin Richards, Senior Planner, LEDUC COUNTY - Fwd: Saunders Lake Area – Proposed Changes to the future Land Use Concept
March 27, 2017
City of Leduc Planning Documents
THE CITY OF LEDUC MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
https://www.leduc.ca/sites/default/files/MDP_Amending_Bylaw_934_2016.pdf
A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LEDUC IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, TO AMEND THE CITY OF LEDUC – LEDUC COUNTY
INTERMUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
https://www.leduc.ca/sites/default/files/IDP_Bylaw_Amendment_933_2016_Final_Version.pdf
March 16, 2017
Vic Moran - Comments at Saunders Lake Area – 2nd Public Hearing - March 14, 2017
March 14, 2017
Over the years the County of Leduc has completed master plans and studies to guide Council in effective planning and in the identification and preservation of environmentally sensitive areas.
In 2006 Leduc County commissioned the Parks & Open Spaces Master Plan. The following are direct quotations from this document.
· Priority for County Residents – Leduc County's primary focus in providing new parks will be to provide outdoor recreation facilities that meet the needs of residents of the County.
· Day Use Facilities – Outdoor recreation trends are changing the type of facilities requested in the County. New parks in the County will focus on providing more day use facilities for casual activities like walking, cycling, nature appreciation, dog walking and access to water for swimming, boating and fishing.
· Areas of Interest for New Parks, Saunders Lake – The County's Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan identifies Saunders Lake as a key recreational and environmental feature.
· Environmentally Sensitive Areas – Protection of sites identified as ESA's in the report Environmentally Sensitive Areas Study: Leduc County will be supported by Leduc County.
In 2008 Leduc County commissioned the Saunders Lake Parks and Open Space Concept Plan. The following are direct quotations from this document.
· Bank & Shoreline Stability –Saunders Lake is located in a glacial melt water channel with steep slopes that are considered highly susceptible to erosion (Spencer Environmental 2004), having high potential to lead to downslope sedimentation and lake infilling. Scheffer Andrew (2005) reports that the elevation of Saunders Lake is 690m, and the slopes rise up to 740m southwest and southeast of the lake. Development along the slopes to top of bank should be restricted and these slopes should be re-vegetated where possible. A leave strip is recommended along the top of the bank to prevent adverse impacts to Saunders Lake from erosion, as determined by geotechnical and wildlife considerations (Spencer Environmental 2004). The maximum possible width of this setback/buffer is recommended (e.g. 100-250m), given the friable soils and potential for species at risk habitat.
· Lake Characteristics & Water Quality – Saunders Lake is a very shallow lake (reports suggest maximum depth of 3-4m, but average depth likely closer to 1m) located in a watershed of rich soils. This suggests it could be very biologically productive, prone to high vegetation production and algal blooms. The shallow nature of the lake would make it more prone to mixing, high turbidity levels, and sedimentation.
· Waterfowl Habitat – Saunders Lake is considered Class 1 waterfowl habitat presenting a good opportunity for waterfowl viewing. Potential recreational uses related to this include viewing platforms, interpretative signage, viewing scope, and/or viewing boardwalk.
In 2015 Leduc County commissioned the Leduc County Environmentally Significant Areas Study; the Saunders Lake Area is noted as a High Risk (aquatic and riparian) Area. The following is a direct quote from the study.
· Aquatic and Riparian ESAs – Human activity that results in the disruption of hydrologic regimes through diversion or impoundment of surface or groundwater flows, as well as dredging or filling of streams, wetlands, and other water bodies, can severely impact Aquatic and Riparian ESAs not only in the immediate vicinity, but also downstream of the activity. Changes in water quantity and quality, as well the duration and frequency of hydrologic flows across the landscape, can also have significant impacts on the ecological health of terrestrial habitats in proximity to Aquatic and Riparian ESAs.
In summary, Saunders Lake has been identified as an environmentally sensitive area, vulnerable to the turbidity created at a stormwater outfall and the pollutants that will not be eliminated through settlement. Saunders Lake would be prone to algal bloom at an outfall where concentrated fertilizer runoff would enter the lake. Saunders Lake has been identified as a future park location, and in keeping with the growing popularity of walking, jogging and cycling could provide a first class nature trail to satisfy growing needs.
So the whole concept of a nature trail works better when there is watchable wildlife.
I asked the County if there were any technical reasons why the stormwater from the Saunders Lake development could not go directly into the Blackmud Creek drainage channel and avoid Saunders Lake altogether. They replied, and I quote, "A complete diversion of water from Saunders Lake would reduce the lake levels in Saunders Lake which could have unpleasant side effects. The controlled flow rates are to maintain predevelopment flow rates. The volume will be higher and as a result the duration of flow through Saunders Lake will be longer (as reduced by the "Bioswales" efforts). This will keep the water in Saunders Lake fresher. An Intermunicipal study is under way to ensure that the discharge rate be set to address the concerns of all municipalities contributing to the Blackmud Creek."
Now there are several things wrong with this view. First and foremost, I don't think that we can be concerned with reduced water levels in Saunders Lake when the land around Telford Lake continues to be developed and all the stormwater collected is drained from Telford Lake, through Saunders Lake into Blackmud Creek. You do not get fresh water from a stormwater collection system, and at the point of discharge the stormwater will have a high concentration of pollutants. Bioswales and constructed wetlands are definitely the way to go and the developer is to be applauded for moving in this direction, this will enhance groundwater recharge, improve water quality, moderate flood peaks and surges, increase water holding ability and increase a wildlife resource. At the same time helping to address discharge rates into Blackmud Creek. These measures should limit discharge to times after heavy rain when Saunders Lake would already be full and the stormwater would cause overflow into Blackmud Creek – again why is it important to dilute this polluted stormwater in Saunders Lake, before it runs into Blackmud Creek.
I also asked the County of Leduc why it was that the City of Leduc can require "Individual property owners to provide some level of on-site stormwater management to minimize the downstream storage requirements" and yet in the Saunders Lake ASP this is not allowed. I was told, and I quote, "Each municipality has the right to manage their community as they see fit. The approach of using on lot storage has a number of benefits and disadvantages. In Leduc County's case, the balance is in favour of using centralized Storm Water Management Facilities".
This response shows a poor understanding of on-site stormwater management, it is not about retention ponds. On-site stormwater management is rainwater harvesting for re-use, the use of porous paving, rain gardens, absorbent landscaping, bioretention areas, vegetated swales and green roofs. All of which reduce the amount of rainwater that is destined to become stormwater, and travel via bioswales to constructed wetlands. In many municipalities these measures are encouraged with financial incentives, as it is recognized that infrastructure upgrades and replacement is expensive and at some point our rivers and creeks will not be able to cope. These measures should be recognized, adopted and promoted throughout the County. Coincidently a forested landscape absorbs rainwater 67 times faster than hardened bare ground.
I might not have the opportunity to address Council again on this matter, so, I would like to close by recommending that the County pursue the provision of a rewilded, barrier free nature trail in a 30 metre wide reserve at the top of the escarpment and put in place measures that would prohibit the discharge of stormwater into Saunders Lake for this and all future developments, while encouraging on-site stormwater management on all developments throughout the County.
Vic Moran - Comments at Saunders Lake Area – 2nd Public Hearing - March 14, 2017
There have been some very positive changes in the language of the IDP since last October.
There are, however, three specific sections that could be clarified and more prescriptive.
In section 4.6.2.18, it is unfortunate that the City and County cannot quite bring themselves to come right out and say that they will protect and maintain the natural connectivity between Saunders and Telford Lakes. Instead they opt to "jointly examine solutions", whatever that means. Interestingly both the City and County have been advised by their respective consultants to maintain the wildlife corridor during their park master planning processes.
The updated figure 10 in the IDP clearly shows that there are uninterrupted and dedicated Open Space and Greenways between the two lakes. Yet the City and County remain half pregnant.
There has been a consistent replacement of "should" with "shall", until we get to section 5.2.2., and the protection of natural assets and features. I'm hoping that this is an oversight, because as we all know, should is a requirement to do nothing.
Finally, Section 5.11.2 recognizes the impact of noise, light, air and water pollution on adjacent natural areas, lakes and natural habitats; and requires that Area Structure Plans demonstrate how they will minimize these impacts. In reading the Area Structure Plan for Saunders Lake I find in section 5.3 that "Land uses and development standards shall ensure that no light pollution, noise, odour, dust or vibration is experienced beyond the edges of any individual Saunders Lake Transition site." Even with my college education I have a hard time imagining such a big promise. No means zero and zero means an unventilated, windowless building without site lighting and no one coming and going, not even in moccasins. I'm not sure what is expected from the IDP, but maybe some guidelines referencing decibels, lumens or LEED and ASHRAE standards are in order. As much as I would like to see the Saunders Lake transition space as rewilded green space, I don't think that this is what the developer intends, and yet it would be the only way to satisfy a zero pollution scenario. Planting a single tree would reduce noise, light, air and water pollution – how many trees would it take to minimize the impact of all the pollutants from a given site? The ask is vague and subjective, the response was unrealistic.
Vic Moran - Letter to the Editor Leduc Representative - March 10, 2017
Dear editor
The stage is set to provide for a first class nature trail in the Northwest quadrant of Saunders Lake. The developer has identified access points to the trail and has set aside the 200 to 400 metres of escarpment (long steep slope at the edge of a plateau), between the lake and the development as natural area / open space. In reading the Area Structure Plan the developer acknowledges that the County will need to request that an Environmental Reserve be set aside on the plateau to create the level land for a nature trail, (even though they show the trail at the top of the escarpment). Obviously the County does not want to build a nature trail on or near a slope. The trail would be dangerous, subject to erosion and expensive to maintain. I investigated what the Province recommends for trail widths and gradients. In a document that was prepared for the Province by Stantec Consulting, the recommended grade for a trail is 5%, (which is also the gradient set for ramps for barrier free access). It is fortunate that the trail route follows a contour and will be practically level between access points, thus creating one of the very few nature trails that can be accessed by the elderly and physically challenged. Stantec's document recommends trail widths of between 3.4 and 4.3 metres, with 1.5m wide shoulders on each side and a slope across the trail of 2%.
So how much of the level plateau is the County able to acquire under the Municipal Government Act, as Environmental Reserve? Well, in their response matrix, the County stated that the area west of the natural area / green space "would not qualify for Environmental Reserve and Municipal Reserve is limited to 10% under the MGA". So, 10% of the original land parcel is (601.4ha x 10%), 60.14ha. This is roughly equivalent to a strip of land 186m wide the length of the trail. Since the County is able to accept money in lieu of land it is reasonable to expect a trail width of say 30 metres, which would allow for a shelter belt to the west of the trail and bush planting at the top of the escarpment and have the planting and trail built with the money received. Of course I don't think that there would be much of a problem applying for grants to provide benches and lookouts along a barrier free nature trail.
https://www.albertaparks.ca/albertaparksca/about-us/inclusion-accessibility/push-to-open-nature/
I can only see that it is up to our elected officials to pursue, what would be an eco-tourism attraction and chance to enjoy nature for those with mobility challenges.
Vic Moran
Leduc County
Andrew J C Tait - Where Has the Sharpie Gone?
Andrew J C Tait - Our Precious Wetlands
Andrew J C Tait - Daylighting Streams
Andrew J C Tait - Buried Watercourses
Andrew Tait - Letter to the Editor Leduc Representative - March 10, 2017
Instead, formal and inflexible traditional methods have been the mainstay. It is hard to imagine that in 2013, only a few (hundred) yards away from County Centre and the hotel where the hearings have been taking place, the new Alberta Wetland Policy was hammered out in multiple meetings with over 80 representatives and stakeholders from around the province. A document and process that was designed to "up the game" in wetlands protection and stewardship has been largely ignored, given "lip-service" only by developers and local officials who are determined that unwanted and un-needed new industrial park plans go ahead. Another document, the 'Workbook for Developing Lake Watershed Management Plans in Alberta', developed by the Alberta Lake Management Society, sets out just such a process for stakeholder engagement.
Will local governments finally sit down and meet with groups that can help achieve a sustainable and world class watershed management plan for Saunders Lake? We shall soon see.
Leduc Wildlife Conservation Society
All the best,
Andrew J C Tait
Always appeal to generosity rather than grievance, and hope rather than fear
Re: Saunders Lake Area – 2nd Public Hearing: Proposed Bylaw to Amend the Leduc County - City of Leduc Intermunicipal Development Plan, Bylaw No. 933-2016
To: Cory Labrecque, Manager
Long Range Planning
City of Leduc
780-980-8435
clabrecque@leduc.ca
Cc: Colin Richards
Senior Planner
Leduc County
County Centre
Suite 101,1101 5th Street,
Nisku, Ab
T9E 2X3
colin@leduc-county.com
Leduc County Mayor and Council
http://www.leduc-county.com/contact (online form) or
Lynn White, Executive Assistant
Council/Administration
Lynn@leduc-county.com
Leduc County Mayor
John Whaley
johnw@leduc-county.com
Leduc County Council, Division Three
John Schonewille
john@leduc-county.com
City of Leduc,
Mayor Greg Krischke
mayor@leduc.ca
City of Leduc,
Councillor Terry Lazowski
Infrastructure & Planning Liaison On City Council
tlazowski@leduc.ca
City of Leduc,
Councillor Beverly Beckett
Infrastructure & Planning Liaison On City Council
bbeckett@leduc.ca
From: Ken G. Brown, a concerned long term resident of Leduc County, next to Saunders Lake
Re: Saunders Lake Area –
2nd Public Hearing: Proposed Bylaw to Amend the Leduc County - City of Leduc Intermunicipal Development Plan, Bylaw No. 933-2016
Dear Cory Labrecque,
I used to think that one's current situation in life was as a sum total result of one's past upbringing, past environments, experiences and mistakes. So I thought that my past determined my present. Then I learned the concept that if I get a very clear picture of my desired future, it is easy then, to decide today what to do to more directly get to that desired future. I learned a better way to think about things: my desired future determines my present.
This concept relates perfectly to our current Planning & Development challenge: what we decide to do today is determined by our collective desired future.
Do we as a society want to pay close attention to the quality of our air, water and soil in order to survive far into the future? Do we want to have clean drinkable water free of toxins in our lakes and creeks and rivers forever? Do we want to be able to view the amazing night sky free of light pollution? Do we want wildlife to be able to live with us in harmony, able to roam as they choose and live in peace? Do we want to preserve special natural areas such as the Saunders Lake Valley as a shining example of the care we have taken in planning for our future?
Or do we want to plan our desired collective future to model unbridled industrial growth?
This except from my letter of July 16, 2016 (attached) regarding the proposed changes at Saunders Lake states as well as I am able:
" The proposed further significant industrial developments -so close to the Saunders Lake Valley, will certainly result in degradation of the quality of the air, water, and soil in the area, doing irreparable harm. To do so is in total opposition to the accepted vision statements in the many existing planning documents pertaining to the area, and is not in the best interests of our future as a community for future generations. Once the area's ecological vibrancy and its Naturalness is gone it cannot be brought back. It is gone forever. The areas we are concerned with would be far better set aside as a parkland reserve with recreational features, or with designated residential access to the valley, rather than to industrial development."
It is easy to see with any small amount of research, that there is no need for all the excessive amount of lighting or light pollution that is currently the norm.
From Aug 6, 2015 report: http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/new-research-streetlights-dont-actually-reduce-crime-or-accidents.html
"In Britain, three quarters of a million street lights have been turned off to save energy, money and maintenance. One would think that this would have affected car and pedestrian safety, as well as crime; however, Alissa Walker of Gizmodo points to a recent study that shows that it made very little difference, if any. Eric Betz of Astronomy.com (who has a vested interest in people turning out the lights) looks at research from University of London:
Researchers looked at 14 years of data from 63 local authorities across England and Wales, searching for trends among agencies that reduced their lighting….That research shows less than 1 percent of all nighttime traffic collisions occurred on streets where the lights had been switched off. And overall, the statistics showed no link between accidents and dimming, reducing, or changing the style of streetlights. Secondly, the researchers looked at lighting's effect on crime trends. In regions of reduced lighting, they found, there was no increase in burglary, auto theft, robbery, violence, or sexual assault."
My opinions of the proposed changes have not changed substantially since my letter of July 16, 2016, (attached).
Ken G. Brown, BScEE,
Local County resident
Lois Shute letter Re: Saunders Lake Area - Proposed Changes to the Future Land Use Direction
Colin Richards,
Leduc County Council,
City of Leduc Council
Re: Saunders Lake Area - Proposed Changes to the Future Land Use Direction:
Thank you for your serious reconsideration of your original proposal and your desire to listen to the stakeholders in this area. Thank you for giving us another opportunity to speak to this issue.
When I sit and look out over Saunders Lake, and read about the value of wetlands to the world, to the balance of nature and to our health and wellbeing, I am very aware of our need to preserve and restore the valuable resource that Saunders lake is for the future of our community.
I can recall mistakes made that have done some damage on this lake over the last 50 to 100 years.
A few examples would be:
- landowners clearing the trees from the hillsides,
- an attempt to drain the lake to make more agricultural land before 1964,
- garbage dumped at dead end roads (later cleaned up by county)
- draining the Leduc sewage into the Saunders Lake via Telford Lake/Telford Creek until early 90's,
- watering cattle directly from the lake until early 2000's,
- huge slabs of concrete dumped into the lake around 1980– still seen in drought years,
- building the landfill right above the lake in 1978.
Some of these errors in judgement have been rectified. Some are being managed reasonably. But this is not a time to add more stress to the wetland by putting industrial development still so close to the lake. Yes, you are putting precautions in place to protect the environment, but I believe this is not enough. Industrial areas tend to deteriorate, not improve with use over the long term. Think 50 years!
Residential development combines well with recreational use of land. I recall a proposal in Edmonton some years ago for the city to buy up houses to make a park in the river valley in Riverdale. It was found that hikers and nature lovers avoided areas where there were no residents, because of the possible danger of unsupervised trails. Where houses are nearby, people felt more comfortable walking. The proposal was abandoned and Riverdale never did become an abandoned park. It is a thriving community.
I would like to see the County actively promote residential development rather than just passively a The County could seek out a developer who would be interested in building environmentally sustainable, earth friendly houses for families back from a green zone along Saunders Lake. I know several families who would love to live out here and are actively looking for an opportunity.
We have not been actively seeking development in this area ourselves, but I believe the time is right. The revenue is needed and the wetland is being threatened. We need to do what is best. Industrial development is irreversible. Let's not give in to the big corporate developers offering us revenue but more interested in their own profit. Do what is best for the community if the future.
Sincerely
Lois Shute
Ralph Shute letter Re: Rezoning the area NW of Saunders Lake from residential to industrial
To Leduc County Council
Cc City of Leduc Council
Re: Rezoning the area NW of Saunders Lake from residential to industrial
Dear Community Leaders,
When making such rezoning decisions one must consider the longer term impacts. The area concerned should be preserved as residential for future housing development along the lake. It is a rare and wonderful opportunity for private residential living. Industrial development would not only prevent this opportunity but would allow access to the lakeshore by motorcycles, quads and snowmobiles which would eventually destroy the wildlife habitat.
Please do not be influenced by the present day economic gains and allow this lovely natural area to be ruined by industrial urbanization.
Yours truly
Ralph Shute
Vic Moran - Letter to the editor Leduc Representative - March 3, 2017
When researching the effects of having an industrial park next to Saunders Lake it became evident that the discharge of stormwater runoff into the Lake would be a problem for wildlife.
Articles on stormwater management commonly refer to a "flushing" action during a rain event, where roof runoff, joins with paved area runoff, gathering volume and speed, collecting pollutants and debris while heading towards an outfall into a river or lake.
The word "flushing" drew a visual image of a toilet bowl for me, with its impervious sides, carrying unwanted human waste, waiting to be efficiently transported to another location to be dealt with by others.
It just happens that the outfalls planned for the Northwest Saunders Lake Industrial Park are at a location where my wife and I observed flocks of North American Pelicans last year.
The shallow waters of Saunders Lake are ideal for many shore birds, but are vulnerable to any accumulation of concentrated pollutants and disturbance from stormwater outfalls. Why the stormwater outfall could not be located in the Blackmud Creek drainage ditch is beyond my understanding, it is after all, located at the north end of the development.
In the revised Northwest Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan dated Feb. 10, the consultant has included descriptions of bioswales and constructed wetlands that could be used in the development. These applications would be a huge step forward from grass ditches and storm retention ponds, as they allow downward infiltration, increased exposure to natural UV light, temperature moderation and with slower movement - increased transpiration and filtering.
Typically storm retention ponds drain down over 24 hours, although best practices recommend a minimum of 48 hours and grassed ditches are graded to expedite the movement of stormwater, usually with a clay base.
The focus of good stormwater management is to reduce runoff in the first place, at source. This can be accomplished by simple measures such as roof rainwater storage in cisterns for later use in onsite irrigation, increasing drainage below landscaped and grassed areas, and by dense tree planting in water pooling areas.
The rainwater absorption rate in a forested area is 67 times faster than hardened grassed areas, not only is evapotranspiration increased, but the shaded forest floor does not bake to a solid crust in the sun and becomes home to burrowing and tunneling wildlife.
The Province of Alberta makes it clear in their publications that they encourage the reduction of stormwater at source, and have even funded research to prove that these solutions provide cost savings for tax payers.
Is it up to our elected officials to mandate these requirements or are we to rely on the social conscience of the developer?
Vic Moran
Leduc County, AB