Re: NORTHWEST SAUNDERS LAKE
AREA STRUCTURE PLAN
A bylaw is a law, and as such is a community rule recognized as prescribing or prohibiting certain actions. The actions prescribed in the Northwest Saunders Lake Area Structure plan need to be precise, reasonable and unambiguous – this is simply good law.
All legislation should reflect the The proposed Northwest Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan falls short of meeting any environmental expectations, especially since Saunders Lake is acknowledged in the ASP as a Regionally Environmentally Sensitive Area.
How can I say this with such certainty, you might ask?
Well, I imagine a poll being conducted by the Leduc Rep, in which the question is:
· Should the County of Leduc's elected officials exercise their option to increase the width of the proposed Natural Area / Open Space around Saunders Lake, at no additional cost to the tax payer?
The response would be a clear and resounding yes. Or, how about this question:
· Should the County of Leduc's elected officials pass legislation to reduce the toxicity and volume of stormwater entering the fragile habit of the American White Pelican on Saunders Lake, again at no additional cost to the tax payer?
Or even:
· Should the developer be required to install a rewilded nature trail through the Natural Area running parallel with Saunders Lake as part of the development?
Since the answer to these questions is obviously yes, the short comings of this document need to be addressed.
Leduc County has the opportunity to increase the width of the natural area by applying the 10% Municipal Reserve that is available under the Municipal Government Act. In the proposed Area Structure Plan Stantec states that the County of Leduc will take cash in lieu of the land: you can refer to the last sentence of 1.3.1., also, the end of the first paragraph in Section 5.0 and the fine print at the bottom of table 1 in Section 5. In fairness to Stantec, they do contradict themselves by saying in 5.1.11. that the decision to take cash in lieu of land lies with the County. They then go on and complete the ASP as if taking the cash was a fait accompli. To put the area of this Municipal Reserve in context, the 10% would increase the Natural Area / Open Space by over 50%, and would cover the land currently referred to as the Saunders Lake Transition.
The east side of the proposed roadway would be a convenient edge to a rewilded natural area.
Since there is contradiction regarding this matter, we are not sure that if the County approves this document, are they approving Stantec's assumption that they will take the cash or reaffirming that they are yet to make a decision in this matter?
The County could also request a treed and landscaped berm at the east edge of the development, as is allowed for in the Leduc County, Land Use Bylaw 6.5.11.
It is worth noting that the proposed Natural Area / Open Space is made up of "steep slopes" as stated by Stantec in the middle of the third paragraph of Section 5.1. This would make neither an ideal or safe place for a walking trail. The Natural Area / Open Space needs to be expanded west to accommodate a walking trail or multi-way.
In Section 2.5 the Inter-municipal Development Plan is referenced as a statutory document - that the "Area Structure Plan has been prepared in accordance with". There is, however, no execution of Inter-municipal Development Plan Item 4.6.2.5. , which states that "the conceptual networks, locations and alignments of trails within the IDP area shall be included in future Area Structure Plans". Confusion is compounded when we look at the last sentence in the first paragraph of Section 5.1 Natural Area / Open Space where it states, "The Inter-municipal Development Plan also identifies regional trail connections between Saunders Lake and Telford Lake recreational areas, of which trails within this plan area will form a part". So, the ASP recognizes the IDP, and even quotes from the IDP, but fails to put in the ASP what is required by the IDP – namely a walking trail. Why is that? This proposed ASP is deficient.
Item 4.2 of the North Saunders Lake Servicing Report states that "discharge into Saunders Lake is not to exceed pre-development flow rates". This statement is consistent with the Alberta Governments, Water Act, Stormwater Management guidelines. It is interesting to note that under ASP Section 3.3 Natural Features, "Intermittent overland flow of stormwater enters Saunders Lake from within the plan area, but forms no permanent watercourses". This means that the normal pre-development flow rate is zero and consequentially the discharge rate into Saunders Lake is not to exceed zero, or at least until such a time as cultivated agricultural land would be saturated. How does this work for the stormwater that is being diverted from the west side of the Nisku spine road? Stormwater that would never have found its way to Saunders Lake.
In Section 5.3.3 apparently the "lands with Saunders Lake Transition designation" will be held to a higher level of wishful thinking than the remainder of the development, as these lands are "encouraged" to use "Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Strategies". Notwithstanding the logical determination that a zero flow rate of stormwater can enter Saunders Lake, the reduction of stormwater at source needs to be a legislated requirement for this entire stormwater system, including the stormwater generated from the City of Leduc's North Industrial development.
Section 7.2 states that "the ultimate, (meaning last, final, beyond which no other exists or is possible), receiving body for stormwater from the plan area is Saunders Lake". This can be taken as an admission that wishful thinking has no place in an ASP and that no stormwater is expected to be diverted. The opening paragraph goes on to say that "the majority of the plan area naturally drains towards the lake", this is somewhat misleading. Although the ground slopes towards the lake, the majority of rainwater that currently falls on the plan area evaporates followed by a similar percentage of vertical seepage into the ground. From the information that I have researched the amount of all rainfall that will enter Saunders Lake will likely go from approximately 25% to 90%, and the quality will drastically diminish. This is the difference between rain falling on porous farmland and falling on developed hard surfaces such as asphalt, concrete and metal roofs. For this development the increased amount of stormwater is in the order of hundreds of millions of gallons a year. It is possible to absorb rainfall throughout the development using the aforementioned "Low Impact Development Stormwater Strategies", which are also known as "Source Control Practices" and commonly deployed in LEED certified projects, which coincidentally are also "encouraged" in Section 5.3.3., but not noted as required.
In Section 5.1 it is stated that the intention of the Natural Area / Open Space is to "conserve wildlife habitat and movement corridors" and yet within this area they intend to build two boat launches. Boating is contrary to conserving wildlife habitat on the lake, as it scares adult birds off of the nest and leaves their eggs available for predators, it can also stress waterfowl, for example a pelican chick cannot fly until 10 weeks of age and live in groups called crèches from 3 to 10 weeks of age making them extremely vulnerable to predation.
It is clear that the threat to wildlife on Saunders Lake is real and accordingly we request that the County of Leduc require that an Environmental Impact Assessment report be completed and submitted as part of this ASP. The completion of this report is an option that exists under item 9.2.8 of the Leduc County Land Use Bylaw, which is specifically written to address environmentally sensitive areas. This information is necessary for the elected officials of Leduc County to make an informed decision regarding the approval of an ASP and to negate the possibility of unintended consequences.
In summary this Area Structure Plan is not ready for approval until the contradictions are resolved, the requirements of the IDP are met and the County of Leduc's elected officials have had the opportunity to reflect on the legacy they will leaving for following generations. We understand that the City of Leduc is quite challenged in completing a trail around Telford Lake, do not saddle our children with the same burden by duplicating this challenge. Now is the time to act with definitive and actionable legislation.
Saunders Lake
October 31, 2016
Vic Moran-Notes re: presentation at Public Hearing on Proposed Bylaw-Proposed Northwest Saunders Lake ASP, Oct. 25, 2016
BY-LAW NO. 933-2016
My objection with this by-law is not so much with what it says, but rather with what it does not say. The City and County do not need a by-law to say that they will follow the law and meet minimum standards.
This is truly not an inspiring or It is neither decisive nor defining. It exists to ensure that the City's North Leduc Industrial development can proceed and the stormwater from this development will be received by the County and dumped into Saunders Lake.
First a couple of housekeeping items, as gibberish devalues the entire process:
1. Section 4.6.2.12 – "Owners of lands with existing tree stands will be encouraged to retain them to the extent possible at the time of the development". If you Google "tree stands" you end up on Cabelas website where you can purchase the equipment to hide up in a tree and take pot-shots at wildlife. I'm pretty sure that the author intended to say "stands of trees", similarly a coppice, copse or grove.
2. Section 5.3.2. – Since the former area C is now area B, and the remaining area C is on the west end of the City of Leduc this is redundant. Like saying that the Civic Centre is in the City of Leduc. This section should be deleted.
3. Section 5.8.1 - Policy area C is no longer adjacent to areas G or J and so this section is redundant and should be deleted.
If one understands that a by-law is a law made by local government that applies only to a local area, then one can appreciate that a law has to be actionable and contain words such as "shall" and "must". Words such as "encouraged", and undefined phrases such as "sustainable future" and "protect and enhance" could be viewed as contrived negligence. Specifically:
Section 4.6.2.12 says that owners in the Saunders Lake vicinity will be encouraged to retain existing trees and plant additional trees. This begs the questions, how will they be encouraged? What will success look like? If one tree is planted is it a success? If only one original tree remains is this a success? This type of initiative needs to be measurable in both time and quantity or it is simply meaningless.
Section 4.8.1 talks of the integration of growth management, land use planning, and municipal services to move toward a more sustainable future. This all sounds very positive, but what is being sustained? Is it industry, employment, the status quo, the profitability of development? Future sustainability is generally linked with positive environmental action and green projects, but there is no evidence in the by-law of any action of this type that would support use of this "motherhood" phrase.
Section 5.2.7 concerns recreational connectivity between Saunders Lake and Telford Lake. This should have been the defining moment for collaboration between the City and County, to create a benefit for future generations and yet there is essentially an agreement to do nothing. It starts out promising enough, "The City and County shall jointly examine feasible solutions for increasing recreational connectivity", and it even talks about interconnected trails, but concludes with deference to the ASP that will follow. Since we now have the ASP for Saunders Lake - one must ask when will this joint examination take place? After approval of this by-law and before consideration of the Saunders Lake ASP, that follows this meeting? The Saunders Lake ASP has no indication of a walking trail, (future or otherwise), to connect to a link between the two lakes. Again, this is an agreement between the City and County to do nothing. Everyone here should be aware that a wildlife corridor exists between Telford Lake and Saunders Lake. This natural occurrence is both observable and documented, and yet this by-law does nothing to recognise and acknowledge this fact, or put in place mechanisms to preserve and maintain this corridor. In short this by-law needs a commitment to maintain the corridor and build a trail between the two lakes – Area I needs to be contiguous between the lakes and not interrupted by area J at the east end of Telford Lake. It would also be visionary to acknowledge that Telford Lake is used for recreational boating and therefore not ideal wildlife habitat, increasing the need to preserve the wildlife habitat on Saunders Lake. We do not need boat launches in nesting areas, as suggested in the Saunders Lake ASP.
Section 5.10.4. Talks about protecting and enhancing natural features within open spaces and greenways. Saunders Lake is specifically named, and one wonders as to how do you protect and enhance Saunders Lake? Is it by dumping millions of gallons a year of saline and chemically laden stormwater from the North Leduc Industrial Park, the Saunders Lake Industrial Park and the Nisku Spine Road through two outfalls, directly into the area of the lake where American White Pelican congregate and nest? Sadly the preservation of existing wildlife is not covered in this by-law; this omission needs to be corrected. A visionary by-law would require that stormwater volume be reduced at each individual business location by incorporating source control practices, such as required by progressive municipalities. You can reference work done by Sustainable Technologies for the City of Toronto and requirements from the City of Calgary's Water Resources. Requirements and reduction percentages for source control practices need to be legislated at this level, they will not voluntarily be required at the ASP level, or be incorporated in subsequent planning and design stages. Source control practices include:
1. Absorbent landscaping
2. Vegetated swales
3. Bioretention areas
4. Rainwater harvesting
5. Porous pavement
6. Soakaways
7. Infiltration trenches
8. Dry swales
The Area Structure Plan for Saunders Lake goes as far as saying that the use of "Low Impact Development Stormwater Management strategies" is encouraged. Again encouragement does not belong in law; people do not pay their taxes because they are encouraged to do so. They pay their taxes because there are consequences for not doing so. Interestingly, the City of Leduc's Industrial ASPs for Leduc Energy Park and Cathton-Farm Air do not even set the lofty goal of encouraging the reduction of stormwater, even though they were written by the same consultant and the Public Hearing is not until November 7th, 2016. It is also worth noting that the North Leduc Industrial ASP dated March 2001 stated on page 4-4 that, "Storm drainage will generally be accommodated with the use of swale ditches" and further on page 4-9 that "Individual property owners will be required to provide some level of on-site stormwater management to minimize the downstream storage requirements. Given the nature and uses of most commercial / industrial sites, onsite storage should not be difficult to incorporate into the site designs." Is it possible that while the rest of the world is moving towards environmental protection, that the City of Leduc is moving backwards?
In summary, if this by-law is solely for the cooperation between the City and County to expedite development then this is an opportunity lost for the citizens of Leduc, since those developments will directly limit the possible opportunities for the enjoyment of nature in and around the lake district of Leduc. Our elected officials need to set the bar higher, while imaging the consequences of inaction. The people of Leduc want an interconnected walking trail around both lakes; they want ecotourism and a connection to nature. It is not that long ago that a Mayor of Leduc wanted to drain Telford Lake, what a mistake that would have been; I am encouraged that some reasoned opposition prevented this from happening.
My objection with this by-law is not so much with what it says, but rather with what it does not say. The City and County do not need a by-law to say that they will follow the law and meet minimum standards.
This is truly not an inspiring or It is neither decisive nor defining. It exists to ensure that the City's North Leduc Industrial development can proceed and the stormwater from this development will be received by the County and dumped into Saunders Lake.
First a couple of housekeeping items, as gibberish devalues the entire process:
1. Section 4.6.2.12 – "Owners of lands with existing tree stands will be encouraged to retain them to the extent possible at the time of the development". If you Google "tree stands" you end up on Cabelas website where you can purchase the equipment to hide up in a tree and take pot-shots at wildlife. I'm pretty sure that the author intended to say "stands of trees", similarly a coppice, copse or grove.
2. Section 5.3.2. – Since the former area C is now area B, and the remaining area C is on the west end of the City of Leduc this is redundant. Like saying that the Civic Centre is in the City of Leduc. This section should be deleted.
3. Section 5.8.1 - Policy area C is no longer adjacent to areas G or J and so this section is redundant and should be deleted.
If one understands that a by-law is a law made by local government that applies only to a local area, then one can appreciate that a law has to be actionable and contain words such as "shall" and "must". Words such as "encouraged", and undefined phrases such as "sustainable future" and "protect and enhance" could be viewed as contrived negligence. Specifically:
Section 4.6.2.12 says that owners in the Saunders Lake vicinity will be encouraged to retain existing trees and plant additional trees. This begs the questions, how will they be encouraged? What will success look like? If one tree is planted is it a success? If only one original tree remains is this a success? This type of initiative needs to be measurable in both time and quantity or it is simply meaningless.
Section 4.8.1 talks of the integration of growth management, land use planning, and municipal services to move toward a more sustainable future. This all sounds very positive, but what is being sustained? Is it industry, employment, the status quo, the profitability of development? Future sustainability is generally linked with positive environmental action and green projects, but there is no evidence in the by-law of any action of this type that would support use of this "motherhood" phrase.
Section 5.2.7 concerns recreational connectivity between Saunders Lake and Telford Lake. This should have been the defining moment for collaboration between the City and County, to create a benefit for future generations and yet there is essentially an agreement to do nothing. It starts out promising enough, "The City and County shall jointly examine feasible solutions for increasing recreational connectivity", and it even talks about interconnected trails, but concludes with deference to the ASP that will follow. Since we now have the ASP for Saunders Lake - one must ask when will this joint examination take place? After approval of this by-law and before consideration of the Saunders Lake ASP, that follows this meeting? The Saunders Lake ASP has no indication of a walking trail, (future or otherwise), to connect to a link between the two lakes. Again, this is an agreement between the City and County to do nothing. Everyone here should be aware that a wildlife corridor exists between Telford Lake and Saunders Lake. This natural occurrence is both observable and documented, and yet this by-law does nothing to recognise and acknowledge this fact, or put in place mechanisms to preserve and maintain this corridor. In short this by-law needs a commitment to maintain the corridor and build a trail between the two lakes – Area I needs to be contiguous between the lakes and not interrupted by area J at the east end of Telford Lake. It would also be visionary to acknowledge that Telford Lake is used for recreational boating and therefore not ideal wildlife habitat, increasing the need to preserve the wildlife habitat on Saunders Lake. We do not need boat launches in nesting areas, as suggested in the Saunders Lake ASP.
Section 5.10.4. Talks about protecting and enhancing natural features within open spaces and greenways. Saunders Lake is specifically named, and one wonders as to how do you protect and enhance Saunders Lake? Is it by dumping millions of gallons a year of saline and chemically laden stormwater from the North Leduc Industrial Park, the Saunders Lake Industrial Park and the Nisku Spine Road through two outfalls, directly into the area of the lake where American White Pelican congregate and nest? Sadly the preservation of existing wildlife is not covered in this by-law; this omission needs to be corrected. A visionary by-law would require that stormwater volume be reduced at each individual business location by incorporating source control practices, such as required by progressive municipalities. You can reference work done by Sustainable Technologies for the City of Toronto and requirements from the City of Calgary's Water Resources. Requirements and reduction percentages for source control practices need to be legislated at this level, they will not voluntarily be required at the ASP level, or be incorporated in subsequent planning and design stages. Source control practices include:
1. Absorbent landscaping
2. Vegetated swales
3. Bioretention areas
4. Rainwater harvesting
5. Porous pavement
6. Soakaways
7. Infiltration trenches
8. Dry swales
The Area Structure Plan for Saunders Lake goes as far as saying that the use of "Low Impact Development Stormwater Management strategies" is encouraged. Again encouragement does not belong in law; people do not pay their taxes because they are encouraged to do so. They pay their taxes because there are consequences for not doing so. Interestingly, the City of Leduc's Industrial ASPs for Leduc Energy Park and Cathton-Farm Air do not even set the lofty goal of encouraging the reduction of stormwater, even though they were written by the same consultant and the Public Hearing is not until November 7th, 2016. It is also worth noting that the North Leduc Industrial ASP dated March 2001 stated on page 4-4 that, "Storm drainage will generally be accommodated with the use of swale ditches" and further on page 4-9 that "Individual property owners will be required to provide some level of on-site stormwater management to minimize the downstream storage requirements. Given the nature and uses of most commercial / industrial sites, onsite storage should not be difficult to incorporate into the site designs." Is it possible that while the rest of the world is moving towards environmental protection, that the City of Leduc is moving backwards?
In summary, if this by-law is solely for the cooperation between the City and County to expedite development then this is an opportunity lost for the citizens of Leduc, since those developments will directly limit the possible opportunities for the enjoyment of nature in and around the lake district of Leduc. Our elected officials need to set the bar higher, while imaging the consequences of inaction. The people of Leduc want an interconnected walking trail around both lakes; they want ecotourism and a connection to nature. It is not that long ago that a Mayor of Leduc wanted to drain Telford Lake, what a mistake that would have been; I am encouraged that some reasoned opposition prevented this from happening.
Environmental Studies done in the Saunders Lake Area
Over recent years, several good Environmental Studies have been done regarding the Saunders Lake Area.
1. Leduc County with EDA did an extensive study in 2008 on the Saunders Lake area and its' biodiversity, named:
Parks and Open Space Concept Plan, Saunders Lake, Leduc County, Prepared by EDA Collaborative Inc.
2. Ducks Unlimited did A Wildlife Habitat Report for Sunnyvale Farms October, 2007. Natural Advantage: The on-farm wildlife and biodiversity Planning Service, Ducks Unlimited Canada, Natural Advantage Office, Red Deer AB 403 342 1314
3. May, 2004, The Leduc and District Regional Waste Management Authority did an extensive study in preparation for their End Use Conservation Plan in 2007. They studied the wildlife corridor and listed all the area species, mammals, birds, trees and shrubs, grasses and grass like, and forbs.
Titled: May 2004 End Use Plan for the Waste Management Facility approved by Leduc and District Regional Waste Management Authority Resolution #6504 "From Refuse to Refuge".
4. The Alberta Fish and Game Association, Parkland Stewardship Program in 2006 did a Natural Resource Inventory at the Shute Family Farm,
Titled: Natural Resource Inventory 2006 Shute Family Farm.
Edmonton 780 437 2342.
1. Leduc County with EDA did an extensive study in 2008 on the Saunders Lake area and its' biodiversity, named:
Parks and Open Space Concept Plan, Saunders Lake, Leduc County, Prepared by EDA Collaborative Inc.
2. Ducks Unlimited did A Wildlife Habitat Report for Sunnyvale Farms October, 2007. Natural Advantage: The on-farm wildlife and biodiversity Planning Service, Ducks Unlimited Canada, Natural Advantage Office, Red Deer AB 403 342 1314
3. May, 2004, The Leduc and District Regional Waste Management Authority did an extensive study in preparation for their End Use Conservation Plan in 2007. They studied the wildlife corridor and listed all the area species, mammals, birds, trees and shrubs, grasses and grass like, and forbs.
Titled: May 2004 End Use Plan for the Waste Management Facility approved by Leduc and District Regional Waste Management Authority Resolution #6504 "From Refuse to Refuge".
4. The Alberta Fish and Game Association, Parkland Stewardship Program in 2006 did a Natural Resource Inventory at the Shute Family Farm,
Titled: Natural Resource Inventory 2006 Shute Family Farm.
Edmonton 780 437 2342.
Lois Shute's presentation at Public Hearing on Proposed Bylaw-Proposed Northwest Saunders Lake ASP, Oct. 25, 2016
The following was presented by Lois Shute at the Public Hearing on Proposed Bylaw-Proposed Northwest Saunders Lake ASP, Oct. 25, 2016
---
Honorable mayors Whaley and Krischke, Leduc County Councillors, City of Leduc Aldermen.
Thank you for responding to our concerns for Saunders Lake, notably the widening of the green zone.
The more I read about wetlands and riparian areas, the more convinced I am that we need to make every effort to respect our environment, specifically Saunders Lake. We need to do our part for the health of the world, the wildlife within this area and the people who are here. Whether people are aware of it or not, there is a bond between humans, animals and the environment. In God's plan for creation we are all interdependent. What strengthens one, strengthens us all.
This fall as we watched the pelicans leave, the cranes go by on their way south and the swans arrive for their annual visit for a few weeks and the little native birds stop by, we know this lake is important to them and to us. Being in nature enhances our health and well being and even our productivity.
Light pollution makes it impossible to watch the stars, disconnecting us with the universe. I can pull the blinds to sleep when the industrial lights shine into my home from 4 miles away. But what about the animals who live around the lake? Where will they find darkness to sleep or for some, to hunt and to discern direction from the stars?
I realize that much effort is being made by Stantec in their We also know that mechanical things can malfunction at times. What natural filters could be put in place to protect the lake from these inadvertent spills? I've been reading about ALUS (Alternative Land Use Services) ALUS partners with county councils landowners and community groups to help with riparian protection and habitat for wildlife and native pollinators among other things. Parkland County is one of the Alberta Counties who are part of this group. They have planted an "eco-buffer" with help from the Agroforestry Woodlot and Extension Society to include native species of trees shrubs and forbs to provide pollinator and wildlife habitat, shelter for livestock, nutrition recycling and groundwater recharge. The various rooting depths pick up nutrient runoff. Lots of synergies happen in this kind of biodiverse community. I would love to see this right around Saunders Lake. The south east side of the lake still has a natural eco buffer. Other areas around the lake have been cleared of trees and need some restoration. Why can't we as a community begin this process. Perhaps the County could make this a requirement for the developers to complete before the fields are stripped of topsoil and weeds take over the vast clay areas. Mr. Manning representing the developer commented that unfortunately this is part of the process of development. But this carelessness, clay washing down the hills, weed seeds contaminating the countryside for a year, maybe 2 o3 years, is disgustingly unacceptable around Saunders Lake. For a reasonable time, an eco-buffer could help filter out the runoff even as the drainage system and roadways are being built.
Does industrial development along Saunders Lake affect us? Probably not. We have lived beside the lake for 42 years. We may be gone by the time it happens, but we care. We care about our own grandchildren and their children. We care about the 2000 Leduc kids who came to Sunnyvale Camp from 1991-2011. They gloried in this unforgettably beautiful part of God's creation. – even the grungy shore line and those leeches on the bottom of the canoes. We care about your grandchildren too, the waterfowl on the lake – the common ducks and geese, gulls, terns and herons. We care about the rare birds we have seen only once - the Avocets, the Parasitic Jager, and the Black Crowned Night Herons. We care about the Eagles, Hawks, Pelicans and Tundra Swans, the coyotes, foxes, beaver, mink, muskrats, deer and moose that frequent the Lake.
Telford Lake has been cleaned up at great expense after years of abuse. Oldtimers told us 50 years ago about the grain elevator burning down and all the debris being dumped on the ice on Telford Lake, essentially killing the lake.
We appreciate the integrity of our county councillors and realize that you have a lot of things to balance with the threat of the land grab by the Edmonton city. And we appreciate your stated priority to preserve the environment across the county. The way wetlands are being destroyed across Canada and the world, we need to be vigilant and do what we can. We need to set the standards high to guide future representatives.
Let's restore and protect Saunders Lake while there is still an opportunity. Lets not let economics trump the environment. Let's not let finances dull our wisdom and steal this treasure.
---
Honorable mayors Whaley and Krischke, Leduc County Councillors, City of Leduc Aldermen.
Thank you for responding to our concerns for Saunders Lake, notably the widening of the green zone.
The more I read about wetlands and riparian areas, the more convinced I am that we need to make every effort to respect our environment, specifically Saunders Lake. We need to do our part for the health of the world, the wildlife within this area and the people who are here. Whether people are aware of it or not, there is a bond between humans, animals and the environment. In God's plan for creation we are all interdependent. What strengthens one, strengthens us all.
This fall as we watched the pelicans leave, the cranes go by on their way south and the swans arrive for their annual visit for a few weeks and the little native birds stop by, we know this lake is important to them and to us. Being in nature enhances our health and well being and even our productivity.
Light pollution makes it impossible to watch the stars, disconnecting us with the universe. I can pull the blinds to sleep when the industrial lights shine into my home from 4 miles away. But what about the animals who live around the lake? Where will they find darkness to sleep or for some, to hunt and to discern direction from the stars?
I realize that much effort is being made by Stantec in their We also know that mechanical things can malfunction at times. What natural filters could be put in place to protect the lake from these inadvertent spills? I've been reading about ALUS (Alternative Land Use Services) ALUS partners with county councils landowners and community groups to help with riparian protection and habitat for wildlife and native pollinators among other things. Parkland County is one of the Alberta Counties who are part of this group. They have planted an "eco-buffer" with help from the Agroforestry Woodlot and Extension Society to include native species of trees shrubs and forbs to provide pollinator and wildlife habitat, shelter for livestock, nutrition recycling and groundwater recharge. The various rooting depths pick up nutrient runoff. Lots of synergies happen in this kind of biodiverse community. I would love to see this right around Saunders Lake. The south east side of the lake still has a natural eco buffer. Other areas around the lake have been cleared of trees and need some restoration. Why can't we as a community begin this process. Perhaps the County could make this a requirement for the developers to complete before the fields are stripped of topsoil and weeds take over the vast clay areas. Mr. Manning representing the developer commented that unfortunately this is part of the process of development. But this carelessness, clay washing down the hills, weed seeds contaminating the countryside for a year, maybe 2 o3 years, is disgustingly unacceptable around Saunders Lake. For a reasonable time, an eco-buffer could help filter out the runoff even as the drainage system and roadways are being built.
Does industrial development along Saunders Lake affect us? Probably not. We have lived beside the lake for 42 years. We may be gone by the time it happens, but we care. We care about our own grandchildren and their children. We care about the 2000 Leduc kids who came to Sunnyvale Camp from 1991-2011. They gloried in this unforgettably beautiful part of God's creation. – even the grungy shore line and those leeches on the bottom of the canoes. We care about your grandchildren too, the waterfowl on the lake – the common ducks and geese, gulls, terns and herons. We care about the rare birds we have seen only once - the Avocets, the Parasitic Jager, and the Black Crowned Night Herons. We care about the Eagles, Hawks, Pelicans and Tundra Swans, the coyotes, foxes, beaver, mink, muskrats, deer and moose that frequent the Lake.
Telford Lake has been cleaned up at great expense after years of abuse. Oldtimers told us 50 years ago about the grain elevator burning down and all the debris being dumped on the ice on Telford Lake, essentially killing the lake.
We appreciate the integrity of our county councillors and realize that you have a lot of things to balance with the threat of the land grab by the Edmonton city. And we appreciate your stated priority to preserve the environment across the county. The way wetlands are being destroyed across Canada and the world, we need to be vigilant and do what we can. We need to set the standards high to guide future representatives.
Let's restore and protect Saunders Lake while there is still an opportunity. Lets not let economics trump the environment. Let's not let finances dull our wisdom and steal this treasure.
August 30, 2016
Fwd: Comment Saunders Lake Area Plan
From: Janette McDonald <...>
Subject: Comment Saunders Lake Area Plan
Date: August 30, 2016 at 11:04:10 PDT
To: Colin Richards <Colin@leduc-county.com>
Colin,
Please find attached my comments. I have cc'd 25 other people who have an interest in this process.
The vote in The Rep was very powerful! 79% of people oppose these proposed changes!
I care about the future of this community and would be happy to contribute in a real stakeholder engagement process.
Janette McDonald
780-862-9850
August 24, 2016
August 23, 2016
Small Amount of Rain Results in Full Culvert Aug 23, 2016
The runoff in the ditch along west side of RR 245 going north of TWP RD 500 at the lane for 50014A-RR 245, is much greater now for a given amount of rain than in years gone by. This is most likely largely due to industrial developments west of RR 250 and south of TWP RD 500, i.e. to the east of MixCor's shop.
August 19, 2016
Leduc Representative POLL Comment
Cathy Nixon • 11 hours ago
Why, why, why !?, does every piece of land that supports many types of wildlife have to be destroyed in order to make room.. the economy sucks at the moment. By the time humans are through with this planet there will be nothing left, no farm land, no animals, and no natural resources.. then what? kind of hard to eat money.
Why, why, why !?, does every piece of land that supports many types of wildlife have to be destroyed in order to make room.. the economy sucks at the moment. By the time humans are through with this planet there will be nothing left, no farm land, no animals, and no natural resources.. then what? kind of hard to eat money.
POLL
The city and county of Leduc are proposing a large industrial area directly west of Saunders Lake. What do you think?
Thursday, August 18, 2016
http://www.leducrep.com/polls/271111
August 03, 2016
Vern Breton Letter
Saunders Lake Suggestions 7/2016
A health impediment prevents me from attending the open house planned for Aug.3rd, so I've taken the liberty of making an attempt to express in writing, my personal hopes for Saunders Lake to offer long term enjoyment of citizens for many years to come.
The first 10 year plan includes building up the earthen dam on the northern end of Saunders Lake to increase the depth of the lake by a further minimum of 10 feet. A new concrete spillway would be required to accommodate fish traffic & runoff. This would also require building up highway 623 similarly & adding a short bridge to allow boat traffic to pass without having to drop sail masts.
Reasonable compensation to landowners loosing land to the expanded area of the lake would have to be addressed. (10 year cropping value + typical developer price per acre?) An area 1 to two kilometers minimum from high water line of the enlarged lake should be reserved as parkland with agricultural land within this area allowed continuous use only for agricultural purposes until eventually turned over to parkland.
The importance of water to the city of Leduc and the County will increase in years to come---climate change, decreased snow melt in the Rockies, etc., and the increased holding capacity of Saunders Lake will serve to improve the water reservoir capacity of the region.
Attempts to commercialize the parkland area should be vehemently rejected. No franchises ever allowed!
Road access to the park should be limited to no more than two locations, both gated to entry where entry fees may be collected for automotive vehicles, camping or boat trailers, & motorized boats & RV's. Entry of pedestrians should remain to be free. Equestrian traffic may face an entry fee one-half of the fee for motorized devices. Fees for use of motorized 'recreational' devices in the park could be based upon displacement or horsepower and rated to discourage safety hazards, pollution and noise potentials.
($25. entrance for a 50 hp outboard??)
Two low maintenance park buildings would allow for County administration purposes & indoor warmup & picnicking accommodation plus public washrooms. (Ski lodge similarity). Additional buildings may be allowed to store & maintain park equipment. Solar powered heat pumps utilizing lake water should adequately provide needed heat for the facilities. Electricity, water & sewage hookup will be necessary at entrance areas.
The park's potential would include many opportunities for the betterment of society, & hopefully result in reducing expenditures on policing, courtroom activities, detox facilities, detention facilities, vandalism, healthcare costs – obesity, lack of fitness, unaffordable recreational facility costs, etc.
A non-inclusive listing of some of the potential benefits the expanded & improved Saunders Lake park could offer, might include the following:
Wildlife preserve. Recreational fishing Boating
Canoeing Scuba diving Sailing
Swimming Sandy beach Ice sailing
Skating Cross Country Skiing Skidoo trails
RV trails Nature trails Equestrian trails
Overnight camping Day picnic areas Bicycle trails
Downhill ski & toboggan runs Competitive/featured events Reforestation
Ecological enlightenment Environment Awareness courses School tours
Persons attending or participating in park activities should be entitled to free entry. Motorized vehicles/boats/rv's, trailers & horses should be required to pay a daily entry charge.
In order to control county bureaucratic costs, activities of county employees should be restricted to handling fee collections & development/maintenance activities, & approving schedules of planned volunteer run events to minimize adverse effects on others. There should be no need for any county expenditures on promotions, advertisements or hired consultants.
The loss of more agricultural productive land to residential or industrial use needs to be severely curbed. It's hoped that County counsellors will have the foresight to realize they've already overstepped the awards given developers who seem to ignore service toward societal benefits. Lots & lots of room for building up! What's the potential lifespan of planners, administrators, consultants & developers fed on a diet of fresh 100 dollar bills garnished with toonies?
For what its worth.
Vern Bretin 780 986 1067
July 27, 2016
July 19, 2016
Ken Brown Letter
July 19, 2016
To: Colin Richards
Senior Planner
Leduc County
County Centre
Suite 101,1101 5th Street,
Nisku, Ab
T9E 2X3
colin@leduc-county.com
Cc: 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 – Proposed Changes to the Future Land Use Concept
File ASP1601-01 Dated June 21, 2016
Dear Mr. Richards,
This letter is written to express my concerns about the proposed significant changes detailed in the document: Saunders Lake Area – Proposed Changes to the Future Land Use Concept File ASP1601-01 Dated June 21, 2016.
I live on the family farm within the County areas being considered, approximately 1 km from the western shore of Saunders Lake, at the NW corner of Twp Rd 500 and Range Road 245. My family has owned the land since 1934.
When I was a child growing up in the early 1950's, within a kilometer of Saunders Lake, I thought nothing of drinking water from the creeks, and swimming in the lake. I have always thought that someday my grandchildren could enjoy the natural environment the way I did. Now this is all becoming increasingly in question, and already I would not dare drink the flowing water. How bad is that? What are we as a society doing to the places we live in? When I was young, the roadsides in the Saunders Lake area were all lined with Wild Roses, Saskatoon bushes and other wonders. Where have all the wild roses gone? Does this important link to a vibrant ecosystem concern our community planners at all?
As we all know, our desired future determines what we do today, i.e. a clearly visualized future determines our present. I am very concerned that the proposed changes to the Area Structure Plan for Saunders Lake appear to be rushed through before adequate consideration and consultation with the general public has taken place. Only some of the affected landowners were notified about the changes and not enough time has been given to thoroughly consider the implications, particularly since it is summer holiday time when many people are away. What is the hurry? And why throw out the current young, duly considered and approved, area structure plan? The generally accepted term is "follow the money". We must ask, 'who stands to gain and at what cost to our community?' Questions and issues surrounding this type of major industrial encroachment and degradation of environmentally sensitive areas is of concern to more than just the landowners and must not be rushed. The area is of great value to not only the County landowners but to all of the citizens of Leduc, an urban center that is so near to the areas affected by the proposed changes. The population of the City of Leduc has just recently exceeded 30,000. How many of these members of the community know about the jewel that is the Saunders Lake Area, this vibrant ecosystem that is within a kilometer of Leduc's eastern boundary? How many citizens know what they stand to lose as a result of these proposed changes? The new plan and the timeline for its consideration and approval do not give our citizenry enough information and time to consider the significant implications of moving forward in this way.
To my way of thinking, Nature is the highest form of development, and the more that mankind does to the land, the lower the resulting quality of the results. For example, I would rank developments something like this - highest quality to lowest: highest is unspoiled Nature, then parkland, agricultural, residential, light industrial, heavier industrial, resource extraction, and finally, community dump. It makes very little sense to consume all the acres right next to the highest form of development (Nature), with the lowest forms (heavy industrial and dump). We all must pay attention to the quality or the air, water and soil. This is the foundation of all life. When industrial development comes, the first thing that is done to the land is to violently strip all remnants of Nature from it, then add back paved roads, gravel yards and concrete parking lots, then buildings. We already have the travesty of the area dump located right next to the once pristine Natural area that contains Saunders Lake. Many local politicians agree that this should never have been allowed, and it should never be allowed to expand. Similarly, the lower forms of development I describe cannot be allowed to further encroach from the west.
I grew up here as did my children, and now my grandchildren come to live and play in this place. What is done today affects all our future generations. I am wondering: What will be left here for our grandchildren? Are our current planners throwing away the Natural beauty and highest form of development for short term gain? What legacy do we wish as a community to pass on to future generations? Will it be an industrial wasteland or will it be clean natural areas, to be enjoyed by all of the community.
The Saunders Lake Area needs to be considered as a whole, and not split into smaller pieces in order to divide and conquer. The existing Saunders lake Area Structure Plan is far better than the newly proposed changes. The existing approved plan keeps a buffer zone between heavy industrial developments, while phasing in better forms of usage as developments come closer to the lake. The greenbelt next to the lake should be expanded not decimated. This area is a major wildlife corridor.
We need to take care to protect our precious environment. A Google search provides a definition of environmental protection: "it is a practice of protecting the natural environment on individual, organizational or governmental levels, for the benefit of both the natural environment and humans. Due to the pressures of population and technology, the biophysical environment is being degraded, sometimes permanently. "
The City of Leduc Municipal Development Plan states in part:
"VISION — BUILDING A COMMUNITY OF INTEGRITY, UNITY AND STRENGTH
In 2035, Leduc will be a vibrant community where growth is balanced and sustainable
• where a strong business community is fostered
• where residents enjoy active healthy lifestyles with a strong sense of belonging
• where our natural environment is healthy and clean
• and where our local government is responsive and accountable."
The Leduc County Municipal Development Plan, MDP states in part:
" PART TWO: PLANNING GOALS
The following planning goals are the ideals that Leduc County will strive for:
1. Preservation and enhancement of the agricultural community.
2. Population growth in desirable locations.
3. Rural and alternative life style choices.
4. A compatible and harmonious land development pattern.
5. Strong and sustained economic growth and tax base.
6. Efficient and economic provision of municipal services and facilities.
7. Protection of significant environmental areas and prevention of land, water, air, noise and visual pollution.
8. Mutually beneficial relationships with neighboring municipalities and other authorities. "
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.
Here are some recommendations that could help the County of Leduc become a national and world leader in responsible development:
1. Keep the existing Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan substantially and widen the greenbelt around Saunders Lake as much as possible to a minimum of 1 km if not more.
2. Keep the estate residential buffer zone between industrial developments and the greenbelt around the lake but add a high berm along all industrial boundaries.
3. Put into place stringent light pollution restrictions.
4. Ensure that no contaminating runoff will ever reach the lake.
5. Include the dump and its operations as part of the structure plan. Clarify and inform everyone that this is the case so that its effects are not whitewashed, hidden and ignored. It is well known that it is impossible for dump membranes to completely stop leakage of toxic fluids into the surrounding geology. Consider carefully: How is this affecting our well water nearby?
6. Close the dump as previously promised in the original plans and restore the area to its natural state to the extent possible. The current location, next to our precious lake is no place for a dump.
Given more time, many more suggestions are sure to arise from the collective intelligence of our community. We need that time. And we need the input of all of our citizens.
Let us go forward in a way we can be proud of in the future.
Ken G. Brown, BScEE,
Local County resident
kbrown@me.com
To: Colin Richards
Senior Planner
Leduc County
County Centre
Suite 101,1101 5th Street,
Nisku, Ab
T9E 2X3
colin@leduc-county.com
Cc: 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 – Proposed Changes to the Future Land Use Concept
File ASP1601-01 Dated June 21, 2016
Dear Mr. Richards,
This letter is written to express my concerns about the proposed significant changes detailed in the document: Saunders Lake Area – Proposed Changes to the Future Land Use Concept File ASP1601-01 Dated June 21, 2016.
I live on the family farm within the County areas being considered, approximately 1 km from the western shore of Saunders Lake, at the NW corner of Twp Rd 500 and Range Road 245. My family has owned the land since 1934.
When I was a child growing up in the early 1950's, within a kilometer of Saunders Lake, I thought nothing of drinking water from the creeks, and swimming in the lake. I have always thought that someday my grandchildren could enjoy the natural environment the way I did. Now this is all becoming increasingly in question, and already I would not dare drink the flowing water. How bad is that? What are we as a society doing to the places we live in? When I was young, the roadsides in the Saunders Lake area were all lined with Wild Roses, Saskatoon bushes and other wonders. Where have all the wild roses gone? Does this important link to a vibrant ecosystem concern our community planners at all?
As we all know, our desired future determines what we do today, i.e. a clearly visualized future determines our present. I am very concerned that the proposed changes to the Area Structure Plan for Saunders Lake appear to be rushed through before adequate consideration and consultation with the general public has taken place. Only some of the affected landowners were notified about the changes and not enough time has been given to thoroughly consider the implications, particularly since it is summer holiday time when many people are away. What is the hurry? And why throw out the current young, duly considered and approved, area structure plan? The generally accepted term is "follow the money". We must ask, 'who stands to gain and at what cost to our community?' Questions and issues surrounding this type of major industrial encroachment and degradation of environmentally sensitive areas is of concern to more than just the landowners and must not be rushed. The area is of great value to not only the County landowners but to all of the citizens of Leduc, an urban center that is so near to the areas affected by the proposed changes. The population of the City of Leduc has just recently exceeded 30,000. How many of these members of the community know about the jewel that is the Saunders Lake Area, this vibrant ecosystem that is within a kilometer of Leduc's eastern boundary? How many citizens know what they stand to lose as a result of these proposed changes? The new plan and the timeline for its consideration and approval do not give our citizenry enough information and time to consider the significant implications of moving forward in this way.
To my way of thinking, Nature is the highest form of development, and the more that mankind does to the land, the lower the resulting quality of the results. For example, I would rank developments something like this - highest quality to lowest: highest is unspoiled Nature, then parkland, agricultural, residential, light industrial, heavier industrial, resource extraction, and finally, community dump. It makes very little sense to consume all the acres right next to the highest form of development (Nature), with the lowest forms (heavy industrial and dump). We all must pay attention to the quality or the air, water and soil. This is the foundation of all life. When industrial development comes, the first thing that is done to the land is to violently strip all remnants of Nature from it, then add back paved roads, gravel yards and concrete parking lots, then buildings. We already have the travesty of the area dump located right next to the once pristine Natural area that contains Saunders Lake. Many local politicians agree that this should never have been allowed, and it should never be allowed to expand. Similarly, the lower forms of development I describe cannot be allowed to further encroach from the west.
I grew up here as did my children, and now my grandchildren come to live and play in this place. What is done today affects all our future generations. I am wondering: What will be left here for our grandchildren? Are our current planners throwing away the Natural beauty and highest form of development for short term gain? What legacy do we wish as a community to pass on to future generations? Will it be an industrial wasteland or will it be clean natural areas, to be enjoyed by all of the community.
The Saunders Lake Area needs to be considered as a whole, and not split into smaller pieces in order to divide and conquer. The existing Saunders lake Area Structure Plan is far better than the newly proposed changes. The existing approved plan keeps a buffer zone between heavy industrial developments, while phasing in better forms of usage as developments come closer to the lake. The greenbelt next to the lake should be expanded not decimated. This area is a major wildlife corridor.
We need to take care to protect our precious environment. A Google search provides a definition of environmental protection: "it is a practice of protecting the natural environment on individual, organizational or governmental levels, for the benefit of both the natural environment and humans. Due to the pressures of population and technology, the biophysical environment is being degraded, sometimes permanently. "
The City of Leduc Municipal Development Plan states in part:
"VISION — BUILDING A COMMUNITY OF INTEGRITY, UNITY AND STRENGTH
In 2035, Leduc will be a vibrant community where growth is balanced and sustainable
• where a strong business community is fostered
• where residents enjoy active healthy lifestyles with a strong sense of belonging
• where our natural environment is healthy and clean
• and where our local government is responsive and accountable."
The Leduc County Municipal Development Plan, MDP states in part:
" PART TWO: PLANNING GOALS
The following planning goals are the ideals that Leduc County will strive for:
1. Preservation and enhancement of the agricultural community.
2. Population growth in desirable locations.
3. Rural and alternative life style choices.
4. A compatible and harmonious land development pattern.
5. Strong and sustained economic growth and tax base.
6. Efficient and economic provision of municipal services and facilities.
7. Protection of significant environmental areas and prevention of land, water, air, noise and visual pollution.
8. Mutually beneficial relationships with neighboring municipalities and other authorities. "
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.
Here are some recommendations that could help the County of Leduc become a national and world leader in responsible development:
1. Keep the existing Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan substantially and widen the greenbelt around Saunders Lake as much as possible to a minimum of 1 km if not more.
2. Keep the estate residential buffer zone between industrial developments and the greenbelt around the lake but add a high berm along all industrial boundaries.
3. Put into place stringent light pollution restrictions.
4. Ensure that no contaminating runoff will ever reach the lake.
5. Include the dump and its operations as part of the structure plan. Clarify and inform everyone that this is the case so that its effects are not whitewashed, hidden and ignored. It is well known that it is impossible for dump membranes to completely stop leakage of toxic fluids into the surrounding geology. Consider carefully: How is this affecting our well water nearby?
6. Close the dump as previously promised in the original plans and restore the area to its natural state to the extent possible. The current location, next to our precious lake is no place for a dump.
Given more time, many more suggestions are sure to arise from the collective intelligence of our community. We need that time. And we need the input of all of our citizens.
Let us go forward in a way we can be proud of in the future.
Ken G. Brown, BScEE,
Local County resident
kbrown@me.com
County and City Contacts
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
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
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/AdministrationLeduc 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
July 18, 2016
Lee Chrystal Letter
Date: July 16, 2016 at 09:17:33 MDT
To: <colin@leduc-county.com>
I do not approve of or recommend any change in the existing area structure plan for the lands around Saunders Lake.
Any changes to these few natural areas left in the lakes proximity should be initiated only after intense scrutiny by all concerned
Citizens. I feel the public of the county are not aware of your intentions for this development and I am moving forward to ensure
to the best of my ability that they be notified of this squandering of lands based on a Private Developers wishes.
The existing area plan may one day need to change in the best interest of the county and Leduc City and at that time I would hope the
county has the foresight to recognize the need for other types of revenue-generating developments that would insure safer buffer zones
for the preservation of the lands and species that occupy them.
Furthermore your suggestion to change this structure plan is in direct contradiction to the vision statement of the county in every aspect
except revenue generation.
Please act accordingly.
Lee Chrystal
MARSH SPECIALTY HVAC
Box 5061
Leduc, Alberta T9E 6L5
Cell: 780-975-6801
July 17, 2016
Rex Adam Letter
Saunders Lake Area- Proposed Changes to the future Land Use Concept
Regards
Rex Adam
rexadam@shaw.ca
780 493-0552
---
Rex Adam
201 Hillcrest Court
Sherwood Park, Ab
T8A 5V5
Colin Richards
Senior Planner
Leduc County
County Centre
Suite 101,1101 5th Street
Nisku, Ab
T9E 2X3
Re: Saunders Lake Area - Proposed Changes to future Land Use Concept
Dear Colin:
Thank you for your letter informing me of proposals to radically alter planning documents in the Saunders lake area.
As a landowner in the area and as a former county councillor who was involved in planning for the area that reflected the concerns of the residents and the long term protection of a very significant regional asset, I am disturbed to see long range plans and certainty for the area being reconsidered in collaboration with the City of Leduc.
The 2003 Terms of Reference for the Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan clearly set forth "the ASP is to be a long-range plan with a 20 year planning horizon.." Predominantly residential use was chosen in recognition of the scenic character and unique environment of the area and to facilitate its protection and enjoyment by others. There was strong buy in to the concept from residents and the City of Leduc recognized County aspirations for the area in part for the trade offs the County made in return to City aspirations. The City and the County further reaffirmed the plans for the area to 2044 in the Inter-municipal Development Plan approved by the City on November 2011 and the County on January 24, 2012.
Proposed industrial uses are not compatible with preservation of this regionally significant feature. Already light pollution from the (temporary?) module yard near the north end of the lake has degraded the natural amenity significantly and further industrial encroachment beyond the proposed buffer lands towards the lake would be very detrimental.
Reasons put forward for changes are not credible. The plan was to be suitable for 20 years initially and the foreseeable future to 2044 just four years ago. Accordingly, it is hardly out of date. Once ongoing industrial /commercial development settles down and more certainty solidifies in the residential market still suffering from the great recession of 2008 and more recent collapse of oil prices, estate residential view properties are sure to be of greater interest.
The Aerotropolis study illegitimately targeted approved residential lands in the county. A larger area at the northside of the airport would be equally suitable. The county has no shortage of potential industrial lands but Saunders Lake is one of the very few significant regional lake features in the capital region and certainly this close to Edmonton. I suggest that either the County or the consultant were negligent in including residential lands in that scheme.
The proposed electrical substation is also no reason to suggest residential is less feasible. It is to be located in the transition area at the northwest corner already impacted by the module yard.
Furthermore because one developer comes along and proposes a new smaller land area that high grades one small portion of the ASP for development seems the worst reason to toss out the approved joint vision for the Lake area. Rather than a new long-term vision, I suggest someone has largely just dusted off the Nisku Area Structure Plan prepared by Stewart Weir in 1981 and long since discredited and replaced by other planning initiatives.
It seems to me that any commitment to collaborate on facilitating amendments to overturn the existing approved land uses is vastly premature and inappropriate. Likewise trashing plans to allow additional residential on the east side of the lake also seems rash and inconsiderate. The long term plans have already been factored into considerations of land value and changes would be a major imposition on current residents and recent purchasers.
I believe that the county should reconsider any action in this regard.
Sincerely,
Rex Adam
July 11, 2016 at 16:34:33 MDT
Attached please find my reply to the Leduc County letter concerning proposed changes to the Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan, the Leduc County Municipal Development Plan and the City of Leduc/ Leduc County Intermunicipal Development Plan. I believe the radical changes proposed would be very detrimental to the residents of the Saunders Lake ASP and the scenic amenity and environment of this important regional feature with no corresponding upside. The county has plenty of potential industrial lands but few lands with this scenic amenity and proximity to services this close to Edmonton or Leduc.
Regards
Rex Adam
rexadam@shaw.ca
780 493-0552
---
Rex Adam
201 Hillcrest Court
Sherwood Park, Ab
T8A 5V5
Colin Richards
Senior Planner
Leduc County
County Centre
Suite 101,1101 5th Street
Nisku, Ab
T9E 2X3
Re: Saunders Lake Area - Proposed Changes to future Land Use Concept
Dear Colin:
Thank you for your letter informing me of proposals to radically alter planning documents in the Saunders lake area.
As a landowner in the area and as a former county councillor who was involved in planning for the area that reflected the concerns of the residents and the long term protection of a very significant regional asset, I am disturbed to see long range plans and certainty for the area being reconsidered in collaboration with the City of Leduc.
The 2003 Terms of Reference for the Saunders Lake Area Structure Plan clearly set forth "the ASP is to be a long-range plan with a 20 year planning horizon.." Predominantly residential use was chosen in recognition of the scenic character and unique environment of the area and to facilitate its protection and enjoyment by others. There was strong buy in to the concept from residents and the City of Leduc recognized County aspirations for the area in part for the trade offs the County made in return to City aspirations. The City and the County further reaffirmed the plans for the area to 2044 in the Inter-municipal Development Plan approved by the City on November 2011 and the County on January 24, 2012.
Proposed industrial uses are not compatible with preservation of this regionally significant feature. Already light pollution from the (temporary?) module yard near the north end of the lake has degraded the natural amenity significantly and further industrial encroachment beyond the proposed buffer lands towards the lake would be very detrimental.
Reasons put forward for changes are not credible. The plan was to be suitable for 20 years initially and the foreseeable future to 2044 just four years ago. Accordingly, it is hardly out of date. Once ongoing industrial /commercial development settles down and more certainty solidifies in the residential market still suffering from the great recession of 2008 and more recent collapse of oil prices, estate residential view properties are sure to be of greater interest.
The Aerotropolis study illegitimately targeted approved residential lands in the county. A larger area at the northside of the airport would be equally suitable. The county has no shortage of potential industrial lands but Saunders Lake is one of the very few significant regional lake features in the capital region and certainly this close to Edmonton. I suggest that either the County or the consultant were negligent in including residential lands in that scheme.
The proposed electrical substation is also no reason to suggest residential is less feasible. It is to be located in the transition area at the northwest corner already impacted by the module yard.
Furthermore because one developer comes along and proposes a new smaller land area that high grades one small portion of the ASP for development seems the worst reason to toss out the approved joint vision for the Lake area. Rather than a new long-term vision, I suggest someone has largely just dusted off the Nisku Area Structure Plan prepared by Stewart Weir in 1981 and long since discredited and replaced by other planning initiatives.
It seems to me that any commitment to collaborate on facilitating amendments to overturn the existing approved land uses is vastly premature and inappropriate. Likewise trashing plans to allow additional residential on the east side of the lake also seems rash and inconsiderate. The long term plans have already been factored into considerations of land value and changes would be a major imposition on current residents and recent purchasers.
I believe that the county should reconsider any action in this regard.
Sincerely,
Rex Adam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)