City council is recommending several changes to the city's major planning document before it gets a final stamp of approval after hearing concerns from an environmental group and local developers.
A new foundational document for St. Albert is raising concerns for the Big Lake Environmental Support Society (BLESS) and the Urban Development Institute (UDI).
On Monday, city council heard a presentation from administration on the latest draft of the Municipal Development Plan (MDP) Flourish before second and third reading.
Katie Mahoney, senior long-range planner with the city, said the plan identifies how and where the city wants to grow as the population expands to 100,000 residents. The project to update the existing document has been in development since 2018 and the document must be updated by June 1 to comply with the Edmonton region's growth plan.
"It will provide certainty and clarity for other city departments, developers and citizens about future land uses in the city and development decisions. Flourish also prepares us for numerous drivers of change and these drivers of change ... a few of these would include climate change and an aging population," Mahoney said.
The draft MDP plan launched last November for public feedback, along with a webinar and short questionnaire on the final stage of the project. To date, the city has received 17,000 responses on the plan with four rounds of public engagement.
However, during the public hearing, both BLESS and the UDI Edmonton chapter raised several concerns about the current draft.
Tony Druett, BLESS director, said the city's draft MDP has a sensitive environmental area classified as employment lands rather than natural space. The lands, located just south of Meadowview Drive next to Big Lake, are "one of the most important and sensitive natural areas" in St. Albert, according to the organization.
The plan also contradicts the city's 2018 Red Willow Park West (RWPW) Master Plan, which envisioned the area as a park destination "to enable nature seekers to experience the beauty of the natural area at a respectful distance from wildlife and wildlife habitat," BLESS's letter to council reads.
"It's a major area where birds migrate through the fall and in the spring. The RWPW plan was particularly designed to keep that as an undisturbed area," Druett said. The strip of land is also home to old growth spruce and deciduous trees.
BLESS is also requesting a change in designation of a 90-acre parcel of land near Lois Hole Centennial Provincial Park from employment area to open space to reflect the province's intent, Druett said.
"It's right next to Big Lake, and it was purchased by the province in 2014, specifically so that it could be included in the Lois Hole Park. We were really surprised to see that that still shows up as potential industrial lands."
If those two designations are changed, Druett said a third 60-acre parcel located north of 137th Avenue and Ray Gibbon Drive should be considered for residential development rather than industrial. That land is still owned by the farmers who have occupied it for many years, he said.
Coun. Jacquie Hansen said she wanted assurances before approving the MDP that the RWPW lands would be protected as an environmental area. Mahoney said there is a provision within the MDP that states any area structure plans to further the development of Lakeview Business District must ensure it would not have adverse effect on Big Lake or Carrot Creek.
"I do understand what you're saying ... but we had this organization, who does a lot of great work conserving our natural areas, pick up on this because that's the way they read it," Hansen said. "We need to be prepared to help people understand that while this is an overarching plan, this doesn't mean these places that we pinpointed as protected to a certain extent, that they're going to be building high-rises and employment centres."
Susan Keating, vice-president at Melcor Developments, spoke on behalf of UDI Edmonton. While Keating commended the city for the document and for incorporating other changes, the group of local developers submitted a letter to council requesting several additional amendments prior to the meeting. Many of them were around language changes.
"It may seem silly to adamantly want to see words like 'encourage' instead of 'ensure' as often as possible, but we just can't predict the needs of future residents or future businesses, and we need the document to be as nimble and adaptable as possible," Keating explained. For example, the plan says developments should provide sidewalks on both sides of the road, but developers worry engineering standards like this are too specific for a high-level document like the MDP.
Coun. Wes Brodhead asked what the impact of softening the language in the MDP would be. Kristina Peter, municipal planning specialist, said the 'ensures' and 'requires' in the plan's language are "pretty significant for us to achieve the goals of the plan."
Coun. Sheena Hughes said she could understand UDI's difficulty with the language as words like 'ensure' and 'require' don't leave room for flexibility. She pointed to one requirement of street networks to be designed with "high interconnectivity" with small block sizes.
"There's no flexibility for crescents or anything larger because we have this requirement in there," Hughes said.
The public hearing on the MDP was adjourned with councillors Hughes, Watkins and Hansen putting forth amendments to the MDP. The Gazette did not receive copies of the amendments from the city before press time.
The amendments are expected to come back to council for debate on April 19.
