Public Hearing Summary and Response to Questions
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Sylvan Lake Intermunicipal Development Plan: Public Hearing Summary and Response to Questions Following the joint public hearing hosted by all eight municipalities, the Steering Committee committed to reviewing all feedback prior to submitting the plan for 3rd reading by each of the respective municipalities. The Steering Committee reviewed all comments, questions and clarifications when determining whether to make revisions to the plan. It is noted that some comments and questions were not directly relevant to the plan’s scope, but were reviewed as part of the process. The summary includes: • Overview of the public hearing participation and public engagement • Outlined comments on concerns/questions raised by agencies and the public with responses from the project team for the questions • Appendices including the written submissions in their entirety, and verbatim documentation of verbal submissions. The public hearing was held on Nov. 21, 2020 from 1:30 – 3:30pm. In accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Government Act, notice of the joint public hearing was published in the following local newspapers: • Lacombe County News October 16, 2020 • Red Deer County News November 3, 2020 • Sylvan Lake News November 5 and November 12, 2020 Notice of the public hearing had been sent to surrounding landowners, sent to agencies to invite their comments, and was posted on the Partnering Municipalities websites. The project website (www.sylvanlakeidp.com) posted information about the public hearing and was visited by 662 unique visitors from Oct. 1 – Nov. 21, 2020 with 209 of these visitors occurring during the week prior to the public hearing. Notice was also circulated on social media (Facebook/Twitter). Public hearing attendance included: • Councillors of the eight municipalities • ~15 members of the public who attended in person • 20 members of the public who attended online • administration • project staff Theming of comments was not useful because of the diverse perspectives and comments provided. Comments are summarized for the Steering Committee’s review with copies of the original written submissions and verbatim documentation of verbal submissions. Page 1 of 15 Agency Submissions: The public agency responses provide significant detail (Appendix A). The main points of concern have been included in this summary. Please review the full submission for complete details. Agency Comment Alberta Health Services Recommendation for a minimum setback distance for Confined Feeding Operations Alberta Health Services Recommendation for lithology for Town of Sylvan Lake municipal drinking water wells and regional hydrogeology be considered when evaluating development in proximity. Alberta Health Services AHS supports the requirement for all new or replaced septic systems on lots <1 acre or where there are >60 lots within a 600m radius, to connect to the regional waste water line as it becomes available. AHS supports connection to existing Alberta Environment & Parks approved drinking water and wastewater systems. Recommendation for Section 8.2.12 that it must comply with Public Health Act Nuisance and General Sanitation Regulations AR 243/2003, Section 15. Alberta Health Services Recommendation for mapping of current/historical industrial land uses, municipal drinking water wells and communal sewage systems in the plan area. And to enable compliance with the point above. Recommendation for consideration of brownfield sites in future development and through mapping. Known former landfill at SW-21- 39-01 W5M. Alberta Transportation No objections. If approval is considered, please be advised of our comments: Alberta Transportation Referral requests and consideration of AT requirements for statutory plans; trail planning; stormwater management re: drainage; and Transportation Master Plan. Alberta Transportation Recommendation to consider a Joint Off-site Levy for the transportation network Alberta Transportation Policy 8.2.21: AT is unable to take land for highways improvements at subdivision. They are identified at the ASP referral level to be confirmed at subdivision referral stage, and enforced at DP stage. Continued referrals at each stage is appreciated. Page 2 of 15 Public Written Submissions: The public written responses provide significant detail (Appendix B). Please review the full submission for complete details. The main points of concern and/or questions have been included in this summary without personal attribution. Responses from the project team are only provided to questions. All comments will be considered by the Steering Committee in their review. Comment Project Team Response to Questions Recommendations to defer most if not all capital Noted for Steering Committee consideration spending until the Alberta economy recovers; reduce property tax assessments and use zero base budgeting. Concerns with the Sunbreaker Cove wastewater Noted for Steering Committee consideration municipal gathering system with expectations for the Summer Village of Sunbreaker Cove (SBC) specifically. Defer all capital spending commitments to WWS municipal gathering system, schedule a “specific WWS authorization vote” of all 271 Sunbreaker Cove lot owners asap. Request that a copy of this letter be uploaded to Our SBC Website as your earliest convenience, or a copy be distributed with your next mailing to all Sunbreaker Cove property owners. Concerns about Lacombe County’s development Noted for Steering Committee consideration standards and decisions including approving development that allowed the removal of many trees; requiring Sunbreaker Cove to contribute to the sewage disposal line around the north end of the lake to service Lacombe County developments and requirements; if Lacombe County had any environmental concerns for Sylva Lake, they would not have approved the trailer/RV park. Concern with the existing public boat launch that Noted for Steering Committee consideration it concentrates pollution in a small area and safety for water egress. No adequate public access public boat launches. Recommend that Lacombe County ensure several other public access boat launches are developed as soon as possible on the north and west end of the lake to relieve the current SBC environmental and dangerous boat congestion. Recommend Town of Sylvan Lake also commit to ensuring adequate public access boat launch facilities are developed at the south end. Who, in fact, does manage the waterbody itself? There is both provincial and federal jurisdiction for the waterbody. Who will be responsible for monitoring the The waterbody is provincial and federal condition of the lake, and for remedying adverse jurisdiction and therefore out of the scope of events should they occur? What actions would be Page 3 of 15 Comment Project Team Response to Questions taken if the water quality is affected, and if the the municipalities to comment on how lake bottom, substrata, wildlife within the lake, monitoring and action will be undertaken. and shoreline is damaged or altered? Shoreline modification is controlled by Alberta Environment and Parks. Past the shoreline and on private property, municipalities have control through development regulations such as environmental assessments, and setbacks. Where the lands are public (municipality ownership), municipal/environmental reserve regulations apply. Each municipality is therefore responsible for enforcing these regulations. P. 17 – “The feedback demonstrated a strong The Intermunicipal Development Plan is a interest in protecting the environment and plan for the land surrounding Sylvan Lake, watershed…” With regard to this quote – and the and that land is part of the watershed. The declaration above that the SLIDP is not a plan for Intermunicipal Development Plan the waterbody of Sylvan Lake itself – how will the development standards policies such as environment and watershed be protected, as environmental assessments, environmentally strongly requested by the survey respondents? significant areas, environmental reserve and development setbacks, stormwater management, water and wastewater servicing provide consistent standards across the plan area that will result in mitigating negative development impacts to the waterbody. It is recognized that the lake is not in the Intermunicipal Development Plan’s scope, but impacts on the land affect the waterbody. Concern that a regional trail would not be Trail details such as alignment, location and possible in some areas, and the negative maintenance would be determined through environmental impact of a trail erosion, habitat, the regional trail plan. privacy. Questions about who would be responsible for maintenance. Concern about the Blindman River and Medicine Noted for Steering Committee consideration River being referenced related to the Sylvan Lake watershed. Wastewater line – will it have the capacity to The initial stages of the wastewater line build support more dwellings and sewer line capacity? out have been designed to accept the anticipated development around the lake. However, it became apparent early on that trying to operate oversized sewage transmission lines is very problematic and costly. Page 4 of 15 Comment Project Team Response to Questions The designers utilized population projections to a 25 year build out. Increased capacity in the wastewater line will need to be added when development hits the 25 year built out capacity. Concern about the amount of residential land The new residential land uses, when they uses. Will they require paving, street lights,