Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. Devon Municipal Office - Council Chambers 1 Columbia Avenue West, Devon, Alberta
1. Call to Order
2. Agenda Approval
3. Scheduled Public Hearing
4. Delegation/Presentations 4.1. Scheduled Delegation 4.2. Unscheduled Delegations
5. Adoption of Minutes 5.1. Organizational Council Meeting – October 28, 2019 5.2. Regular Council Meeting – October 28, 2019 5.3. Special Council Meeting – November 4, 2019 5.4. Business Arising from Minutes
6. Old Business 6.1. RCMP Update 6.2. Bylaw 933-2019 MDP Amendment 6.3. Photo Enforcement Contract 6.4. Clean Energy Improvement Tax Bylaw Public Hearing
7. Disposition of Delegations
8. New Business 8.1. AUMA Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments 8.2. Amendment to Land Use Bylaw # 937/2019 - Ravines South, R1A &R 4 districts and Home Occupations on Jasper Court West
9. Correspondence Requiring a Decision
Page 1 of 2 1 9.1. Request for Support for the Inter-Provincial Nomination for the Designation of the North Saskatchewan River for the Canadian Heritage River System
10. Other Correspondence 10.1. High-speed Broadband Designate
11. Reports 11.1. Council Reports 11.2. Mayor and Council Calendar 11.3. Council Information Distribution List 11.4. Department Monthly Reports 11.4.1. Planning and Operations 11.4.2. Community Services 11.4.3. Corporate Services 11.4.4. Legislative and Protective Services
12. Information Requests
13. Notice of Motions
14. Confidential Matters
Page 2 of 2 2
Organizational Council Meeting Minutes October 28, 2019 – Council Chambers
Council Attendance Mayor Ray Ralph Councillor Stacey May (Absent) Councillor, Chris Fish Deputy Mayor Councillor Blake Adams Councillor Juston Porter Councillor Tanya Hugh Councillor Sandy Koroll
Administration Attendance Tony Kulbisky Chief Administrative Officer Melanie Crothers Executive Assistant, Legislative and Protective Services Alvin Allim General Manager of Corporate Services Paresh Dhariya General Manager of Planning and Operations Justin Janke Communication Coordinator, Legislative and Protective Services
1. Call to Order – 7:00 p.m.
2. Council Seating Arrangements
301/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Hugh Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves the procedure of having the Deputy Mayor seated to the left of the Mayor and the outgoing Deputy Mayor exchanging seats with the incoming Deputy Mayor. That Council approves Councilor Adams will be seated to the first seat right of the Mayor. That Council approves Councillor Fish will be seated in the second seat to the right of the Mayor. That Council approves Councillor Hugh will be seated in the third seat to the right of the Mayor. That Council approves Deputy Mayor Koroll will be seated in the first seat to the left of the Mayor. That Council approves Councillor Porter will be seated to the second seat left of the Mayor. That Council approves Councillor May will be seated to the third seat left of the Mayor.
3. Establishment of Date and Time of Council Meetings
302/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Koroll Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll 1. That Regular Council Meetings be scheduled for the second and fourth Mondays of each month, with the following exceptions: no council meetings will be scheduled for
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon – Organizational Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4
3 December 23, 2019, July 27, 2020 and August 31, 2020; the first meeting in April will occur on Tuesday, April 14, 2020 to observe Easter Monday, and the first meeting in October will occur on Tuesday, October 13, 2020 to observe Thanksgiving Monday.
2. That the Committee of the Whole meetings will be scheduled for 7 pm the first Thursday, of each month, as required.
3. That the 2020 Organizational Meeting be scheduled for October 26, 2020 at 7:00 p.m.
4. That a Special Council Meeting to discuss the 2021 budget be scheduled for 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Friday, November 20, 2020 and Saturday, November 21, 2020.
5. That the location of the Regular Council Meetings, Organizational Meeting and the Special Council Meetings regarding the 2021 budget be in the Council Chambers at the Devon Municipal Office located at 1 Columbia Avenue West.
6. That the scheduled time for the Regular Council Meetings to commence be 7:00 p.m. with the exception of October 26, 2020 when the regular meeting shall commence upon completion of the Organizational Meeting.
4. Appointment of Mayor and Councillors to Boards 303/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Hugh Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council appoints Councillor PORTER to the Devon Public Library Board and Councillor MAY as an alternate for a one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor MAY and Councillor ADAMS to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor PORTER, Councillor HUGH and Councillor FISH to the Municipal Planning Commission – Committee of Council, and Mayor RALPH as alternate, effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor KOROLL, Councillor ADAMS and Mayor RALPH to the Inter- municipal Development Plan - Committee of Council, for one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor KOROLL to the River Valley Alliance, and Councillor FISH as an alternate for a one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon – Organizational Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4
4 That Council appoints Mayor RALPH to the Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Board, and Deputy Mayor as an alternate for a one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Mayor RALPH to the Regional Transit Commission Services, and Councillor Hugh as an alternate for a one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor HUGH to the Edmonton Region Waste Advisory Committee, and Councillor PORTER as an alternate for one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor ADAMS to the Devon and District Chamber of Commerce, and Councillor PORTER as an alternate for a one for one year terms effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor KOROLL to the Edmonton International Airport Noise Advisory Committee and Councillor ADAMS as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor HUGH to the Leduc District Waste Management Committee, and Councillor PORTER as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor FISH to the Leduc Regional Housing Foundation and Councillor ADAMS as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor KOROLL to the North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance and Councillor MAY as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor MAY to the Yellowhead Regional Library and Councillor PORTER as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor MAY to the Devon Historical Society and Councillor HUGH as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon – Organizational Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4
5 That Council appoints Councillor MAY to the Capital Region Assessment Services Commission and Councillor KOROLL as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor ADAMS to the Federation of Gas Co-Ops and Councillor MAY as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
That Council appoints Councillor FISH to the Single Use Task Force and Councillor PORTER as an alternate for a one year term effective October 28, 2019 to October 26, 2020.
5. Community Events 304/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Koroll Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council accepts the Community Events – 2020 Dates as information.
6.1 FCM Conference Council Appointments
305/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Koroll Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council appoints Mayor RALPH, and Councillor FISH, as the Town of Devon Council Representative(s) to attend the 2020 FCM Annual Conference and Trade Show in Toronto taking place June 4 – 7, 2020.
10. Adjournment 306/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m.
Mayor Ray Ralph Chief Administrative Officer Tony Kulbisky
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon – Organizational Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4
6 Council Meeting Minutes October 28, 2019 – Council Chambers
Council Attendance Mayor Ray Ralph Councillor Blake Adams Councillor, Chris Fish Deputy Mayor Councillor Stacey May (Absent) Councillor Juston Porter Councillor Tanya Hugh Councillor Sandy Koroll
Administration Attendance Tony Kulbisky Chief Administrative Officer Melanie Crothers Executive Assistant, Legislative and Protective Services Alvin Allim General Manager of Corporate Services Paresh Dhariya General Manager of Planning and Operations Justin Janke Communications Coordinator, Legislative and Protective Services Marilyn McMartin Planning and Development Officer, Planning and Operations Ki Wilson FCSS Coordinator, Community Services, Planning and Operations Joseana Lara Municipal Planning Intern, Planning & Operations Sean Goin Manager of Infrastructure, Planning & Operations Kristin Walsh Manager of Parks, Recreation, and Culture, Planning & Operations
1. Call to Order – 7:22 p.m.
2. Agenda Approval 307/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Hugh Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves the agenda as presented.
308/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Koroll Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves a recess to go into the Public Hearing at 7:24 p.m.
3. Scheduled Public Hearing
AGENDA FOR PUBLIC HEARING MDP BYLAW 933/2019
OCTOBER 28TH, 2019 AT 7:00 P.M. OR SHORTLY THEREAFTER IN THE TOWN OF DEVON MUNICIPAL OFFICE - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 7
7
1. Call to Order at 7:24 p.m. 2. Purpose and Effect of Amending Bylaw 933/2019 - to allow for amendments made to Bylaw 890/2017 Municipal Development Plan (MDP) as a required by the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board to ensure that the Town’s MDP is in alignment with the Growth Plan – Joseana Lara, Municipal Planning Intern 3. Reading of written presentations received – Secretary 4. Those to speak in favor of the Bylaw 933/2019 5. Those to speak against the Bylaw 933/2019 6. Public comments if requested by Chairman 7. Adjournment
309/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council adjourn the Public Hearing. The meeting adjourned at 7:29 p.m.
310/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Porter Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor May Councillor Hugh Councillor Porter Councillor Koroll That Council approves returning to the regular Council meeting.
4. Delegations and Presentations 4.1 Scheduled Delegations 4.2 Unscheduled Delegations
5. Adoption of Minutes
5.1 October 15, 2019 Council Meeting Minutes
311/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Hugh Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor May Councillor Hugh Councillor Porter Councillor Koroll That Council approves the October 15, 2019 Council Meeting Minutes as amended with Councillor Hugh’s information request 12.1 be amended with the Miquelon St. replaced with Maligne Dr. and Justin Janke removed from Administration attendance.
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 7
8 5.2 Business Arising from Minutes T. Kulbisky advised that the photo radar contract brought up at the last Council meeting concludes January 2020 and that the Devon RCMP will be in attendance in November to review photo radar zones. The Request For Decision in November will bring options forward for Council’s consideration.
6. Old Business 6.1 Deputy Mayor Appointment Mayor Ray Ralph 312/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Hugh Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council appoints Councillor Sandy Koroll as Deputy Mayor for the Town of Devon for the period of November 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020 and that Mayor Ray Ralph administers the Oath of Office to appoint Councillor Sandy Koroll accordingly.
6.2 Community Bussing Program Options Briefing Ki Wilson, FCSS Coordinator, Community Services, Planning and Operations Paresh Dhariya, General Manager of Planning and Operations 313/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves the attached 2019 Community Bus Program Report and presentation as information.
6.3 Bylaw 933/2019 Municipal Development Plan Amendment Marilyn McMartin, Development Officer, Planning and Operations Joseana Lara, Municipal Planning Intern, Planning & Operations Paresh Dhariya, General Manager of Planning and Operations 314/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Porter Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council provides second reading to Bylaw 933/2019, an amending Bylaw that will amend Bylaw 890/2017 – Municipal Development Plan as recommended.
6.4 2020 Strategic Priorities Chart Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer 315/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Koroll Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves the new 2019/20 Strategic Priorities Chart as presented.
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 7
9
7. Disposition of Delegations
8. New Business 8.1 Direct Control Permit – 3 Bros - 2A Saskatchewan Avenue West Marilyn McMartin, Development Officer, Planning and Operations 316/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approve Development Permit 2019-28 subject to the following conditions: 1. That a building permit be issued by the Town of Devon Building Inspector 2. Driveways from roadway hard surfaced. Driveways must be reviewed and approved by the Operations Manager 3. The exterior finish of a building must be upgraded within 1 year of the date of issuance of a building permit 4. If any satellite dishes are proposed they are to meet the bylaw requirements 5. Any signage must meet the bylaw requirements 6. A driveway edge shall be no closer than 1.5 m to any hydrant and 1.0 m from any other utility appurtenance (e.g. street light pole, power transformer, telephone pedestal, etc.) unless a protection post is installed. 7. The site and improvements thereon shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition during construction, free from rubbish and debris. Receptacles for the purpose of disposing of rubbish and debris shall be provided to prevent scattering of debris and rubbish. 8. No person shall keep or permit to be kept in any part of a yard any excavation, storage or piling up of materials required during the construction stage unless all necessary safety measures are undertaken. The owner of such materials or excavation must assume full responsibility to ensure the situation does not prevail any longer than reasonably necessary to complete a particular stage of construction. 9. That a landscaping plan be provided as per the Land Use Bylaw requirements in the PS1 Public and Private Service 1 District Regulations.
8.2 Emergency Mutual Aid Agreement Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer 317/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves the Emergency Mutual Aid Agreement with the communities of Calmar and Thorsby as presented.
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 7
10 8.3 Clean Energy Improvement Tax Bylaw 936-2019 Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer 318/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Fish Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves 1st reading of Bylaw 936/2019 – Clean Energy Improvement Tax Bylaw as recommended.
9. Correspondence Requiring a Decision
10. Other Correspondence
11. Reports 11.1 Council Reports Councillor Koroll commented that the Devon Business Expo that happened this past weekend and it looked to be a success; the Devon Environmental Sustainability Awards were rewarded. The Cemetery Master Plan Open House, was good, the quality of discussion was one of the best ever heard in the community. Kudos to the staff for the preparedness and sensitivity to the topic. 11.2 Mayor and Council Calendars 11.3 Council Information Distribution List
319/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor May Councillor Hugh Councillor Porter Councillor Koroll That Council accepts information items 11.1 through 11.3 for information.
12. Information Requests 12.1 Location of Photo Radar Councillor Koroll brought forward a safety concern regarding the photo radar vehicle parking at Highway 60 leaving the industrial park.
13. Notice of Motions
14. Confidential Matters 320/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor May Councillor Hugh Councillor Porter Councillor Koroll That Council approves a motion to go closed session to discuss negotiation matters; per Section 16, and 17 of FOIP to discuss Confidential Matters from Administration A. Allim, P. Dhariya, T. Kulbisky, S. Goin, K. Walsh and M. Crothers attended. Council Chambers closed to the public at 8:19 p.m.
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 7
11 Break 8:19 p.m.
Return 8:26 p.m. 321/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves a motion to go out of closed session. Council Chambers opened to the public at 9:41 p.m.
14.1 Negotiation Matter Councillor Sandy Koroll Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer 322/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Koroll Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council accepts the Chief Administrative Officer’s report on the negotiation matter as information.
14.2 Negotiation Matter David Price, Sport + Recreation Leader, Senior Landscape Architect, Select Engineering Inc. Jarrad Elliott, P.Eng., Senior Project Manager, Select Engineering Inc. Paresh Dhariya, General Manager of Planning and Operations 323/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Fish Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council accepts the verbal presentation update on the Ball Diamond Relocation Upgrades from General Manager of Planning and Operations as information.
14.3 Negotiation Matter Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer 324/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Porter Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council accepts the report by the Chief Administrative Officer on the negotiation matter as information and to bring forward further information as directed.
Left blank
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 7
12 15. Adjournment 325/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor May Councillor Hugh Councillor Porter Councillor Koroll That Council adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9:48 p.m.
Mayor Ray Ralph Chief Administrative Officer Tony Kulbisky
October 28, 2019 Town of Devon - Council Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 7
13 Special Council Meeting Minutes November 4, 2019 – Council Chambers Council Attendance Mayor Ray Ralph Councillor Blake Adams Councillor, Chris Fish Deputy Mayor Councillor Stacey May (Absent) Councillor Juston Porter Councillor Tanya Hugh Councillor Sandy Koroll
Administration Attendance Tony Kulbisky Chief Administrative Officer
1. Call to Order – 5:30 p.m.
2. Agenda Approval 326/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Hugh Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves the agenda as presented.
3. Old Business
3.1 Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP) Application Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer 327/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Porter Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council approves as a record of decision that the Addendum to the Expression of Interest application submitted on July 18th, 2019 for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure program for a total of $18,394,714 in estimated eligible costs, that if approved for $7,357,885 under the Federal ICIP, combined with the approved MSI provincial allocation of $6,130,958 that the remaining $4,905,871 will be the required estimated municipal portion financed through a combination of internal/external borrowing and partner contributions.
4. Adjournment 328/2019 Moved By In Favour Opposed Carried Councillor Adams Mayor Ralph Councillor Fish None opposed. Councillor Adams Councillor Porter Councillor Hugh Councillor Koroll That Council adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
Mayor Ray Ralph Chief Administrative Officer Tony Kulbisky
November 4, 2019 Town of Devon – Special Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 1
14
Council Briefing
Date November 6th 2019 RFD Prepared Month Day Year
RCMP Update
Recommended Action That Council accepts the Devon RCMP update from SGT Jolene Nason as information.
Proposal and Background In follow up to a previous presentation made to Council, SGT Jolene Nason, Detachment Commander committed to review all the enforcement zones currently being used for photo enforcement to determine if those zones are still valid or if new ones need to be identified as per the new Provincial regulations.
Target Decision Date November 12th 2019 Council Meeting Date Month Day Year
Submitted By SGT Jolene Nason, SGT Detachment Commander – Devon RCMP Name / Title
Reviewed By Tony Kulbisky, CLGM – Chief Administrative Officer Name / Title
CAO Comments Support recommended action.
Attachments 1. n/a
RCMP Update Agenda Item 6.1 Page 1 of 1 15 Request for Decision
Date October 28th 2019 RFD Prepared Month Day Year
Town of Devon Bylaw 933/2019 Municipal Development Plan Amendment – Growth Plan
Recommended Action 1. That Council provides third and final reading to Bylaw 933/2019, an amending Bylaw that will amend Bylaw 890/2017 – Municipal Development Plan as recommended.
Proposal and Background Prior to third and final reading, Bylaw 933/2019 requires approval by the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB) through the Regional Evaluation Framework (REF) process. On October 10, 2019, EMRB Administration recommended to approve the proposed amendments. In accordance with the REF Administrative Procedures, the EMRB Administration recommendation may be appealed to the Board by any EMRB member municipality within 28 calendar days of the posting of the recommendation on the EMRB website. Therefore, any Notice of Appeal to the Board can be received by EMRB Administration by November 7, 2019. If a Notice of Appeal is not received by the EMRB by the end of the 28-day appeal period, the EMRB Administration recommendation to approve the subject statutory plan(s) will stand as the final decision.
Discussions on Benefits/Options In accordance with the Regional REF Administrative Procedures, no appeals from Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB) member municipalities with regards to the Town’s MDP amendments were received, therefore, Bylaw 933/2019 can be brought forward for Council to provide third and final reading.
Implementation/Communications – N/A
Bylaw 933/2019 MDP Amendment Agenda Item 6.2 Page 1 of 2 16
Target Decision Date November 12th 2019 Council Meeting Date Month Day Year
Submitted By Joseana Lara, Municipal Planning Intern Name / Title
Reviewed By Marilyn McMartin, Planning & Development Officer Paresh Dhariya, General Manager, Planning & Operations Tony Kulbisky, CLGM – Chief Administrative Officer Name / Title
CAO Comments Support recommended action.
Attachments 1. EMRB Administration Recommendation 2. Third Party Evaluation 3. REF Administrative Procedures
Bylaw 933/2019 MDP Amendment Agenda Item 6.2 Page 2 of 2 17
Administration Recommendation October 10, 2019 to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board
REF 2019-021 Town of Devon Municipal Development Plan Amendment
Recommendation EMRB Administration recommends that REF application 2019-021 be approved.
Background
On September 24, 2019, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB) received an application from the Town of Devon (the Town) for approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan (MDP). The Town submitted the proposed MDP amendment pursuant to the following submission criteria in the Regional Evaluation Framework (REF):
4.2 A municipality must refer to the Board any proposed amendment to a statutory plan that meets one or more of the following conditions:
a) The proposed amendment to a municipal development plan is pursuant to Chapter 5, section 5.1.3 of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan for the purpose of updating the municipal development plan to conform to the Growth Plan.
EMRB Administration deemed the application complete on September 27, 2019.
Application
The proposed amendment to the MDP updates the Town’s MDP as outlined in the Regional Context Statement to align with the principles, objectives, and policies of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan (Growth Plan).
Evaluation
EMRB Administration obtained the assistance of V3 Companies of Canada Ltd. (V3) to evaluate the application with respect to legislative requirements. The V3 evaluation (attached) reviewed the proposed MDP amendment in relation to: Part 3 of EMRB Regulation 189/2017; Section 8 of Schedule A of REF Ministerial Order MSL 111/17; and, the Principles and Policies of the Growth Plan. The V3 evaluation recommends that the Town of Devon’s proposed MDP amendment be supported by the EMRB.
EMRB Administration Comments
The Town of Devon is located within the Rural Area tier of the Metropolitan Regional Structure to 2044 (Schedule 2 of the Growth Plan); therefore, the MDP has been reviewed and evaluated for consistency with the principles and policies of this tier pursuant to the Policy Areas in the Growth Plan.
Prepared on: October 10, 2019 Page | 1 18
Administration Recommendation October 10, 2019 to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board
Devon is located on the banks of the North Saskatchewan River at the intersection of Highways 19 and 60. The MDP, originally approved in 2017, sets the long-term vision, objectives, and overall land use framework for the Town. The proposed amendment to the MDP satisfies section 5.1.3 of the Growth Plan, requiring municipalities to update their MDP as outlined in their Regional Context Statement to conform with the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan.
Most of the amendments to the MDP are technical and minor in nature. The amendments update references to the Capital Region Board to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board and the Growth Plan. Additionally, the MDP now acknowledges the Town’s role, subsequent policy direction, and levels of service as a Rural and Sub-Regional Centre as identified in the Growth Plan.
The proposed amendments to the MDP strive to increase the diversity of the housing stock in the Town with additional policy direction for low-rise apartments, row housing, and inclusionary housing enabling the development of a complete community for all ages and lifestyles. Additionally, the amendments to the MDP strengthen the alignment of the Town’s transportation system and policy with that outlined in the Growth Plan.
The most significant change to the MDP is the acknowledgement and new policy direction for agriculture, including encouraging urban agriculture, edible landscaping, and diversification of agricultural operations. Additionally, policy states that the Town shall minimize fragmentation and conversion of agricultural land until such time there is demand for development. The strengthened recognition of agriculture’s value and policy direction is consistent with that outlined in Policy Area 6: Agriculture of the Growth Plan.
Overall, the proposed MDP amendment is consistent with the principles and policies of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan and Section 8.0 of the REF.
Recommendation
EMRB Administration recommends that REF 2019-021 be approved.
Attachments
Evaluation V3 Companies of Canada Ltd. REF Documents 1. Cover Letter 2. Schedule A – Amendments to Bylaw 890-2017 3. Bylaw 890-2017 Municipal Development Plan 4. Report to Council – 8.3 Bylaw 933-2019 MDP Amendment 5. Evaluation Criteria Report
Prepared on: October 10, 2019 Page | 2 19
Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019 October 10, 2019
Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board #1100 Bell Tower 10104 – 103 Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5J 0H8
Attention: Taylor Varro, MPlan Project Manager, EMRB
Dear Mr. Varro,
RE: Referral of the Town of Devon Municipal Development Plan (MDP) Amendments
REF 2019 – 021
Please find attached our third-party evaluation of the referral to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board from the Town of Devon regarding amendments to the Municipal Development Plan (Bylaw 933/2019).
If you have any questions, please contact Alan Wallace at 306.291.7024.
Sincerely,
Alan Wallace, RPP, MCIP
Planning Lead – Saskatchewan
VISIO, VERTERE, VIRTUTE … THE VISION TO TRANSFORM WITH EXCELLENCE 20 V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD. – SUITE 200, 9945 - 50 ST NW, EDMONTON, AB T6A 0L4 – PH: 780.482.3700 – FX: 780.423.3416 – WWW.V3CO.CA
Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
1.0 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Ministerial Order MSL 111/17, the Province of Alberta adopted the Regional Evaluation Framework (REF) for the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB) to ensure consistency and alignment with the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan (EMRGP) and the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulations. As such, certain statutory documents from member municipalities require review to ensure compliance.
Section 4.0 of the REF states that a member municipality must refer proposed statutory plans or statutory plan amendments to the EMRB under certain conditions, after the first reading by Council and prior to the third reading pursuant to Section 5.1 of the REF.
2.0 PURPOSE Bylaw 933/2019 was presented to Council for first reading on September 23, 2019. After passing first reading, the amended MDP was submitted to the EMRB for a referral in accordance with the REF. The purpose of REF 2019 – 021 is to review the amended MDP for consistency with the EMRGP.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 2 21 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Municipality: Town of Devon First Reading Date: September 23, 2019
Location: SW of the City of Edmonton (45 km), northern portion of Leduc County adjacent to the North Saskatchewan River.
Purpose of the MDP: Connecting Devon, the Town’s MDP, was created in response to the annexation of a significant area of land in the SE of the Town. The MDP was created to guide growth and development in a manner that aligns with the principles and policy directions of the Alberta Land Use Framework and the EMRGP.
Summary of the Referral
This evaluation reviewed the proposed amendments to the Town’s MDP in relation to the Guiding Principles, Objectives, and Policies of the EMRGP. The MDP was first adopted in August 2017 and the EMRGP took effect on October 26, 2017. For this reason, we’ve analyzed the entire MDP document (as well as the amendments) for alignment to EMRGP Principles, Objectives and Policies.
The information presented in this report represents our professional opinion on how the referral aligns within the framework of the Growth Plan, and we have concluded that the EMRB should support the proposed plan adoption.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 3 22 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
4.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA Section 8.1 of the REF states that “When evaluating a statutory plan or statutory plan amendment, the Board must consider whether approval and full implementation of the statutory plan or statutory plan amendment would result in development that is consistent with the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan.”
Applicable Policy Tiers
The Town of Devon is located within the Rural Area, defined as “land outside the metropolitan area within the wider Edmonton Metropolitan Region.” Based on the EMRGP Regional Structure (Schedule 2 in the Growth Plan) the Town of Devon is both a rural centre and a sub-regional centre.
Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Structure Policy Applicability Tier Metropolitan Core N/A (Not Applicable)
Metropolitan Area N/A
Rural Area Applicable
Applicable Growth Directions for the Rural Area are to:
1. Encourage growth in existing towns, villages and in the built-up urban area.
2. Plan and build rural centres and sub-regional centres with a mix of land uses and higher densities.
3. Support employment growth in rural/sub-regional centres.
The review of the MDP against the Growth Directions of the Rural Area concluded that the proposed amendments are consistent with the Growth Plan. The following tables highlight how the MDP meets the Growth Plan’s various principles and objectives. Note: proposed amendments will be identified in red.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 4 23 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
GUIDING PRINCIPLE Promote global economic competitiveness and regional prosperity.
1.1: Promote global economic Section 6.1 of the existing Town’s MDP competitiveness and addresses the EMRGP guiding principle and diversification of the regional objective through policies relating to the diversification and growth of the energy and economy commercial sectors, protecting lands for future √ employment and policies to foster local 1.2: Promote job growth and the entrepreneurship.
competitiveness of the Region’s employment base
1.3: Enhance competitiveness Existing policies within Sections 6.1 and 6.3 of through the efficient the Town’s MDP support regional movement of people, goods transportation infrastructure and the √ preparation of a future transportation master and services to, from and plan. within the Region
1.4: Promote the livability and Section 4.0 of the existing Town’s MDP prosperity of the Region and documents historical population growth and plan for the needs of a future projections. Sections 6.2 and 6.7 acknowledge the increase and changing changing population and √ dynamic of the Town’s and Region’s workforce population. Policies are included to promote liveability and maintain a high quality of life.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 5 24 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
GUIDING PRINCIPLE Protect natural living systems and environmental assets.
2.1: Conserve and restore natural Section 6.5 of the existing Town’s MDP living systems through an addresses the EMRGP guiding principle of ecological network approach protecting the natural living systems and environmental assets. Goals and policies within Section 6.5 include the protection of natural 2.2: Protect regional watershed areas, conserving regional and ecological health, water quality, and wildlife corridors, protecting water and land quality, and using environmental and quantity conservation reserves as a tool to achieve these goals.
2.3: Plan development to promote √ clean air, land, and water and address climate change impacts
2.4: Minimize and mitigate the impacts of regional growth on natural living systems
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 6 25 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
GUIDING PRINCIPLE Recognize and celebrate the diversity of communities and promote an excellent quality of life across the Region.
3.1: Plan and develop complete Section 6.2 of the existing Town’s MDP communities within each addresses communities and housing, and policy tier to accommodate includes policies promoting a diversity of √ housing forms, encouraging density and people’s daily needs for living affordability, and setting minimum greenfield at all ages density requirements for future development.
3.2: Plan for and promote a range Policies within Section 6.2 of the Town’s MDP of housing options √ were amended to increase opportunities for row housing and low-rise apartments, and to encourage innovative ways to deliver affordable 3.3: Plan for and promote market, and inclusionary housing options. affordable, and non-market housing to address core √ housing need
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 7 26 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
GUIDING PRINCIPLE Achieve compact growth that optimizes infrastructure investment.
4.1: Establish a compact and Existing policies within Section 6.2 of the contiguous development Town’s MDP are in place regarding the pattern to accommodate intensification and redevelopment of the Downtown area, encouraging compatible land employment and population √ uses and providing safe pedestrian access growth between residential and commercial areas.
4.2: Enable growth within built-up urban areas to optimize existing infrastructure and
minimize the expansion of the √ development footprint
4.3: Plan and develop greenfield Policies in Section 6.2 of the Town’s require areas in an orderly and Area Structure Plans (ASP) to be prepared for phased manner to contribute all development in Future Neighbourhoods and Industrial areas prior to consideration of zoning to complete communities and subdivision.
ASP requirements were amended to include Established and Planned Neighbourhoods. Phasing of development is a required √ component of ASP approval.
Future neighbourhoods and minimum greenfield density requirements were amended into the updated MDP.
4.4: Plan for and accommodate The Town of Devon is a Rural and Sub-Regional rural growth in appropriate Centre as per the EMRGP. As such, rural growth locations with sustainable is primarily located outside of the MDP N/A boundary. The MDP does acknowledge that the levels of local servicing Town of Devon is a centre that serves the rural area.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 8 27 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
4.5: Plan and develop mixed-use Existing policies in Section 6.2 of the Town’s and higher density centres as MDP support providing a mix of land uses in a compact form, including a mix of residential areas to concentrate growth √ and employment uses to support complete of both people and jobs communities.
4.6: Prioritize investment and Section 6.4 of the MDP outline how the Town of funding of regional Devon is committed to explore new and innovative ways to provide infrastructure, and infrastructure to support √ to capitalize on utility corridors where possible. planned growth
4.7: Ensure compatible land use Existing policies in Section 6.2 of the Town’s patterns to minimize risks to MDP place emphasis on ensuring compatible
public safety and health √ land use patterns to minimize and manage risks to public safety and health.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 9 28 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
GUIDING PRINCIPLE Ensure effective regional mobility.
5.1: Develop a regional Existing policy contained in Sections 6.3 and transportation system to 6.9 of the Town’s MDP addresses the EMRGP support the growth of the transportation systems objectives with a wide variety of goals and policies related to Region and enhance its √ exploring future transit, increasing accessibility regional and global to active transportation, development of a connectivity transportation utility corridor, efficient movement of people and goods, and exploring regional transportation partnerships. 5.2: Encourage a mode shift to transit, high occupancy Note: The size of the community limits the full vehicles and active range of viable options for transportation modes as transportation/transit; however, Devon has made a policy commitment to participate in all viable alternatives to private √ endeavours to utilize more efficient and automobile travel, appropriate sustainable modes of transportation to the scale of the community
5.3: Coordinate and integrate land use and transportation facilities and services to support the efficient and safe
movement of people, goods √ and services in both urban and rural areas
5.4: Support the Edmonton International Airport as northern Alberta’s primary air N/A gateway to the world
5.5: Ensure effective coordination and alignment of regional transportation policies and
initiatives between all √ jurisdictions
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 10 29 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
PRINCIPLES + OBJECTIVES CONSISTENCY EVALUATION + COMMENTARY
GUIDING PRINCIPLE Ensure the wise management of prime agricultural resources.
6.1: Identify and conserve an Section 6.7 (Urban Agriculture) of the Town’s adequate supply of prime MDP was amended to include the following agricultural lands to provide a policies:
secure local source of food √ 1. Promote diversification and value- security for future generations added agriculture production through urban agriculture and edible landscapes in public open spaces and 6.2: Minimize the fragmentation gathering places to increase the and conversion of prime community’s capacity to grow food agricultural lands to non- √ locally. agricultural uses 2. Minimize the fragmentation and conversion of agricultural lands for 6.3: Promote diversification and non-agricultural uses until there is value-added agriculture demand for development. production and plan infrastructure to support the 3. Recognize the value of agriculture within the Town of Devon, as well as its agricultural sector and √ adjacent lands. regional food system The amended policies provide further support to the EMRGP agricultural policies.
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 11 30 Statutory Plan Evaluation Report for REF 20 19 – 021 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Date of Submission: October 10, 2019
5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The following summary provides an overview of how the proposed amendments work towards each Guiding Principle within the EMRGP:
Economic • Provides opportunities for additional employment. Competitiveness • Policy direction to diversify and grow the energy and commercial sectors. & Employment • Support regional transportation through future master transportation plan. • Acknowledges location within the EMRGP boundary and that the Town represents a rural & sub-regional centre. Natural Living • Goals and policies within Section 6.5 of the Town’s MDP include the Systems protection of natural areas, conserving regional and ecological wildlife corridors, protecting water and land quality, and using environmental and conservation reserves as a tool to achieve these goals. Communities & • The Town’s MDP contains policies to develop a range of housing options. Housing • Increased policy direction to encourage row houses and low-rise apartments. • Policy direction to explore innovative ways to deliver affordable and inclusive housing. Integration of • Redevelopment of the Downtown is encouraged in the amended MDP. Land Use & • Focus on the pedestrian for redevelopment and establishing greenfield Infrastructure density requirements to minimize future demand on infrastructure. Transportation • MDP promotes density proximate to transit and transportation systems. Systems • Policy for future transportation utility corridor. • Amended MDP puts priority on the efficient movements of people and goods.
Agriculture • Amended MDP includes policies to promote agriculture diversification and value-added agriculture production. • Policy to minimize the fragmentation of agricultural lands. • MDP recognizes the value of agriculture to the Town of Devon.
6.0 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board support The Town of Devon’s proposed Municipal Development Plan amendments (Bylaw 933/2019).
V3 COMPANIES OF CANADA LTD P a g e | 12 31 Re-imagine. Plan. Build. Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan
October 13, 2016
REGIONAL EVALUATION FRAMEWORK H
EMRB ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR THE REF Purpose: To clarify the EMRB’s Administrative Procedures for the Regional Evaluation Framework (REF).
Step Description of EMRB Administrative Procedures i Pre-Application Consultation
EMRB Administration may be consulted by an Applicant for advice related to the submission of a REF Application. The best professional advice shall be provided to the Applicant by EMRB Administration in writing. At this stage there shall be no REF Consultant yet engaged by the EMRB. 1 Receipt of Application by EMRB
An Application is received by the EMRB. EMRB Administration date stamps the documents. If the Application is submitted in paper only, EMRB Administration requests an electronic copy from the Applicant Municipality. 2 Preliminary EMRB Administration Review
The Application is reviewed by EMRB Administration to determine if all required documents have been received in accordance with Section 5.2 of the REF. Applications do not proceed until an electronic copy of all required documents have been received.
If all required documents have not been received, EMRB Administration contacts the Applicant Municipality.
EMRB Administration reviews the Application to determine whether or not the Application relates to a statutory plan that must be referred to the EMRB under Section 4 of the REF. If yes, then the Application is referred for REF Consultant Evaluation.
If the Application does not appear to relate to a condition under Section 4 of the REF, then EMRB Administration contacts the Applicant Municipality. 3 Application Deemed Complete
When all required documents are received, and it is determined that the Application meets conditions required for referral to the Board for review under Section 4 of the REF, the Application is assigned a REF number (e.g. REF 20XX-XXX).
An email is sent to the Applicant Municipality noting the date the Application is deemed to be complete and the date by which a EMRB Administration Recommendation must be issued (within 25 working days from date Application is deemed complete). This email is copied to Board Members and CAOs.
The Applicant Municipality’s documentation is posted to the EMRB website.
After an Application is Deemed Complete no further advice will be given by EMRB Administration and/or REF Consultants, and no changes may be made to the Application whatsoever. By sending the Deemed Complete email, that email action clarifies what the final document is that is to be evaluated. Clarification may be sought but no changes are allowed whatsoever (other than typos, grammar, immaterial errors, etc.) to the documents from this point forward until a decision is made by the EMRB. If the REF Consultant requires clarification regarding an Application, a supplemental report may be submitted by the Applicant for clarity, but there shall be no alteration made to the original Application.
Date approved by CRB: April 10, 2014 32 Effective Date: July 1, 2014 Page 1 of 3 EMRB update: November 22, 2017 Re-imagine. Plan. Build. Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan
October 13, 2016
REGIONAL EVALUATION FRAMEWORK H
Step Description of EMRB Administrative Procedures 4 Referral for REF Consultant Evaluation
EMRB Administration refers the Application to a REF Consultant for review and evaluation. If the REF Consultant advises that they have a conflict of interest, EMRB Administration refers the review to another REF Consultant.
Once a REF Consultant confirms interest in the Application, with no conflict of interest, a Consultant Evaluation is prepared pursuant to Section 8 of the REF. If clarification is required regarding an Application, a supplemental report may be submitted by the Applicant, but there shall be no alteration made to the original Application.
The Consultant Evaluation is provided to EMRB Administration within 14 working days. 5 EMRB Administration Recommendation
EMRB Administration reviews the Application and the REF Consultant Evaluation in accordance with Section 8 of the REF and prepares a EMRB Administration Recommendation on or before the 25 working days. The REF Consultant Evaluation and EMRB Administration Recommendation are posted to the EMRB website and forwarded to the Applicant Municipality, EMRB Members, and CAOs.
Approve Recommendation:
An EMRB Administration Recommendation to approve an Application will stand as the final decision on a REF Application after a 28 calendar days appeal period, unless a Member Municipality appeals the recommendation to the Board. If no appeal is received within the appeal period, the Application is Deemed Approved and EMRB Administration will confirm in writing to the Applicant Municipality, Board Members, and CAOs of the disposition of the REF within one week after the appeal period expires.
Reject Recommendation:
If an EMRB Administration Recommendation is to not approve an Application, EMRB Administration notifies the Applicant Municipality, Board Members, CAOs and indicates that the Application will be brought to the next Board meeting for disposition. 6 Appeals
1. Any EMRB Member Municipality may appeal the EMRB Administration Recommendation to approve a REF Application.
2. An appeal may be commenced by submitting a notice of appeal within 28 calendar days after the EMRB Administration Recommendation is posted to the EMRB website. Note that the date of the recommendation and posting of the recommendation may be different due to the logistics of posting the recommendation to the website.
3. The notice of appeal must be accompanied by a resolution of Council in support of the appeal.
4. The reasons for the appeal must be included in the resolution and shall reference the section(s) of the EMRB Regulation and/or the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan that the submitted statutory plan does not conform.
Date approved by CRB: April 10, 2014 33 Effective Date: July 1, 2014 Page 2 of 3 EMRB update: November 22, 2017 Re-imagine. Plan. Build. Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan
October 13, 2016
REGIONAL EVALUATION FRAMEWORK H
Step Description of EMRB Administrative Procedures 5. All appeals must be submitted by 4:30 pm at the EMRB offices on or before the 28th day of the appeal period. If the 28th day falls on a weekend or statutory holiday, the appeal deadline is extended to the end of the next business day at 4:30 pm. A notice of appeal will be accepted by email at [email protected] provided it includes a record of the Council resolution with the reasons for the appeal.
6. If a notice of appeal is received within the appeal period, EMRB Administration shall send the notice of appeal, including the Council resolution, by email to the Applicant Municipality, EMRB Members, and CAOs, within one business day of receiving the appeal. Further, the notice of appeal, including the Council resolution, will be posted to the EMRB website.
7. An appeal period does not end with the submission of a notice of appeal. Appeals will continue to be accepted until the final day of the appeal period.
8. If a REF Application is appealed and the appeal period ends within 10 working days of an upcoming Board meeting, the REF will be added to the agenda of the following Board meeting.
9. EMRB Administration will present the appeal(s) at the Board meeting the REF Application is presented. The Municipality(s) that submitted the appeal will be identified by EMRB Administration, however, they are under no obligation to speak to the appeal at the Board meeting. 7 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Review and Decision
An Application is considered by the Board if a EMRB Administration Recommendation is to not approve the Application or if a Member Municipality appeals the EMRB Administration Recommendation to approve an Application.
At a Board meeting, the Applicant Municipality and EMRB Administration must be afforded the opportunity to address the Board (Section 7.3 of the REF). The Board must, by consensus, approve or reject the Application. If consensus is not reached, a formal vote of the Board must be conducted in accordance with the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulation (Section 7.2 of the REF).
If an Application is reviewed by the Board, following a decision, EMRB Administration will issue a letter to the Applicant Municipality indicating approval or rejection of the Application (copied to Board members, CAOs and the REF Consultant).
Decisions of the Board taken under Section 13 of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulation (approval of statutory plans) subject to Section 708.23(1) of the MGA are final and not subject to appeal.
Date approved by CRB: April 10, 2014 34 Effective Date: July 1, 2014 Page 3 of 3 EMRB update: November 22, 2017
Request for Decision
Date November 6th 2019 RFD Prepared Month Day Year
Photo Enforcement Contract
Recommended Action That Council accepts the Chief Administrative Officer’s report on the Photo Enforcement Contract as information and that an extension is negotiated as directed.
Proposal and Background In follow up to Mayor Ralph’s information request pertaining to photo enforcement in the Town of Devon, this briefing outlines the clauses in the current contract that would be relevant for Council discussion and direction. Notice to Renew current contract is found in Section 2.1, in that the Town can renew for another three years with written notice. Revisions to Contract is found under Section 2.3, in that if the Town wishes to modify the current contract, it can be done in writing, (i.e. remove stop sign enforcement, add distracted driving enforcement, etc.) and it will remain in effect for the duration of the current contract and its extension upon receiving Council direction.
Target Decision Date November 12th 2019 Council Meeting Date Month Day Year
Submitted By Tony Kulbisky, CLGM – Chief Administrative Officer Name / Title
Reviewed By Alvin Allim, GM – Corporate Services Name / Title
CAO Comments Support recommended action.
Attachments 1. n/a
Photo Enforcement Contract Agenda Item 6.3 Page 1 of 1 35
Request for Decision
Date November 6th 2019 RFD Prepared Month Day Year
Clean Energy Improvement Tax Bylaw – Public Hearing
Recommended Action That Council directs that a Public Hearing be set for November 25th, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter in the Town of Devon Council Chambers pertaining to Bylaw 936/2019 – Clean Energy Improvement Tax as recommended.
Proposal and Background On October 28th, 2019 Council provided first reading to Bylaw 936/2019 – Clean Energy Improvement Tax, commonly referred to as the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program. As noted at that meeting further program guidelines, applications and communication products will be forthcoming from Energy Efficiency Alberta so that the program can roll out in early 2020. Before second reading can be provided Council will need to schedule a public hearing on this proposed bylaw as follows: The new legislation, Bill 10, an Act to Enable Clean Energy Improvements also requires the municipality to schedule a public hearing as per Section 390.3(4) Before giving second reading to a proposed clean energy improvement tax bylaw, the council must hold a public hearing with respect to the proposed bylaw in accordance with Section 230 after giving notice of it in accordance with Section 606 of the Municipal Government Act.
Target Decision Date November 12th 2019 Council Meeting Date Month Day Year
Submitted By Tony Kulbisky, CLGM – Chief Administrative Officer Name / Title
Reviewed By n/a Name / Title
CAO Comments Support recommended action.
Attachments 1. n/a
Clean Energy Improvement Tax Bylaw – Public Hearing Agenda Item 6.4 Page 1 of 1 36
Council Briefing
Date November 6th 2019 RFD Prepared Month Day Year
AUMA Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments
Recommended Action That Council accepts the Indigenous Engagement Coordinator’s briefing on the AUMA Measuring inclusion Tool for municipal governments as information.
Proposal and Background In August 2019, the Town submitted a grant funding proposal to AUMA for the Measuring Municipal Inclusion Grant, which funds up to $50,000 for community inclusiveness projects and initiatives. The objective of the measuring municipal inclusion grant is to support Alberta municipalities to use AUMA’s measuring inclusion tool for municipal governments to evaluate the inclusiveness of their organization and to advance strategies that will propel the municipality to be a more inclusive employer, service provider, and community leader.
Implementation/Communications Upon being awarded the grant funding, the Town is required to complete a 3-phase program which consists of an internal inclusion evaluation. The AUMA’s measuring inclusion tool for municipal governments will be used to evaluate our municipality’s inclusiveness across nine key areas of focus including leadership, commitment of resources, planning, implementation and measurement, human resource policies and practices, employee engagement and education, infrastructure and land use, municipal social services, resident engagement, and economic development. The goal is to have members of Council and more than sixty (60) percent response rate from all administrative departments.
Once completed, the results will be calculated using the AUMA’s measuring Inclusion Tool calculator which will produce a baseline score of Devon’s overall level of inclusion for each of the nine areas of focus. This data will then be compiled into a report and then shared with Council and staff. From these results, the Town will then construct an Action Plan which will focus on key areas of inclusion and initiatives which will be implemented throughout the following year (2020). The Phase 1 initial inclusion tool evaluation and action plan must be submitted to AUMA by no later than February 28th, 2020.
RFD – AUMA Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments Agenda Item 8.1 Page 1 of 2 37
Phase 2 consists of the implementation of strategies and actions that were identified from the initial evaluation and in the action plan, and phase 3 will involve a secondary (follow-up) assessment, much like phase 1, which will measure the Town’s progress since the initial evaluation (Nov 2020-Jan 2021). By February 2021, Devon will submit all final reports to AUMA, including a statement of financial expenditure.
Target Decision Date November 12 2019 Council Meeting Date Month Day Year
Submitted By Mitch Wincentaylo, Indigenous Engagement Coordinator Name / Title
Reviewed By Paresh Dhariya, General Manager of Planning & Operations Name / Title
Reviewed By Tony Kulbisky, CLGM – Chief Administrative Officer Name / Title
CAO Comments Support recommended action
Attachments 1. Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments, 2019 2. Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments PowerPoint, 2019
RFD – AUMA Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments Agenda Item 8.1 Page 2 of 2 38 Alberta Urban Municipalities Association
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments. 2019
39 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019)
The Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments was developed based on adaptations of the 2014 and 2017 versions published by the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association (AUMA). AUMA appreciates the contributions of its members and stakeholders who generously contributed their time and input to help improve the Measuring Inclusion Tool.
Funding support provided by the Government of Alberta
Layout and design by Stately Plump Creative
Published by the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association
The Welcoming and Inclusive Communities Initiative Alberta Urban Municipalities Association Alberta Municipal Place 300, 8616 – 51 Avenue NW, Edmonton, Alberta T6E 6E6
Email: [email protected] Phone: 780-433-4431
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 2 40 Contents.
Introduction 4
Terms 5
How to use the Tool 9
Components of the Measuring Inclusion Tool 9
Instructions for the user 10
Instructions for the project coordinator 11
Levels of Inclusion 14
Evaluation Tool 15
A. Leadership 16
B. Commitment of Resources 17
C. Planning, Implementation & Measurement 18
D. Human Resource Policies & Practices 19
E. Employee Engagement & Education 20
F. Infrastructure & Land Use 21
G. Municipal Social Services 22
H. Resident Engagement 23
I. Economic Development 24
J. Emergency and Protective Services 25
K. Transit Services 26
L. Housing 27
Evaluation Summary 28
Appendix 29
Example of a completed evaluation 30
References 31
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 3 41 Introduction.
The Alberta Urban Municipalities Association is pleased to release a newly-improved version of the Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments. This updated version of the Measuring Inclusion Tool is designed exclusively for municipal governments to evaluate internal policies and practices to take proactive steps to be an inclusive employer, inclusive service provider and inclusive leader of the community.
Why use the Tool? Our goal with this tool is to give municipal government organizations a way to measure their inclusiveness across a broad scope of topics that are specific to the operations and service delivery responsibilities of municipalities. The Measuring Inclusion Tool will help your municipal government understand the areas where it is fostering a culture of inclusion and the areas where there are opportunities to improve.
By using this tool on a periodic basis, you will be able to measure whether your strategies and actions to be inclusive are making an impact. In addition to measurement, it can be used to help facilitate discussion and education about inclusion. By reading the tool’s real-life indicators, municipal elected officials and staff can begin to understand what inclusion looks like for a municipal government and how issues of discrimination and social exclusion can be eradicated.
Addressing the issue Municipal governments have a mandate to serve all residents, but in many cases, municipal policies and practices are designed without considering the perspectives or specific needs of residents that may not be involved in the planning process. In doing inclusion work, it’s essential to consider many kinds of diversity and difference. Often ‘diversity’ is used as a code word for ‘race’ or ‘culture’, but if we are truly committed to eradicating racism, discrimination and social exclusion, we must be willing to look at the number of interlocking ways that people are disadvantaged or mistreated. Many residents can face racism, discrimination, social exclusion or other barriers that limit their potential to fully participate in the community due to their unique characteristics such as gender, skin colour, race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, education, income level, religion, heritage, or physical or mental ability or many other factors. As leaders of the community, municipal governments are best positioned to lead the way in demonstrating how to remove barriers and create an inclusive organization and community.
Help is available It is our hope that the Measuring Inclusion Tool can help your municipality move closer to becoming a more diverse and inclusive organization that is a leader in creating a community where all residents are included and can reach their full potential. If you have any questions about using the tool or if you get stuck during the process, please contact us at [email protected]. Once you finish your evaluation, we encourage you to share your results with AUMA’s Welcoming and Inclusive Communities initiative, so we can measure the collective progress of municipalities to become more inclusive.
What is new in the 2019 version of the Measuring Inclusion Tool? • The 2019 version is specific to the operations of a municipal government organization. A separate tool will be available for measuring the inclusiveness of the community. • A new evaluation system that uses a ladder-based approach to each topic and indicator. • Updated language to meet user needs. • The supporting strategies to improve are now available at wic.auma.ca. • A more concise and user-friendly document.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 4 42 Terms.
These definitions have been adapted from Dancing on Live Embers: Challenging Racism in Organizations, The City of Ottawa’s Equity and Inclusion Lens, the UC Berkeley Gender Equity Centre’s Definition of Terms web page, Training for Change’s Glossary, Canadian Human Rights Commission, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, VisitAble Housing Canada, AUMA’s WIC Glossary of Terms, and Wikipedia.com
Accommodation Accommodation is the process of making alterations to the delivery of services so that those services become accessible to more people, including persons with disabilities. In terms of employment, accommodation is the process of making alterations in the work environment that ensures persons with different needs are able to fully participate on the job and do not face discrimination in employment under any of the ‘grounds’ protected in the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Affordable Housing Affordable housing includes market-based housing and non-marketing housing (often referred to as ‘social housing’ or ‘government-subsidized housing’). The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation considers housing to be affordable when a household spends less than 30 per cent of its pre-tax income on adequate shelter.
Bias A tendency to be for or against an individual or group without a justified reason. A bias limits a person or group’s ability to look at a situation objectively, and shapes how they act in the situation, often unfairly. An example of a bias is a landlord believing that it’s easier to rent to people who speak English as a first language. There may be no good reason for her to believe that, but it will influence her actions when she decides who to rent to.
Community Community is the collection of people, businesses and organizations that reside within the boundaries of the municipality.
Disability Refers to physical, mental, or emotional conditions that limit and/or shape an individual’s participation in work and society. Disabilities may involve mobility, agility, visual, speech, hearing, learning, and cognitive characteristics. Canadian law requires employers to accommodate people with disabilities to ensure their maximum participation and contribution.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 5 43 Terms (Continued)
Discrimination Discrimination is an action or decision that treats a person or group badly for reasons such as their race, ethnicity, colour of skin, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability, or genetic characteristics.
Individual Discrimination When an individual discriminates against others for being members of a particular social group. For example, an employer who rejects all black persons who apply for a job.
Institutional Discrimination When organizations or institutions (e.g. schools, municipalities, corporations) have policies, procedures or informal practices that give one social group (usually a mainstream group) advantages over another (usually a marginalized group). For example, a when company only gives days off for Christian religious holidays.
Systemic Discrimination Systemic discrimination occurs when a whole society or culture has widespread beliefs, practices and systems that advantage one social group over another. When discrimination is woven into the fabric of our society, it’s more powerful, and more difficult to root out. For example, transgender people experience systemic discrimination in Canada. This means that the idea that transgender people are abnormal, unhealthy, deviant or dangerous shows up in every structure of our society – the legal system, health care, housing, employment, as well as media and the arts. Because many people hold such ideas about transgender people, laws and policies are created that discriminate against them; but because those laws and policies are in place, it’s easy to believe that those discriminatory ideas are ‘natural’ and right. This creates a cycle of discrimination that’s hard to end.
Diversity Diversity is any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. Celebrating diversity means understanding that each individual is unique and recognizing and relating to those qualities and conditions that are different from our own to understand how each person contributes to the good of the community.
Equality Equality means treating everyone the same and providing everyone with access to exactly the same resources, services and opportunities, regardless of differences in their social group or situation. It assumes that we’re all starting from a ‘level playing field’, that we’ve all had access to the same resources and opportunities, and that none of us have experienced systemic discrimination or privilege. When working on inclusion, it is important to distinguish between approaches that focus on equality as compared to equity.
Equity Equity involves trying to give people what they need to enjoy full, healthy lives. Equity acknowledges that we are different: some people may be advantaged and already have greater access to resources and opportunities, and others may be disadvantaged, and as a result have different or additional needs. These disadvantages can be from historical injustices or current discrimination. Equity asks us to ‘level the playing field’. For example, if you and I are sharing a cake, equality means we split the cake exactly in half. But if I just had dinner and you haven’t eaten since breakfast, equity means that you get the larger share of cake so that we can both feel full at the end of the day.
Ethnicity An ethnic group or ethnicity is a population of people whose members identify with each other, based on a real or assumed common ancestry. Ethnicity assumes that the group of people shares cultural traits and a group history.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 6 44 Terms (Continued)
Gender Social categories that assign qualities of masculinity and femininity to people and calls them men or women. Sex and gender are not the same. Sex refers to the biological state of having certain genitalia, certain chromosomes or certain hormones in one’s body, while gender is about one’s appearance, mannerisms and roles, or one’s internal sense of gender. Words that refer to gender include man, woman, transgender, masculine, and feminine. Words that refer to sex include female, male and intersex.
Identity The social characteristics that make up a person’s identity such as their age, race, ethnicity, occupation, political opinions or many other factors. Each characteristic is not mutually exclusive and as such, can be viewed as layers of identity. A person may be discriminated against by one or many of their layers. For example, an Indigenous woman who lives on social assistance could experience discrimination because she is a woman, or because of she is Indigenous or because of her income level. Sometimes a person chooses their identity (e.g. occupation) and sometimes it is out of their control (e.g. age).
Inclusion Inclusion is the act of creating environments in which any individual or group can feel welcomed, respected, supported, and valued to fully participate. An inclusive and welcoming community embraces human differences, sees them as strengths, and offers respect in both words and actions for all people.
Indigenous Peoples This term refers collectively to First Nations, Inuit and Métis people. The word recognizes the fact that Indigenous peoples are the original inhabitants of Canada. The term is similar to Aboriginal peoples. There are other words that Indigenous peoples may use to describe themselves and therefore, it is a good practice to ask how people wish to be named.
LGBTQ+ This acronym stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender/transsexual and queer. The plus sign is included to encompass other spectrums of sexuality and gender. There are many variations of this acronym, but we use this one in the evaluation tool.
Mainstream The centre or in-group. The mainstream sets the tone for a group or organization or society, its own preferences become the norms for the group, and it provides most of the leadership for carrying out the mission of the group. The mainstream may or may not be conscious of its role and higher status. Everyone is a member of some mainstream or other: even a working class Jewish radical lesbian may be able-bodied, for example, and “able- bodied” is a mainstream identity. When we talk about the mainstream, we contrast it with the marginalized.
Marginalized Excluded, ignored, or relegated to the outer edge of a group/society/community. People are often marginalized in societies or communities due to the effects of structural inequality (see below). A person may be marginalized based on gender, skin colour, income level, education, age, sexual orientation, religion, race, ethnicity, immigration status, language, occupation, heritage or other factors.
Municipality Municipality is the local government organization – the corporate entity (e.g. city, town, village, summer village, specialized municipality, municipal district) and local authority that provides services, facilities and infrastructure for the community. It represents the elected officials, employees, policies and practices of the municipal government. The term ‘municipality’ should not be used interchangeably with ‘community’ in this tool.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 7 45 Terms (Continued)
Public space Refers to an area or place that is open and accessible to all peoples, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, age, ability, or socio-economic level. These are public gathering spaces such as plazas, squares and parks. Connecting spaces, such as sidewalks and streets, are also public spaces.
Racialization Using social markers (e.g. skin colour, cultural habits, dress, language, religions, political beliefs and surnames) to label or perceive a person of a certain community as different from “whiteness”. If you are racialized, you are likely to receive unequal treatment in society.
Senior People over the age of 65.
Structural Inequality Occurs when the fabric of organizations, institutions, governments or social networks contain an embedded bias which provides advantages for some members and marginalizes or produces disadvantages for other members. This can involve property rights, status, or unequal access to health care, housing, education and other physical or financial resources or opportunities.
Systemic discrimination Refer to ‘Discrimination’.
Transgender/Trans A broadly used umbrella term that refers to all individuals who cross the socially constructed line of masculinity or femininity. Trans includes people who reject, or who are not comfortable with, in whole or in part, their birth-assigned gender identities. It includes diverse groups of people: pre-operative, post-operative, and non-operative people; male and female cross- dressers, “drag queens” or “drag kings”.
Underrepresented When a certain group of people have disproportionately less persons in an organization, field of work, or political system, compared to their proportion of the average population. Often, underrepresentation is not a coincidence, but a result of systemic discrimination. For example, if the average population of Indigenous people in a community is 8 per cent but only 2 per cent of the municipal workforce is Indigenous, then Indigenous people are underrepresented and may be facing discrimination in hiring or retention.
Visitability The term refers to single-family housing that is designed to be lived in or visited by persons who are physically challenged by stairs or those who use wheelchairs or walkers. Visitability allows for greater mobility and social interaction for persons that are aging, persons with physical disabilities as well as parents with strollers. A visitable house has: • One entrance without steps; • Wider doorways and hallways for clear passage throughout the main floor; and • A washroom on the main floor that is accessible to persons who use mobility devices.
Youth People aged 15 to 30.
For more terminology on diversity and inclusion, download AUMA’s WIC Glossary of Terms at wic.auma.ca
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 8 46 How to use the Tool. Components of the Measuring Inclusion Tool 1. Areas of Focus The Measuring Inclusion Tool is sectioned into twelve areas of focus, representing the broad scope of topics that are specific to the operations and service delivery responsibilities of municipalities. Each area of focus can be completed independently of other areas and therefore, you can complete one or as many areas of focus that you deem important or are applicable to your municipality.
2. Topics Each area of focus is organized by a series of topics specific to the issue. Each topic has four indicators, representing the range of levels of inclusion specific to that topic.
3. Levels of Inclusion The Measuring Inclusion Tool is based on the concept that a municipal government will generally fall into one of four levels of inclusion. The lowest level, Invisible, implies that the principles of inclusion are nonexistent within the organization. The highest level is a Culture of Inclusion, which describes a municipal government that is deeply inclusive. Your municipality’s level of inclusiveness will likely be different for each area of focus, which allows you to identify your strengths in inclusion as well as areas where improvements can made.
4. Indicators The indicators are brief statements that describe situations or characteristics that typically happen at each level of inclusion within a municipal government. The indicators serve as the foundation of the Measuring Inclusion Tool that allow you to explore the issues and measure the inclusiveness of your municipal government. Each indicator is specific to each topic within each area of focus.
5. Rating Your answers to each topic will translate into a point score. That point score will determine the level of inclusiveness for the area of focus that you have evaluated. By averaging the ratings of multiple users, the municipality will have an overall assessment of how inclusive it is for each area of focus.
Area of Focus
Levels of Inclusion
Topics
Indicators
Scoring Total Score System
Rating Based on the Total Score Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 9 47 Instructions for the user. 1. The project coordinator will provide directions on what areas of focus you are to evaluate.
2. Read the four indicators for a topic and select the indicator that best describes your municipal organization. Repeat this process for each topic for each area of focus. • In some cases, the indicators may describe situations that you do not have personal knowledge of or experience with but consider the broad intention of the indicators and rate your municipality based on your perception.
3. At the end of each area of focus, add up your score:
a. Score 1 point for every indicator selected under Invisible.
b. Score 2 points for every indicator selected under Awareness.
c. Score 3 points for every indicator selected under Intentional Inclusion.
d. Score 4 points for every indicator selected under Culture of Inclusion.
e. Add up your points to determine your total score for the area of focus. Write the number in the orange circle labeled ‘Total Score’. If you use the Tool with an electronic device, the scores will automatically calculate for you.
f. Using your Total Score, find the corresponding number on the rating scale. This is your rated level of inclusion for the area of focus. For example, if your total score is 9, then you have rated the municipality in the Awareness stage of inclusion or if your total score is 13, then you have rated the municipality as being between Awareness and Intentional Inclusion.
4. Once you are complete, submit your evaluation to the project coordinator who will consolidate and calculate the overall average rating based on the responses from all users.
5. If you are interested in exploring potential strategies to become more inclusive, visit the Measuring Inclusion Tool section of AUMA’s website at wic.auma.ca.
Refer to Appendix A for an example of a completed evaluation.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 10 48 Instructions for the project coordinator
Preparing for the Evaluation 1. The project coordinator should familiarize themselves with the entire Tool. This includes being familiar with the terms, structure of the evaluation system, and how using the Tool can benefit the municipality. This is important orf when questions are raised by users.
2. Determine who will participate and the approach that will be used. For ideas, refer to the section below titled, “Who Should Complete the Evaluation?”
3. Take the time to set the stage and explain why people are being asked to complete the evaluation and what purpose it will serve.
4. Provide users with access to the terms (pages 5-8), the user instruction sheet (page 10), and the definitions of the levels of inclusion (page 14).
After the evaluation 5. Collect all the responses and use AUMA’s Measuring Inclusion Tool Calculator (available at wic.auma.ca) to consolidate the responses and calculate the municipality’s overall average rating for each area of focus.
6. Once the municipality’s overall ratings are determined, save this information for future reference.
a. If this is the municipality’s first time using the Measuring Inclusion Tool, these ratings serve as the municipality’s benchmark to measure against for future progress.
b. If your municipality has completed the Tool before, compare the ratings with the last evaluation to measure the municipality’s progress to become more inclusive.
7. Note the areas of focus where the municipality is fostering a culture of inclusion and the areas of focus where there are opportunities to improve.
8. Report the results to senior management or council.
9. Share the results with AUMA (email us at [email protected]), to allow AUMA to measure the impact of the Tool and the overall progress of Alberta’s municipalities to become more inclusive.
10. Develop goals and a strategic plan to improve the municipality’s inclusiveness for some or all targeted areas of focus. To assist in this process, AUMA’s website (the Measuring Inclusion Tool section at wic.auma.ca) offers a list of suggested strategies.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 11 49 Instructions for the project coordinator (Continued)
11. Report the results and planned actions to staff and especially those that were involved in the evaluation.
12. Compare your results with other communities and discover how you can support each other with expertise.
13. Consider publicizing your ratings and planned actions. If your ratings were higher than expected or has improved from the last evaluation, then celebrate! Use the evaluation results in a press release; include it when you market to potential residents; publicly recognize your inclusion committee for their hard work. If your ratings were lower than expected, it could be a great way to emphasize the need to take action and secure support from the community.
14. Use your results or selected areas of focus as a talking tool to open conversation about inclusion with municipal employees, council, business leaders, community leaders, or residents.
15. It is recommended that you repeat the evaluation at regular intervals. This step is important to determine whether your municipal organization is becoming more inclusiveness. We recommend you complete the evaluation every 1-3 years.
16. Contact AUMA’s Welcoming and Inclusive Communities initiative for guidance or questions in using the Tool ([email protected]).
How long will it take to use the Tool? An individual working alone can complete all 12 areas of focus in as little as 60-75 minutes but the time it takes is entirely dependent on the approach you use. For example, you may ask some individuals to only evaluate selected areas of focus, which will reduce the time, or you may facilitate the evaluation through group discussions, which will increase the time required. We suggest you tailor your approach based on your available time and resources.
Who should complete the evaluation? To have a reasonably accurate assessment of your organization, it is important to have a diverse group of people complete the evaluation. Each person will bring varying experience and perspectives that can be valuable to understanding your organization’s inclusiveness. Diversity will look different in each organization, but the municipality may consider involving:
• Elected officials and employees (management and front-line staff). • Employees from various departments. • Residents – for areas of focus that are specific to external service delivery (e.g. municipal social services). • People of different backgrounds and characteristics such as diversity in gender, race, ethnicity, age, education, sexual orientation, income level, mental or physical ability or other factors.
We recommend that a minimum of ten people complete the evaluation.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 12 50 Instructions for the project coordinator (Continued)
Possible approaches to using the Tool
Facilitated approach The following are potential approaches where users are brought together in a meeting- based environment under the guidance of a facilitator. While each user will complete their evaluation independently, there is an opportunity to ask questions and generate discussion about the issues and potential opportunities to take action. • Create a committee that is tasked with completing the evaluation. • Host meetings where elected officials and staff can voluntarily come together to complete targeted areas of the Tool and then take part in group discussions on what stood out and potential steps to improve. • Schedule meetings with each department where staff will evaluate the areas of focus that are specific to their role in the organization. –– For instance, public works staff may not have enough knowledge to evaluate the Municipal Social Services area of focus but would be well-suited to evaluate other areas of focus such as Leadership, Employee Engagement, or Infrastructure and Land Use.
Non-facilitated approach The following are potential approaches where users are asked to complete the evaluation without the guidance of a facilitator. A non-facilitated approach is usually more time efficient, but the lack of an in-person facilitator increases the risk of confusion and potentially uninformed responses and does not allow for users to engage in meaningful group dialogue. • Email the targeted areas of focus to each user and ask them to return their completed evaluation to the project coordinator. • Build the Tool’s content into an online survey-based software program and email the link to each user.
Use the Tool in different formats Users can complete the evaluation on paper or digitally. Digital users benefit from the feature of automatic scoring calculation. Note that users of an electronic device must have the ability to save the document so it can be emailed to the project coordinator for aggregate scoring.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 13 51 Levels of Inclusion.
The Measuring Inclusion Tool uses four levels for rating the inclusiveness of your municipality. The four levels of inclusion are defined as:
Invisible We do not recognize that there is a problem. Diversity and difference are not on the radar, or there is no recognition of the value that inclusion brings to the municipal organization. Discrimination is present in the municipality, in either overt or subtle ways. When a discriminatory incident happens there is no attempt to rectify the situation. Individuals who face discrimination must deal with any of its negative impacts on them without support from the municipality. There is a very entrenched/simplistic sense of who is seen as ‘normal’ and who is seen as ‘different’.
Awareness We know there is a problem, we are taking tentative steps, but we are not sure how to proceed. There is some effort being made to welcome marginalized or minority people into the organization, based on a belief that all people are equal or an understanding of the harmful effects of exclusion. Discrimination is seen as somewhat important to address, but actions taken to address it lack adequate resources, do not happen consistently and are ad hoc. Interventions by the municipality focus on helping marginalized individuals meet their basic needs even if they are facing discrimination or exclusion elsewhere.
Intentional Inclusion We have acknowledged the importance of diversity and inclusion and are taking formal steps to eliminate all forms of discrimination through systematic change. The municipality has made an official statement about the importance of inclusion and diversity, and a structural understanding of inclusion and inequity is being advanced. Interventions are planned with the goal of reducing barriers to participation for marginalized populations and incorporating more equitable practices and attitudes into the entire organization or community. People make initial medium to long term commitments to inclusion work. Ideas about who makes up the ‘mainstream’ of the community are starting to broaden.
Culture of Inclusion Inclusion is normal and part of our culture. All layers of identity and difference are considered and supported, and systemic processes for maintaining inclusion are fully woven into the municipal organization. The good of all people is a widely held value and everyone is comfortable with and sees the importance of diversity. The municipality continually takes steps to eliminate inequality. Policies, practices and programs continually undergo analysis through an inclusion lens. Inclusion is a way of life and all employees and residents are supported to reach their full potential.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 14 52 Evaluation Tool.
Measuring the inclusiveness of your municipal government.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 15 53 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 16 A. Leadership All residents and municipal staff benefit when elected officials and administrative leaders of the municipal government are involved and accountable in validating issues of discrimination and demonstrating commitment to building inclusion and equity.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Leadership Most elected officials see Elected officials attend Most elected officials Most elected officials by elected work on inclusion as pulling community events that support the development publicly initiate and support officials staff resources away from support diversity, but have not of an inclusion strategy or inclusion-related policies and more important municipal supported proposals for the initiatives initiatives, even if residents services municipal government to take view it as controversial action to support inclusion
Communication Most elected officials are not Elected officials require notes Most elected officials Most elected officials talk by elected aware of the importance of or scripts to discuss diversity willingly make speeches and about the value of diversity officials diversity and inclusion or inclusion statements about inclusion, and inclusion in speeches but usually only at events and conversations, no matter about diversity the audience
Representation Members of municipal Council is aware that Council is appointing The membership of municipal on municipal committees are of similar members of municipal underrepresented committees is representative committees age, gender, race, ethnicity, committees may not be populations to municipal of the community’s diversity income levels, etc. representative of the committees more often than community’s diversity in the past
Leadership The managers I engage The managers I engage The managers I engage The managers I engage by management with use stereotypes or with are aware of the value with are actively attempting with can explain the discriminatory language of inclusion, but have to learn about inclusion and municipality’s inclusion not invested their time to are supportive of inclusion strategy, and are leading understand the issues and initiatives the way in implementing opportunities inclusion initiatives
Responses to The managers I engage with The managers I engage The municipality regularly All managers are fully discrimination ignore or are defensive when with can describe some trains managers about prepared and will adequately issues of discrimination are aspects of legislation/ equity in the workplace and respond if issues of brought to their attention regulation that help create how to respond to issues of discrimination are brought equity in the workplace discrimination to their attention
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion54 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 17
B. Commitment of Resources Advancing inclusion and equity is made possible when the municipality provides human resources and funding to support the work.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Staff time Inclusion work is not part Inclusion-related activities Inclusion work is a key part of Inclusion work is integrated of any staff member’s job are inconsistent because one or more staff member’s throughout the municipal description they are done ‘off the side job description organization (not siloed in one of someone’s desk’ due to position or department) personal passion
Financial Most elected officials see Staff are reluctant to request Inclusion work is seen as Most elected officials, resources work on inclusion as pulling resources for inclusion a good investment and is managers and staff can resources away from more work because they expect a regular line item in the explain why the municipality important municipal services management or council will municipality’s budget continually invests in inclusion turn down the request work
Adequacy of No financial resources have Inclusion work is seen as The municipality provides There are sufficient resources financial resources been set aside for inclusion important but very few dollars adequate funding for at least in place to ensure that work or staff hours are made one department’s inclusion inclusion strategies are fully available work, but not enough for all implemented across of all departments areas of municipal business
Support within There are no organized At least one department Most managers make it a Staff across the organization the organization discussions about diversity considers inclusion work priority that department staff continually bring forward new and inclusion within the important, but there is little attend inclusion training or be ideas on how their department municipal government interest by others involved in inclusion work can be more inclusive
Structure There are no organized The municipality has an Municipal funding is provided The municipality’s inclusion to collect input discussions about diversity inclusion committee made for an inclusion committee committee has sufficient and inclusion within the up of diverse staff and/or made up of diverse staff and/ resources and decision- municipal government residents, but it has limited or residents — with influence making power and is resources, power or influence over decision-making representative of the diversity of staff/residents
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion
55 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 18
C. Planning, Implementation & Measurement Creating a shared vision of an inclusive, equitable community provides a framework for planning, policy, and action by the municipality. By measuring the municipality’s progress, the municipality can make informed decisions on the next steps needed. Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Vision Council does not see Although council sees A vision for an inclusive People at all levels of the the value of creating a inclusion as important, it has community is defined and organization notice if inclusion community or organization not formally communicated a approved by council is not a consideration during that is inclusive vision or goals for inclusion planning
Strategic planning There has been no Management is aware of The municipality has a All departments have annual consideration by opportunities to update written plan for inclusion with goals related to diversity and management to have planning documents to objectives, strategies, and a inclusion that are actioned inclusion goals be part of include inclusion goals, but no time line and reported on strategic plans action is taken
Implementation Diversity issues and services There is some effort Promising practices from Managers and elected are left for other community- to understand how other municipalities and officials consider how based organizations to other municipalities are organizations are sought out marginalized residents and address approaching issues of and used to inform plans and staff may be affected by any inclusion, but limited action is actions decision, program or policy taken
Measurement The municipality is not Some staff know what groups Some formal processes The municipality uses collecting any data related to of people are accessing are in place to measure the metrics on service use, diversity services but there is no diversity of residents not human resources, incidents, formal process to understand accessing services or whose community demographics and what diversity of residents are needs are not being met people’s views to monitor its not accessing services culture of inclusion
Review There is no evaluation system Sometimes the municipality The municipality gathers All municipal services for programs and services gathers input on whether a input on whether services are regularly reviewed for that work with diverse service is inclusive but there are inclusive and takes action inclusion and revised if residents is little follow-up action taken based on the feedback necessary
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion56 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 19 D. Human Resource Policies & Practices Policies and practices that promote equitable recruitment and retention ensure that the municipal workforce is representative of the diversity of the community and that employee diversity is respected and supported.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Workplace culture Employees are expected Employees that work in an Attempts are made to The organization’s to adapt to abide by the office environment have some accommodate the practices reputation in supporting same societal and cultural flexibility to personalize their and holidays of all religions workplace diversity makes it norms and traditions of the workspaces and dress and cultures an employer of choice workplace
Diversity of staff Most staff are of similar Staff from marginalized Persons from marginalized Staff is reflective of the age, gender, race, ethnicity, groups are often concentrated groups are increasingly diversity of the community, or religion and are not in specific departments, being employed by various across all departments, all representative of the or in positions with lower departments, including in levels of position and pay community’s demographics pay and less decision-making positions of leadership authority
Hiring practices Employees in charge of The municipality’s website Hiring managers are Hiring panels are educated hiring are not aware of or job postings state that it educated in understanding about bias and inclusion their own bias or stereotypes, offers a diverse or inclusive cultural differences and the and are representative of which influence their choices workplace, but in reality, this impact their biases may have the diverse population the in hiring is not the case on hiring decisions municipality serves
Workplace equity Management is not sure The municipality’s human All departments abide by Workplace policies are whether its human resource resource policies comply the municipality’s human implemented using an policies and practices are with human rights legislation, resource policies, which inclusion lens that considers up-to-date with legal and but not all departments know align with human rights language, dress, physical human rights regulations about or buy into following legislation and employment appearance and the policies equity policies non-traditional schedules
Accommodation of There is no attempt to Managers understand Accommodation for Accommodation programs for needs (e.g. disability, accommodate the unique accommodation practices, but employees are implemented employees are implemented religion, gender, etc.) needs of applicants or rarely offer or encourage the on a consistent basis, but consistently across all employees use of them some employees view it as departments, without being special treatment questioned by others
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion57 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 20 E. Employee Engagement & Education When municipal employees receive training and support about inclusion, they are more prepared to respond the needs of a diverse public as well as foster an inclusive workplace. The knowledge and perspectives of employees and residents with lived experience can be valuable to inform planning and decision-making to ensure services are delivered in an inclusive manner.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Availability There is no diversity and Inclusion and equity training Inclusion and equity training Competencies in inclusion of training inclusion training available for is available, but it is infrequent is regularly available for all must be demonstrated staff and only available to select staff, on a voluntary basis in annual performance positions reviews and when applying for jobs/promotions
Scope There is no diversity and Employee education Employee education focuses Employee education covers of training inclusion training available programs primarily focus on a range of dimensions of dimensions of diversity plus for staff on ‘culture’ but ignore other diversity that is representative training on human rights, forms of diversity that are of the demographics of the respect, equity, privilege, common in the community community and unconscious bias
Employee Generally, staff don’t Staff are aware of the value of Employees are beginning to Most staff can detect and understanding understand the value of inclusion, but are still resistant understand their own biases, challenge bias in their own inclusion and are unskilled or to diversity training, as they stereotypes, or privilege and others’ written and uncomfortable working with see it as taking time away because of education oral communications and staff or residents who are from ‘real work’ programs consciously make changes different from them to be more inclusive
Workplace culture Staff do not talk about the Staff sometimes talk about Staff commonly talk Employee spouses and different or unique aspects of the unique aspects of their about the unique aspects of partners that are from a their lives at work (e.g. no talk lives at work, but usually their lives (e.g. sharing marginalized population about invisible disabilities, only with a few people in of culture, LGBTQ+ staff enthusiastically attend staff few ‘out’ LGBTQ+ staff) their department are ‘out’) with many staff events that are open to guests across departments
Reporting There is no discussion Staff are informally There is a formal process to There is a formal process discrimination about discrimination and encouraged to report bring forward concerns on to report discrimination and there is no formal process to incidents of discrimination, discrimination positive action is taken to bring forward concerns on but there is no formal address issues discrimination process in place
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion58 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 21 F. Infrastructure & Land Use When municipal infrastructure is inclusive and accessible, all residents can actively participate in the life of the community. The community becomes more inclusive when land use planning considers the health, economics and history of all residents.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Physical There is no discussion by Existing facilities are The municipality takes action The municipality takes accessibility municipal leaders about renovated to increase when it is notified that a proactive steps to ensure that whether municipal facilities physical accessibility but only facility or public space is not all new and existing facilities or spaces are accessible to if budget is leftover (viewed physically accessible or spaces are accessible to persons with disabilities by leaders as a low priority) persons with disabilities
Adequacy of Municipal leaders are not Most public facilities and The municipality seeks Policies and strategies are physical sure whether all residents above-ground infrastructure input from all residents on in place to ensure public accessibility can access public spaces are up to legal code how existing infrastructure facilities and spaces are or whether legal code requirements for accessibility and facilities can be more built beyond the legal code requirements for accessibility accessible and follow through requirements for accessibility are being met with action and are truly accessible to all
Inclusivity for Municipal leaders assume The municipality is aware The municipality has taken All municipal facilities have other needs that existing public facilities that its facilities may not be some steps to create inclusive been renovated or built to be meet the needs of all people inclusive of all persons, but facilities (e.g. change rooms for inclusive of the needs of all there is no plan to address it mixed gender families, gender residents neutral washrooms, quiet rooms for prayer)
Access to safe There are few public spaces Outside of sporting facilities, There is at least one All marginalized populations public spaces (inside or outside) where there is no adequate public municipal public space, other have options when choosing residents can gather together space for people to meet and than a sporting facility, where a safe public place to spend in groups interact people can safely spend time time in
Respecting Indigenous communities Municipal leaders want to Municipal leaders are Land use planning happens the rights of are seen as an obstacle to build relationships with nearby increasingly reaching out in coordination with local Indigenous peoples municipal expansion and/or a Indigenous communities, but to Indigenous communities and nearby Indigenous hassle in land use planning have yet to act to build relationships and communities, as well as a discuss land use planning range of community groups
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion 59 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 22 G.Municipal Social Services The breadth, quality and inclusiveness of municipal social service programs can be a key factor in supporting residents to actively participate in the social, cultural and economic life of the community. Municipal social services includes recreation, libraries and other social programs run by the municipality. This does not include social programs that are funded by the municipality, but day-to-day operations are controlled by a non-municipal organization.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Staff skill Staff are unskilled or The municipality Staff are skilled and Staff take responsibility impatient working with acknowledges its inability to professional when working for advancing inclusion by residents who have work with people of diverse with diverse clients, even adjusting services as needed complex issues that may backgrounds and refers them if staff are personally to create equitable outcomes prevent their participation to services elsewhere uncomfortable for diverse populations
Resident There is no consideration of Although staff may try to be Staff proactively engage Programs and services participation in whether certain populations welcoming, the municipality marginalized populations to are used by a wide range services face barriers to participate in knows that residents from understand why they do not of underrepresented municipal programs marginalized populations attend programs and services populations as systemic generally do not use/attend barriers to their participation programs and services have been addressed
Cultural Programs and services Municipal staff recognize Cultural programs celebrate Cultural programs celebrate programming are primarily designed for that existing programs do not multiculturalism by multiculturalism and also heterosexual, economically cater to diverse cultures or showcasing diversity in food, reflect the complex histories stable, white, Christian, religions, but there is no plan dress and dance, but ignores and life experiences of the English-speaking, able- in place to celebrate other other aspects of culture diversity of residents bodied, adult residents cultures (e.g. history, religion, family structure, traditions)
Documentation Managers do not recognize Management is aware that Key documents are Key documents are available that the language in existing key documents use complex presented in plain language in multiple languages, large documents and forms may language, but no action has and is gender neutral print, plain language, and not work for all residents been taken to simplify the is gender neutral, etc. language
Language barriers in Municipal leaders believe that Municipal leaders want to The municipality has There is always someone service delivery residents should not expect serve residents who may not interpreters or translators, but on site or a process in place to receive service if they do speak English, but do not users may have to return at a to ensure interpretation or not speak English have resources in place different time to meet them translation is available
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion60 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 23 H. Resident Engagement When the municipality works to engage the opinions all residents, this can lead to better involvement in municipal decision-making and participation in community life. Municipal communication is then meaningful and accessible to all community members.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Diversity in The same type of people Some effort is made to There is a policy in place People participating in public consultation attend town halls, take include marginalized that addresses how the public consultation surveys, write letters to people in consultation. municipality will obtain input represent all demographics the editor, or comment Often those that are asked from residents with diverse in the community on social media to provide input are the same backgrounds go-to people
Input in If there is community The municipality is aware of Organizations that serve Diverse community groups decision-making participation in decision- organizations that work with marginalized populations regularly participate in making, it is by informal marginalized populations, and its members are consultations, and their conversations with groups but the municipality does regularly engaged, in suggestions are shown in of persons who are mostly not engage them to inclusive ways, to be a part policy and decision making wealthy, white and/or male understand needs of planning discussions
Methods used Municipal leaders are not Municipal leaders want to The municipality has a The municipality always to collect input concerned or not aware if hear from diverse residents, policy requiring the use of uses different methods to certain groups of residents but no special effort is made a range of in-person and ensure the opinions of diverse are rarely involved in to engage them online methods to ensure all communities are heard community consultations residents are heard
Communication to Municipal leaders are Municipal leaders recognize The municipality has a The municipality’s residents not concerned whether that public communications policy requiring the use of communication methods are communications are often use complex language, plain language in all written inclusive of the needs of all accessible to all residents but there is no formal plan to communications residents (including those with address it visual or hearing disabilities)
Responding When residents bring forward When residents bring forward When residents bring forward When residents bring forward to reports issues around discrimination issues around discrimination issues around discrimination issues around discrimination of discrimination or exclusion, decision makers or exclusion, decision makers or exclusion, decision makers or exclusion, decision makers don’t know what to do, get acknowledge the concern but are quick to take action, but willingly discuss the issue and defensive or don’t take them don’t take action often without the input of the involve the affected parties in seriously affected parties implementing a solution
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion61 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 24 I. Economic Development The community benefits when municipal economic development principles and strategies are created based on the understanding that diversity benefits the economy. This area of focus is specific to economic development initiatives that are under the direct control of the municipal government.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Representation There is no consideration by The municipality is aware The municipality is starting Members of economic on economic municipal leaders to have of populations that are not to seek out diverse persons development committees development diverse groups of people represented on economic to be members of economic are representative of the committees on economic development development committees development committees community’s demographics committees
Accessing diverse There is no consideration by Municipal leaders see value The municipality engages Municipal economic views on economic municipal leaders to involve in involving marginalized marginalized communities development plans are planning marginalized communities communities in economic to help inform its municipal regularly updated with in the creation of municipal planning but have no plan economic development plan input from marginalized economic development plans of engagement communities
Use of data to inform There is no attempt to The municipality has data The municipality collects The municipality collects a economic planning understand available on the diversity of the some data about the comprehensive amount of data on the profile and community but does not use it diversity of the community to data about the diversity of diversity of the community to inform municipal economic inform municipal economic the community and uses it to to inform economic development plans development plans inform municipal economic development discussions development plans
Attraction of Elected officials do not see Elected officials want to The municipality has a Immigrants are welcomed by immigrants the need to attract immigrants attract immigrants but do not strategic plan to attract and all as valued business owners to the community have a plan to achieve it retain immigrants to support and consumers of local goods economic development and services
Support to the There is no discussion Municipal leaders discuss The municipality regularly Municipal and business business community about diversity and inclusion how creating a more inclusive partners to create training for leaders continually strategize between municipal and business environment could businesses about inclusive on how to help businesses business leaders support tourism or community hiring and workplaces offer customer environments growth, but no action is taken that are inclusive
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion 62 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 25 J. Emergency and Protective Services All residents benefit when the municipality takes steps to ensure that emergency and protective services is inclusive of the diverse needs of residents. This area of focus is specific to emergency and protective services that are under direct control of the municipal government. As such, this area of focus may not apply to municipalities that receive primary policing support through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Service to diverse Emergency and protective Emergency and protective Emergency and protective Emergency and protective populations services staff are perceived as services staff don’t recognize services staff receive training services staff treat all discriminatory when dealing their biases when dealing on working with diverse residents fairly and inclusively with certain populations with certain populations cultures and populations
Violence in cultural The action, or lack of action, Leaders are aware that some Protective services staff are Protective services are well- communities by protective services protective services staff deal becoming more aware of trained and able to talk about staff to deal with violence with violence in racialized cultural issues that contribute violence in marginalized in racialized communities communities differently than to violence in racialized communities in a way that causes further isolation of other populations, but no communities supports safety and inclusion survivors and perpetrators action is taken for all residents
Language Emergency and protective Emergency and protective Emergency and protective Emergency and protective services often ignore services do not have services have identified services employ staff that can residents who do not speak resources to communicate resources to help speak the common languages English with residents who do not communicate with residents spoken in the community and speak English who do not speak English translators are available
Gender identity and Emergency and protective Emergency and protective Emergency and protective The education to emergency gender expression services staff are not aware services staff are aware of services staff are educated and protective services staff of considerations that should different needs of gender on differences and needs includes training on how to be made for gender diverse diverse populations but are of gender diverse persons, provide proper, respectful persons and harm is done not skilled in providing the including their own bias and treatment for gender diverse to them as a result – either best services to them prejudices towards them persons neglect or psychological
Engagement with There is no concern about Leaders are aware that many Emergency and protective The municipality monitors the the public whether emergency and marginalized populations services staff proactively public’s trust of emergency protective service staff are do not trust emergency and meet with community and protective services staff trusted by the public protective services staff due groups and vulnerable and and takes proactive action to past experiences marginalized residents to to increase trust in the build understanding and trust community
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion63 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 26
K. Transit Services All residents benefit when the municipality takes steps to ensure that transit services is inclusive of the diverse needs of residents. This area of focus is only applicable to municipal governments that offer a public transit service.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Access to Transit services do not Public transit coverage The municipality has a policy The majority of marginalized transportation consider the specific needs is lower in low-income, to ensure public transit populations have efficient, and barriers of marginalized racialized, Indigenous, coverage is adequate for affordable and accessible populations newcomer or commercial/ all neighbourhoods and transportation options for industrial neighbourhoods affordable travel within the municipality
Serving riders with Transit staff are unskilled or Transit staff want to better Public transit operators Transit staff are skilled and complex needs impatient working with riders serve riders with complex receive mandatory training on comfortable when serving who have complex needs needs but are unsure how serving diverse populations riders that have complex to act issues
Personal safety Instances of hate or Municipal leaders are aware Transit staff are trained on Marginalized populations discriminatory actions that some transit users do how to respond if a transit view public transit vehicles between transit riders is not feel safe on public transit rider is experiencing hate or as safe spaces ignored by transit staff vehicles, but there is no discriminatory actions from formal plan to address the another rider(s) issue
Language barriers in Transit staff believe that Transit staff want to serve Transit staff can access There is always someone service delivery riders should be able to residents who may not speak a municipally-provided on call who can interpret if communicate in English when English, but do not have interpreter by phone during required seeking help or directions resources in place some hours of the day
Physical There is no consideration All transit facilities and Transit services actively seek Policies are in place to accessibility whether transit pickup vehicles are up to legal code input on how transit pickup ensure transit facilities and locations and vehicles are requirements for accessibility points and transit vehicles vehicles are built beyond the accessible to those with can be more accessible legal code requirements for physical disabilities accessibility and are truly accessible to all
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion 64 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 27
L. Housing All residents benefit when the municipality takes steps to ensure that local housing is inclusive of the diverse needs of residents.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Demand in There is no discussion by the The municipality knows the The municipality has a formal Residents have access to affordable housing municipality about the need percentage of residents in plan or makes financial safe and affordable housing for affordable and diverse need of affordable housing, investments to increase the options that meet their need housing options but does not have a formal supply of affordable housing and lifestyle plan to address the issue
Diversity in housing Marginalized populations Council discussions about the The municipality’s bylaws Marginalized residents have costs and types often live in unsuitable, need for affordable housing, and plans encourage the access to safe and affordable unsafe or crowded primarily focuses on concerns development of housing housing options that meet residences because of the that it may attract crime or at a wide range of price their need and lifestyle high cost of housing reduce surrounding property points, family sizes, and value configurations
Accessible housing Municipal leaders are Municipal leaders recognize The municipality informally The municipality’s policies unaware of the challenges that many homes are not encourages developers and encourage new housing that persons with disabilities accessible to persons with builders to create housing developments to meet the face in accessing homes in physical disabilities, but there that meets the standards of standards of ‘visitability’ the community is no plan to address it ‘visitability’
Economic diversity Municipal leaders do not People of similar income The municipality’s planning Residential neighbourhoods by neighbourhood consider the value of levels tend to live in specific policies encourage diverse are economically mixed creating economically-mixed areas of the municipality options in housing size and neighbourhoods cost in each neighbourhood
Access to rental The municipality does not The municipality is aware of The municipality offers Marginalized populations face housing consider how marginalized challenges that marginalized cultural awareness education no barriers or discrimination in populations may be populations face in accessing to landlords and education on accessing rental housing challenged in accessing rental housing, but has no rental rights for renters rental housing plan to address it
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total = + + +
For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion
65 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 28 Evaluation Summary. Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20
Leadership
Commitment of Resources
Planning, Implementation & Measurement
Human Resource Policies & Practices
Employee Engagement & Education
Infrastructure & Land Use
Municipal Social Services
Resident Engagement
Economic Development
Emergency & Protective Services
Transit Services
Housing
Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 66 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 29
Appendix.
67 Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 30 Example of a completed evaluation. I. Economic Development The community benefits when municipal economic development principles and strategies are created based on the understanding that diversity benefits the economy. This area of focus is specific to economic development initiatives that are under the direct control of the municipal government.
Invisible Awareness Intentional Inclusion Culture of Inclusion Representation There is no consideration by The municipality is aware The municipality actively Members of economic on economic municipal leaders to have of populations that are not seeks out diverse persons development committees development diverse groups of people represented on economic to be members of economic are representative of the committees on economic development development committees development committees community’s demographics committees
Accessing diverse There is no consideration by Municipal leaders see value The municipality engages Municipal economic views on economic municipal leaders to involve in involving marginalized marginalized communities development plans are planning marginalized communities communities in economic to help inform its municipal regularly updated with in the creation of municipal planning but have no plan economic development plan input from marginalized economic development plans of engagement communities
Use of data to inform There is no attempt to The municipality has data The municipality collects The municipality collects a economic planning understand available on the diversity of the some data about the comprehensive amount of data on the profile and community but does not use it diversity of the community to data about the diversity of diversity of the community to inform municipal economic inform municipal economic the community and uses it to to inform economic development plans development plans inform municipal economic development discussions development plans
Attraction of Elected officials do not see Elected officials want to The municipality has a Immigrants are welcomed by immigrants the need to attract immigrants attract immigrants but do not strategic plan to attract and all as valued business owners to the community have a plan to achieve it retain immigrants to support and consumers of local goods economic development and services
Support to the There is no discussion Municipal leaders discuss The municipality regularly Municipal and business business community about diversity and inclusion how creating a more inclusive partners to create training for leaders continually strategize between municipal and business environment could businesses about inclusive on how to help businesses business leaders support tourism or community hiring and workplaces offer customer environments growth, but no action is taken that are inclusive
Total Invisible Total Awareness Total Intentional Inclusion Total Culture of Inclusion Total 10 = 1 + 6 + 3 + 0 For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected For every indicator selected Score score 1 point. score 2 points. score 3 points. score 4 points.
Match your score 5 – 6 7 – 8 9 – 11 12 – 13 14 – 16 17 – 18 19 – 20 on the rating scale Invisible between Awareness between Intentional Inclusion between Culture of Inclusion68 References. Andrulis, D. Conducting a Cultural Competence Self-Assessment https://www.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/programs_campaigns/samhsa_hrsa/cultural- competence-self-assessment.pdf
Creating a Culturally Inclusive Organization: A Resource Action Guide. (March 2002) Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA).
Cultural Competency Organizational Assessment Questionnaire, Wisconsin Initiative to promote healthy lifestyles.
Human Rights Maturity Model. Canadian Human Rights Commission http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.804423/publication.html
LGBTQ Inclusion Continuum for Schools. Ally Action Lopes, T. & Thomas, B. (2006). A39. Between the Lines.
O’Mara, J. & Richter, A. (2011). Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks: Standards for Organizations Around the World. http://centreforglobalinclusion.org/
Organizational Diversity, Inclusion & Equity – A Self Assessment Tool Potapchuk, M. Assessing Your Community’s Inclusiveness.
Self-Assessment Tool. NFHS Minority Inclusion Project, National Federation of State High School Associations: NFHS http://www.nfhs.org/media/9699/minority-inclusion-project-assessment-tool.pdf
Susan Drange Lee, S.D. (2006) Achieving a Culture of Inclusion - A Self-Assessment Tool. University of California. https://diversity.ucsf.edu/sites/diversity.ucsf.edu/files/meeting-materials/self-assessment-tool.pdf
The Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments is an adaptation of AUMA’s original version of the Measuring Inclusion Tool (2014), which was developed by Zenev & Associates.
Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments (2019) 31 69 Evaluating the Inclusiveness of our Municipal Government
November 12th, 2019
70 What is an inclusive community? A community where people of every age, gender identity, Or in other words: sexual orientation, ethno- cultural identity, race, A community where everyone can feel safe, physical and mental ability, whomever we are, or income and educational level, wherever we come and religion feel included, from, no matter how we valued, and empowered. look, how we worship, how much money we have, or who we love.
71 2 Why our municipal government should support inclusion We have a mandate to serve all residents – Everyone should have equitable access to our services Reduce social conflict Encourage business growth and attraction Involving more people leads to new innovation Remove barriers so all employees and residents can reach their full potential
72 3 Why evaluate our work on inclusion To assess the progress of inclusion work in our municipality To be able to communicate our progress to management, council, our community partners and other stakeholders To create a case for allocating resources to inclusion work To provide a framework which can be used to work with community partners to achieve common goals
73 4 Introduction to AUMA’s Measuring Inclusion Tool for Municipal Governments
Fall 2019
74 5 Overview of the Measuring Inclusion Tool
• Assists a municipal government to: • Assess its current state of inclusiveness. • Identify areas for improvement. • Advance strategies to be more inclusive of employees, residents, and service users. • Provides a framework to measure ongoing performance.
75 6 Areas of Focus
Planning, Human Resource Commitment of Leadership Implementation Policies & Resources & Measurement Practices
Employee Infrastructure & Municipal Social Resident Engagement & Land Use Services Engagement Education
Emergency & Economic Protective Transit Services Housing Development Services
76 7 Levels of inclusion
Intentional Culture of Invisible Awareness Inclusion Inclusion
We do not We know there is a We are taking Inclusion is normal recognize that problem, we are formal steps to and part of our there is a problem. taking tentative eliminate all forms culture. steps, but we are of discrimination not sure how to through systematic proceed. change.
77 8 Area of focus and description Levels of inclusion
Topics Indicators for each topic
Scoring system
78 Rating scale 9 Example This person’s responses resulted in a score of 12 for this area of focus. This means the person rated the municipality’s leadership at “Between Awareness and Intentional Inclusion”.
79 10 Key items to know
• Your responses will be anonymous. • Key words are defined in the Terminology section. • You must rate every topic. • You may feel that you don’t know the answer to some topics. This is expected. Your goal is to answer based on your perception of what is happening in the municipal organization.
80 11 How will this information be used
• Your ratings will be consolidated with the ratings of others to produce an average rating for the municipality. • Those ratings will highlight the areas where the municipality is demonstrating a culture of inclusion and where there are opportunities to improve. • This sets the stage to implement strategies to improve. • Suggested strategies are available at wic.auma.ca.
81 12 Instructions for electronic users
1. Read the four indicators for a topic and select the indicator that best describes our municipal organization. Repeat this process for all five topics. 2. The Tool will automatically calculate your total score. 3. Using your total score, find the corresponding number on the rating scale. This is your rated level of inclusion for the area of focus.
82 13
Request for Decision
Date November 4 2019 RFD Prepared Month Day Year
LAND USE AMENDING BYLAW 937/2019 (Ravines South, R1A &R 4 districts and Home Occupations on Jasper Court West)
Recommended Action 1. That Council provides first reading to Bylaw 937/2019, an amending Bylaw that will amend Bylaw 924/2019 – Land Use Bylaw as recommended. 2. That Council directs that a Public Hearing be set for December 9th, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter in the Town of Devon Council Chambers pertaining to Amending Bylaw 937/2019.
Proposal and Background Since the Land Use Bylaw was completed in early October 2019, the following requests have been brought to the Town’s attention:
1. A request has been received from a homeowner in the R1A District (East side of Peace River Drive and Highwood Bay) to allow for secondary and garage suites as the properties are larger and easily able to handle a second family. 2. Change to approvals for Home Occupations for lots on Jasper Court West where rear lots face Erie Street. We presently have one business on that block facing Erie Street. We have had a request to allow up to 2 businesses in the rear of one lot with the business frontage and parking being Erie Street. Currently only one Home Occupation is allowed per residential dwelling unit. As this street could be conducive to have a property owner operating their business from a building at the rear of the lot and live in the principal dwelling. The Municipal Planning Commission reviewed an application by an applicant requesting two businesses out of a newly constructed building that would face Erie Street. After discussions with the applicant, the application was pulled until the Land Use Bylaw amendments can be reviewed by Council. 3. Developers and Builders contacted us regarding allowing secondary suites in the R1C Low Density District in Ravines South. 4. Presently there are single family homes in the R4 High Density District (Banff Court West). At least one of the property owners has a secondary suite and would like to make it legal. The lots are very large and can accommodate a suite and the required parking.
LUB 987/2019 Amending R1A and R4 Districts RFD Agenda Item 8.2 Page 1 of 2 83
Discussion on Benefits, Disadvantages and Options 1. A homeowner on Peace River Drive has requested approval for a secondary suite. This will allow for more density in this neighborhood. At present, secondary suites are not allowed in the R1A district. 2. There are no available business units on main street to rent. Allowing this street to have a Home Occupation of more than one unit would give an opportunity for the homeowner to work from home, have better security as owners of business will live in the dwelling unit. 3. Allows for a more affordable housing in the Ravines. Permission will still only be granted to every 4th house which meets all conditions as per the current Land Use Bylaw. 4. As there are several houses on Banff Court West which are single family, it is ideal for those property owners to be allowed the suite. This will also make their homes more affordable. Note, that they cannot tear down an existing dwelling and build a new one as the bylaw requires any new build meets the high density regulations.
Financial / Policy Considerations These changes help us to meet the Growth plans of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB).
Impact on Public The secondary suites could have an impact on the neighbors as parking is not properly addressed in each district. The Home Occupation change could have an impact as there will be increased traffic and potentially parking on Erie Street.
Target Decision Date November 12th 2019 Council Meeting Date Month Day Year
Submitted By Marilyn McMartin, Planning & Development Officer Name / Title
Reviewed By Paresh Dhariya, General Manager, Planning & Operations Tony Kulbisky, CLGM - Chief Administrative Officer Name / Title
CAO Comments Support recommended action.
Attachments Draft Bylaw 937/2019
LUB 987/2019 Amending R1A and R4 Districts RFD Agenda Item 8.2 Page 2 of 2 84
Bylaw 937/2019
Amendment to Bylaw 924/2019 – Land Use Bylaw Month/Day/Year Resolutions xxx/2019 Effective Date xx/xx/xxxx Related Bylaws Land Use Bylaw 924/2019 Lead Role Marilyn McMartin, Planning & Development Officer
Being a Bylaw to amend Bylaw 924/2019 of the Town of Devon, in the Province of Alberta, relating to the Land Use Bylaw.
Whereas in accordance with the Municipal Government Act, Statutes of Alberta, 2000, Chapter M-26, Part 17, Division 5 Section 639 the Municipal Council of the Town of Devon has adopted a Land Use Bylaw 924/2019 and
WHEREAS the Council deems it to be in the public interest to amend Land Use Bylaw 924/2019; and
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Town of Devon duly assembled hereby enacts as follows:
THAT Land Use Bylaw No. 667/99 of the Town of Devon be amended by:
1. By adding to PARTB – R1A – Residential Low Density
In Table of Contents add 2.33 and renumber accordingly
2.2 PURPOSE
2.2.1 The purpose of this District is to provide an area for single detached houses on standard lots and other developments compatible with the low-density residential nature of this District. Secondary suites or garage suites are discretionary in select areas.
2.4 DISCRETIONARY LAND USES
The following are discretionary uses that may be approved by the Municipal Planning Commission (g) Secondary suites with a minimum of three (3) single detached dwelling between each approved suite or garage suite; and (h) Garage suites with a minimum of three (3) single detached dwelling between each approved suite or secondary suite.
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 1 Agenda Item 8.2
2.5 DWELLING UNITS ON A LOT
2.5.1 The maximum allowable number of dwelling units on one site is one with the exception that the Municipal Planning Commission approves a maximum of one of either a garage or secondary suite
2.33 SECONDARY AND GARAGE SUITES
2.33.1 In addition to the regulations in this District, the following conditions shall also apply for a Secondary Suite:
(a) Secondary and Garage suites shall not be subject to separation from the principal dwelling through condominium conversion or subdivision. (b) Secondary and Garage suites shall only be developed as an Accessory dwelling to a single detached housing (not allowed in conjunction with semi-detached or town or row housing). (c) Secondary or Garage suites shall provide an addition of one (1) off-street parking stall for each bedroom, in addition to the two (2) off-street parking stalls required for the principal dwelling. A minimum of three (3) on-site parking spaces are required for sites with a Secondary or Garage suite. Where a Secondary or Garage suite is proposed there must be a minimum hard surfaced 6.0 m by 6.0 m driveway for parking which may include parking space within a garage. (d) A maximum of one Secondary or Garage suite on a lot with a single detached dwelling. (e) Secondary and Garage suites shall not be developed in combination with a Home-Based Business where customers are coming to the dwelling or where the dwelling is being used as more than an office. (f) Occupants living in the suite can have a maximum of three (3) unrelated persons occupying a Secondary or Garage Suite. (g) Minimum site area for a secondary suite is 450.0 m2. (h) Minimum suite size shall be 50.0 m2. (i) Maximum basement not more than the total floor area of the first story of the building. Suites on or above first floor: - 40% of the principal dwelling, or 70.0 m2 , whichever is less (j) Secondary Suites must have a separate entryway that is: - at the side or rear of the dwelling but shall not be located on a front elevation of a building, or - through a separate entrance within a common landing. This is the only option for an entrance at the front of the building so as to appear as a single detached dwelling .
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 2 Agenda Item 8.2 (k) A Secondary suite shall be developed in such a manner that the exterior of the principal dwelling containing the secondary suite shall appear as a single dwelling (l) Driveway, if in front yard, must be hard-surfaced, a minimum of 6.0 m in width (20 ft) and cover no more than 80% of the front yard. Driveway width at the street can be a maximum of 5.0 m. Driveways in the rear can be gravel, but must be a designated area – parking is not allowed on grass areas.
2.33.2 In addition to the regulations in this District, the following conditions shall also apply for a Garage Suite Regulations:
(a) Side yard setback shall be the same as that required for a principal dwelling. (b) Privacy i. Place larger windows to face lane or flanking street ii. Offset windows to limit overlooking into neighboring yards iii. Limit Garage suite balconies iv. Prohibit roof decks on top of Garage suite v. Consideration of potential effect on privacy of adjacent properties (c) Character is compatible of design and siting with surrounding development. (d) Minimum of 4.0 m separation between principal dwelling and garage suite. (e) Minimum site size 500.0 m2. (f) Minimum site width 15.0 m. (g) Suite minimum 30.0 m2, maximum 60.0 m2. (h) Maximum height for a second story Garage suite is 8.0 m; 6.0 m. for a bungalow style addition. (i) Standard regulations of maximum site coverage of 40%.
By Adding to PARTB - R1B – Residential Low Density
3.29 HOME OCCUPATIONS
3.29.1 In addition to the regulations in this District, the following conditions shall also apply for the accessory use of home occupations in all areas of the R21B district with the exception of Lots 24 to 31, Block 8, Plan 720HW (lots backing onto Erie Street):
(a) There shall be no exterior signage, display or advertisement other than a business identification plaque or sign 20 cm by 30 cm in size located on the dwelling. (b) There shall be no outside business activity, or storage of material, equipment or products. Indoor storage related to the business activity will be allowed within the dwelling unit or an accessory building provided that such materials or equipment are not likely to result in a fire hazard. (c) There shall be no mechanical or electrical equipment used that creates unreasonable external noise or interferes with electronic equipment in adjacent dwellings.
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 3 Agenda Item 8.2 (d) No commodity other than the product or service of the home occupation shall be sold on the premises. (e) A person performing a service to the community, or instruction of arts or crafts, shall not permit more than six students or customers to be in attendance at any one (1) time. (f) Not more than one (1) employee of a business other than a resident of the dwelling shall work on the site of a home occupation. (g) Retail and personal service business shall operate by appointment only. A minimum of one (1) on-site parking space in addition to those required by other sections of the Land Use Bylaw shall be provided for businesses where customers visit the home. Parking on the front yard or side yard shall be prohibited except on a driveway. (h) Development permits for home occupations are issued on a one-time basis only. Permits are not transferable to another property, another property owner or another tenant and are not valid for a different home occupation.
3.29.2 In addition to the regulations in this District, the Municipal Planning Commission may approve the following accessory uses of home occupations on Lots 24 to 31, Block 8, Plan 720HW (lots backing onto Erie Street):
(a) If the lot is large enough up to two business but not more may operate from a building at the rear of the lot, facing Erie Street. Two business cannot operate from the principal dwelling This lot cannot be subdivided. The owner or an employee must live on the property. (b) Exterior signage can be placed on the building, (c) There shall be no outside business activity, or storage of material, equipment or products. Indoor storage related to the business activity will be allowed within the dwelling unit or an accessory building provided that such materials or equipment are not likely to result in a fire hazard. (c) There shall be no mechanical or electrical equipment used that creates unreasonable external noise or interferes with electronic equipment in adjacent dwellings. (d) A person performing a service to the community, or instruction of arts or crafts, shall not permit more than six students or customers to be in attendance at any one time. (f) Not more than one employee of a business other than a resident of the dwelling shall work on the site of a home occupation. (e) Personal service business shall operate by appointment only. A minimum of one (1) on-site parking space in addition to those required by other sections of the Land Use Bylaw shall be provided for businesses where customers visit the home. Parking on the front yard or side yard shall be prohibited except on a driveway. (f) Development permits for home occupations are issued on a one-time basis only. Permits are not transferable to another property, another property owner or another tenant and are not valid for a different home occupation.
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 4 Agenda Item 8.2 (g) There can be no liquor, cannabis, restaurants, eating establishments, bars, grocery stores, supermarkets, mass merchandiser (i.e. dollar stores, department stores, discount stores, auto parts, convenience stores etc.) The intent is a specialty retail sales. a professional business or any other business approved by the Municipal Planning Commission. Retail sales can operate from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
By Adding to PARTB - R1C – Residential Low Density
In Table of Contents add 4.28 and renumber accordingly
4.2 PURPOSE
4.2.1 The purpose of this District is to provide an area for single detached houses on relatively narrow lots. Lots can have front attached garages or garages in the rear yard where the property has a lane. Other Developments compatible with the low-density residential nature of this District may also be considered. Secondary suites are discretionary in South Ravines located on the south half of SE 27-50-26 W4
4.4 DISCRETIONARY LAND USES
4.4.1 The following are discretionary uses that may be approved by the Municipal Planning Commission:
(a) modular homes – single detached; (b) home occupation that uses a garage; (c) public utility buildings; (d) accessory developments to any discretionary use; and (e) 3 season sun rooms where the setback is less than the required 8.0 m, AND.
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 5 Agenda Item 8.2 (f) Secondary suites with a minimum of 3 single detached dwellings between each approved suite.
4.5 DWELLING UNITS ON A LOT
4.5.1 The maximum allowable number of dwelling units on one site is one (1), with the exception that the Municipal Planning Commission may approve a maximum of one (1) Secondary suite in Ravines South.
4.27 ON-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
4.27.1 Where there is a lane, a minimum of two (2) parking stalls shall be provided in the rear yard of each site, inclusive of any parking stalls provided in a garage or carport. All residential properties shall have a minimum of two (2) parking stalls per dwelling
4.28 Secondary Suites 4.28.1 In addition to the regulations in this District, the following conditions shall also apply for Secondary suites: (a) Secondary suites shall not be subject to separation from the principal dwelling through condominium conversion or subdivision. (b) Secondary suites shall only be developed as an Accessory dwelling to a single detached house (not allowed in conjunction with semi-detached or town or row housing). (c) Secondary suites shall provide an addition of one (1) off-street parking stall, in addition to the two (2) off-street parking stalls required for the principal dwelling. A minimum of three (3) on-site parking spaces are required for sites with a Secondary suite. Where a Secondary suite is proposed there must be a minimum hard surfaced 6.0 m by 6.0 m area for parking which may include parking space within a garage. (d) A maximum of one Secondary suite on a lot with a single detached dwelling. (e) Secondary suites shall not be developed in combination with a Home-Based Business where customers are coming to the dwelling or where the dwelling is being used as more than an office. (f) Minimum site area for a Secondary suite is 255.0 m2. (g) Minimum suite size shall be 50.0 m2. (h) Maximum basement not more than the total floor area of the first story of the building. Suites on or above first floor: - 40% of the principal dwelling, or 70.0 m2, whichever is less. (i) Secondary suites must have a separate entryway that is: - at the side or rear of the dwelling but shall not be located on a front elevation of a building, or - through a separate entrance within a common landing this is the only option for an entrance at the front of the building, so as to appear as a single detached dwelling.
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 6 Agenda Item 8.2 (j) A Secondary suite shall be developed in such a manner that the exterior of the principal dwelling containing the secondary suite shall appear as a single dwelling. (k) A driveway, if in the front yard, must be hard-surfaced and cover no more than 80% of the front yard. Driveways in the rear can be gravel, but must be a designated area – parking is not allowed on grass areas.
By Adding to PART – R4 – Residential High Density
In Table of Contents add 7.34 and renumber accordingly
7.4 DISCRETIONARY LAND USES
7.4.1 The following are discretionary uses that may be approved by the Municipal Planning Commission:
(a) day care facility; (b) home occupation that uses a garage; (c) public utility building; (d) accessory development to any discretionary use; and (e) 3 season sun rooms where the setback is less than the required 8.0 m. (f) Secondary suite where the existing lot has a single family dwelling
7.34 SECONDARY SUITE
7.34.1 In addition to the regulations in this District, the following conditions shall also apply for a Secondary suite:
(a) Secondary suites shall not be subject to separation from the principal dwelling through condominium conversion or subdivision. (b) Secondary suites shall only be developed as an Accessory dwelling to a single detached housing (not allowed in conjunction with semi-detached or town or row housing). (c) Secondary suites shall provide an addition of one (1) off-street parking stall for each bedroom, in addition to the two (2) off-street parking stalls required for the principal dwelling. A minimum of three (3) on-site parking spaces are required for sites with a Secondary or Garage suite. Where a Secondary or Garage suite is proposed there must be a minimum hard surfaced 6.0 m by 6.0 m driveway for parking which may include parking space within a garage. (d) A maximum of one Secondary suite on a lot with a single detached dwelling. (e) Secondary suite shall not be developed in combination with a Home-Based Business where customers are coming to the dwelling or where the dwelling is being used as more than an office.
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 7 Agenda Item 8.2 (f) Occupants living in the suite can have a maximum of three (3) unrelated persons occupying a Secondary suite. (g) Minimum site area for a Secondary suite is 450.0 m2. (h) Minimum suite size shall be 50.0 m2. (i) Maximum basement not more than the total floor area of the first story of the building. Suites on or above first floor: - 40% of the principal dwelling, or 70.0 m2 , whichever is less (j) Secondary suites must have a separate entryway that is: - at the side or rear of the dwelling but shall not be located on a front elevation of a building, or - through a separate entrance within a common landing this is the only option for an entrance at the front of the building so as to appear as a single detached dwelling (k) A Secondary suite shall be developed in such a manner that the exterior of the principal dwelling containing the secondary suite shall appear as a single dwelling (l) Driveway, if in front yard, must be hard-surfaced, a minimum of 6.0 m in width (20 ft) and cover no more than 80% of the front yard. Driveway width at the street can be a maximum of 5.0 m. Driveways in the rear can be gravel, but must be a designated area – parking is not allowed on grass areas.
This by-law comes into full force and effect upon third and final reading.
READ A FIRST TIME IN COUNCIL THIS ___ day of ______, A.D 2019
PUBLIC HEARING held this ____ day of ______, A.D., 2019
READ A SECOND TIME THIS ____ day of _____, A.D 2019
READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME THIS _____day of ______, A.D. 2019
Ray Ralph, Mayor
Tony Kulbisky, Chief Administrative Officer
Bylaw 937/2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Page 8 Agenda Item 8.2 P.O. Box 310 Smoky Lake County 461 2 McDot}gall fii\re Smolq Lake, Alberta T0A 3CO
PtEne: 78G6563730 1{88{5S3730 Fax: 78G65&3768 www.soEh/iakecour y.ab.ca NORTH SASKATCHEWAN WATERSHED ALTIANCE (ALBERTA) 202-9440 49 STREET EDMONTON, AB T68 2M9 RECEIVED
2019 Nov 0{ Sent by: Regular Mail TOWN OF DEVONI October 30, 2019
RE Letter of Support for the tnter-Provinclal Nomlnatlon for Deslgnatlon of the l{orth Saskatchewan River for the Canadian Herltage Rlver System
To Whom it May Concern,
On behalf of Smoky Lake County, it is a pleasure to provide this letter supporting nomination of the North Saskatchewan River for the Canadian Heritage River System (CHRS) on an inter- provincial basis. Further to the North saskatchewan Watershed Alliance Heritoge River Bo ckg ro u n d Stu dy l2OO5l:
"The Canadian Heritage River System is a cooperative venture between federal, provincial, and tenitorial governments desigded to offer international, national, provincial and regional recognition to outstanding rivers in Canada that demonstrate exceptional examples of Canadian cultural, natural, and recreation values. The main objective is to ensure lhe longterm management of these rivers in order that their unique values are consemed for the continuing beneJit and enjoynent of Conadians and visitors to Canado. "
Smoky Lake County is situated along an 82 kilometer stretch of the North Saskatchewan River, which forms our southern municipal boundary with Lamont County. we are home to the Victoria Settlement Provincial Historic Site, as well as the Victoria District National Historic Site of Canada, which encompasses approximately 22 kilometers of the River shore. As derived from the June 2001 minutes of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada (HSMBC), Victoria District was designated as a National Historic Site because:
"its cuhural landscape represents an exceptional illustration in one concenftated area of major themes in Prairie settlement including the development of the fur lrade, the l€tter of Support lnter+rovlnclal Nomlnatlon of th€ Nort'lr Saslotcheuran Rlver Gnadlan Herltage Blver System (OlRSl PaBe 1 of 4
93 establishment of the Mitis river lot system, the anival of mksions, Prairie agricultural development and lhe establishment ofeastern European immigrants at the beginning ofthe 20th century."
Likewise, the Victoria Trail (a segment of the Fort Edmonton - Fort Garry/lVinnipeg Trail, or Carlton Trail) runs adjacent to the River in many places, and has served as a connection between people, landscape, and the River for centuries, being utilized as the primary over-land method of travel by lndigenous peoples, M6tis and Red River Carts, missionaries, and settlers, prior to the arrival of rail in Western Canada. The use ofthis trail network was designated a 'National Historic Event' by the NSMBC in 1972. lndeed, prior to European settlement, the North Saskatchewan River held importance for First Nations peoples, for example, as a meeting place, a source offood and water, for navigation and travel, and commerce. Today, the River continues to serve as a cornerstone of our communities and economies.
People continue to seek out the River, including at the M6tis Crossing interpretive center for music and jigging, gastro-tourism, reconnection to landscape, and to seek greater cultural understanding. The popular'Paddle into the Past' program is an experience in which participants embark on a journey in a Voyageur Canoe, along the same route taken by historic fur traders and explorers such as Henry Alexander and David Thompson along the North Saskatchewan River.
We outht to safeguard the future of our North Saskatchewan River environment for the use, benefit, and enjoyment of future generations. Currently, only the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River falling within the Banff National Park are recognized under the Canadian Heritage River System.
As such, we would support an inter-provincial nomination of the entire reach of the North Saskatchewan River for inclusion into the Canadian Heritage River System, and we implore our North Saskatchewan River neighbors spanning both the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan to lend their support as well.
Best Regards, ,;:.'-.,,-../,
Craig Lukin u k Reeve, Smoky Lake County cell: 78G556-5/t49 / email: @ webrite: lA^4{,lEgkylakgegglw4b.Ca
cc: North Saskatchewan River Basin Council Mosquito Grizzly Bear's Head Lean Man (saskatchewan) First Natlons Letter of support lnter-Provlnclal Nomlnatlon of the North Saskatchewan River Canadlan Herltate Rlver System (CHRS) Page 2 of4
94 . Beardy's & Okemasis Cree FiEt Nation Muskeg Lake First Nation . Brazeau County Nicole Rancourt, MLA for Prlnce Albert . Oty of Fon saskatchewan Northcote . clty of l-educ Othiese FiRt Nation . City of North Battleford Onion Lake Flrst Natlon . City of Prince Albert Parkland County . Clearwater County Poundmaker Flrst Natlon . Colleeh Youn& MLA for Lloydminister Rakhi Pancholl, MLA for Edmonton- . County of Wetaskiwin Whltemud o Dane Uoyd, MP for StuBeon Rlver - a Randy Hoback, MP for PRINCE AIAERT Parkland Randy Weekes, MLA for Biggar-Sask valley . Davld Hanson, MLA for Bonnwllle{old RM of Baftle River No. /t38 Lake.st. Paul ,. RM of Britannia No. 502 . Davld shepperd, MLA for Edmonton{lty a RM of Buckland No, 491 Centre RM ofCorman Park No. 3tl4 o Deron Bilout MLAfor Edmonton-Beverly- a RM of Duck Lake No. 463 Clareview RM of Eagle Creet No. 376 . Dilbert Kirsch MLA for Batoche RM of Eldon No.471 . Frog Lake First Nation a RM of Frenchman Butte No. 501 . Gamett Genlus, MP for Sherwood Park - a RM of Garden Rtuer No. 490 Fort Saskatchewan a RM of Garden No. 490 . Garth Rowswell, MtA for Vbrmlllion- I RM of Glenside No. 377 Lloydminlster-wainwrlght RM of Great Bend No. 4Os . Gerald Soroka, MP for YELLOWHEAD RM of lalrd No. 404 . Glenn Van Dijken, MIA for Athabasca- a RM of Leask No. 464 Barrhead-Westlock a RM of Mayfield No. 406 . Heather McPherson, MP for Edmonton BM of Mervin No. 499 Strathcona RM of North Battleford No. 437 . Heather Sweet, MLA for Edmonton- RM of Payton No.47O Manning a RM ofShelhrook No.463 r Herb Co& MLA for The Battlefords a RM of Turtle River No.459 . Dale Nally, Ml.A Morlnvllle-St. Hon. for Rosemarie Falk, MP for Battlefords - Albert Lloydmlnster . Hon. Dustln Duncao MLA,for Weyburn-Bit a Saddle take Flrst Nation Muddy, Minister of Envlronment Shannon Stubbs, MP for Lakeland . Hon. Jason Nlxon, MIA ior Rlmbey-Rocky- a Smoky Lake County Regional Herltage Mountain-House:Sundre, Minlster for AEP Board Edmonton- . Hon. Kaycee Madu, MLAfor Smolry Lake Regional Communlty South west, Minister for Municipal Affairs Economic Developmefl t Committee . Hon. Nadine Wilson, MLA for (RcDc) , Saskatchewan Rivers, St. Paul County . Hon. Rachel Notley, MIA for Edmonton- Strathcona County Strathcona Sturgeon County . Hon. Scott Moe, MLA for Rosthern- Sturgeon Lake First Natldn Shellbrook, Premier Sweetgrass First Nation . Jackie Armstrong-Homeniult MLAfor Fort Thorhlld county Saskatchewan-Vegrevllle Thunderchild First Nation o Janis lrwin, MLAfor Edmonton-Highlands- Town and RM of Blalne Lake No.434 Norwood . btter of Support lnt3FPtlvlmlal Nominatbn of tfie orth Sa3katch€wan Rlwl Canadlan Heritap nhrer System (CtlRS) Page 3 of 4
95 . Joe Hargrave, MLAfor Prlnce Albert- o Town ofDevon Carlton o Town of Drayton Valley o Jordan Walker, MLA for Sherwood Park o Town ofLangham o Kelly Block, MP for Carlton Trall - Eagle o Town of Radisson Creek o Town of Rocky Mountain House . Kelly Mc€autey, MP for Edmonton -West o Town of Smoky Lake . Kerry Diotte, MP for. Edmonton - Grlesbaclt o Two Hills County o Lamont County o Vermillion River County o Larry Dqke, MLA for Cut-Knlfe-Turtleford o Victoria Settlement Provincial Historic Site o Leduc County o Victoria Home Guard Hlstorical Society o Lltde Pine lndian First Nation. o VictorlaTrailAgriculturalSoclety . totl Slgurdson, MLA for Edmonton- o Village of Boiden Riverview o Vitlage of Grollne o Lome Dadr, MLAfor Edmonton-McClung o Village of Denholm o Mark Smtth, MLA for Draytori Valley-Dwon o 'Vlllage of Elk Point . Marlin Scmidt; tvllA for Edmonton€old Bar o Vlllage of Maymont . Mdtt Jenerou& MP for Edmonton - o Village of Paradlse Hill Rlverbend o Vlllage of Ruddell o Mdtls Crossing r Village of Mlna o Mdtis Natlon of Alberta o Mllage of Waskatenau o Mike take, MP for Edmonton - . wahpeton Dakota Nation & Prince Albert Wetaskiwin Grand Council . 'Moosomin First Natlon o Ziad Aboulta'f, MP for Edmonton- Manning
LetGrof Snpport! lnter-Prwlmlal Nomlnatlon of the ltorth Saslotchewan Rluel Canadlan Herltage Rtuer System (CHnSl
96 ALBERTA SERVICE ALBERTA
Ofue of the Minister M LA, Strath co na- Slt eruto od Par k AR36637
October 3L,20L9
His Worship Raymond Thomas S. Ralph Mayor, Town of Devon l Columbia Avenue West Devon, AB T9G 1A1
Dear His Worship Ralph:
I am reaching out to you with regard to the important issue of broadband internet. On my recent tour of Alberta, I met with hundreds of Albertans including elected officials, community representatives, small business leaders, and concerned citizens across 36 communities.
It quickly became clear the pressing need for improved access to high-speed broadband and the challenges that rural and remote communities are facing in its absence. I also heard inspiring examples of communities working together to overcome the connectivity challenges head-on with innovative local solutions, often in partnership with regional neighbours.
As Minister of Service Alberta, I am committed to continue working with municipalities, telecommunications providers, and infrastructure owners to find ways to expand high-speed broadband services across the province. During my tour I was able to strengthen relationships with key stakeholders, and I want my department to foster this dialogue with elected representatives, municipal officials, and business leaders across the province. To help nurture this ongoing collaboration and dialogue, I am requesting the following information:
o The name of a designated contact within your organization for broadband.
o Contact information for that individual, including an email address and telephone number.
o lf applicable, a short summary of current plans or initiatives your municipality is involved in for expanding access to high-speed broadband to your community. HECHIWHffi ./2 Nov 0 i 20te
103 Legislature Building, 10800 - 97 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta TSKZBG
hintcd on nclcbd papcr 97 His Worship Raymond Thomas S. Ralph Page 2
My department's contact person is Richard Bates, Provincial Broadband Business Analyst, and he can be reached at richard. [email protected]. Please use the subject line, "Designated broadband contact". lf you have any questions, you may contact Richard by telephone at 780-422-0798. To calltoll-free, dial 310-0000 and then the number.
Thank you for your cooperation. I look forward to working with you on these issues.
Sincerely, ft6Cr6,^
I Honourable Nate Glubish -c Minister of Service Alberta cc Honourable Kaycee Madu Minister of Municipal Affairs
98 11. Reports 11.1 Council Reports Councillor Adams attended and/or reported on the following:
Councillor Fish has nothing to report at this time. Councillor Koroll attended and/or reported on the following:
Councillor May attended and/or reported on the following:
99 Councillor Hugh attended and/or reported on the following:
Councillor Porter has nothing to report at this time. Mayor Ralph attended and/or reported on the following:
100
11.2a 101
11.2b 102
11.3 103 Planning & Operations Monthly Report: October 2019 Presented to Council: November 12, 2019
FUNCTION HIGHLIGHTS – STATISTICS - TRENDS GENERAL 21 first calls/utility locates SERVICES 34 natural gas meters and 4 water meters changed Branch chipping at town yard ongoing Contracted branch debris hauling to landfill th ENGINEERING Devon Environmental Sustainability Award complete for 4 year. Awards presented at Devon Business Expo Energy Scoping Audit completed at Dale Fisher Arena under MCCAC REC grant Staff attended workshop #2 for the Municipal Asset management plan regional cohort through FCM, AUMA and RMA. Quarterly HVAC inspection completed at Town facilities Fire Alarm and sprinkler inspections Ongoing completion on long term capital plan and 2020 capital plan details Preparation for completion of internal safety audit for COR certification Maintenance items completed at various facilities NATURAL GAS UTILITY Price for Natural Gas increased in October to a $1.72 per GJ, September was $1.42 per GJ. Multiple gas services installed for new home construction sites Gas service installed at Sii 360 shop and meter set fabrication underway ROADWAYS & All fire hydrants checked and preparations made for winter season DRAINAGE Equipment preparations and maintenance continuing for winter season Multiple street sign repairs completed and installed RECYCLING & SOLID Collection Concerns: 5 garbage, 6 organics and 2 recycling missed WASTE UTILITY Large Item Collection and Brown Bag Collection Complete. Less fuel tanks and electronics placed at curbside than previous years. Communications have been improving program. Organics collection pilot began at Dale Fisher Arena nd 2 task force meeting completed with the theme around “communications” Physical and digital letters/copies of bylaw delivered to businesses Updating website and initiating communications for residents WATER UTILITY Divers did the fall river intake inspection and marker buoy removed Fire evacuation practice done Cleaned out clarifier blow down sump Painted piping at the reservoir WASTEWATER UTILITY Repaired #2 RBC Unit Replaced Sodium Thiosulfate pump Annual inspection done on Unit #12 Tank Truck PLANNING & Permits issued include: 2 Commercial,1 Basement Development and 1 Home Occupation DEVELOPMENT 7 Electrical, 12 Gas and 3 Plumbing permits issued Working with Community Services on cemetery plan Returned Security Deposits to several builders as their services were hooked up The new Chicken to Go is unofficially open and a General Store is working on stocking their shelves and will be opening in the near future. Municipal Planning Commission meeting – permit application was withdrawn, and Land Use Bylaw amendment being proposed to Council.
Agenda Item 11.4.1. 104
Finance & Support Services Monthly Report For: October 2019 Presented to Council November 12, 2019
FUNCTION HIGHLIGHTS – STATISTICS – TRENDS GENERAL Attended GFOA-Western Conference Oct 1 - 4 SERVICES Participated in the Strategy Priorities Planning sessions with Council and staff Attended IAMA workshop in Calgary Attended annual GFOA-Alberta Board meeting in Red Deer Attended monthly Devon Golf & CC Board meeting Met with representatives from BenefitLink to discuss actual usage data for 2018 & 2019 Met with representative from Leduc County to discuss 2020 Cost Share agreement Met with local resident to discuss tax arrears and payment arrangement
UTILITIES Work orders for disconnect/reconnect/service change are as follows: 2019 2018 October 59 67 Y-T-D 572 592 Utility bills for the month of October will be mailed out the week of November 11, 2019 Residents of Devon were billed at a cost of $1.72/gj, compared to $1.54/gj in October 2018 Participation in the preauthorized payment program was 802 customers compared to 758 customers in October 2018 1,301 utility bills sent via email, compared to 1,166 in October 2018 Total of monthly pre-authorized payment was $156,787
TAXES 2019 Tax Levy was $8,287,269 of which $786,969 is outstanding. This equates to 9.0% of the 2019 levy. In comparison, 2018 Tax Levy was $8,122,130 of which $864,471 is outstanding. This equates to 10.6% of the 2018 levy. Prior years uncollected taxes as of October 2019 was $46,844, compared to October 2018 which was $74,761 There are 1,258 participants in the pre-authorized tax payment plan compared to 1,239 in October 2018. Total of monthly pre-authorized payments was $323,635 Title Changes are as follows: 2019 2018 October 14 26 Y-T-D 203 238 There were 15 properties on tax notification as October 31, 2019; 6 are currently on payment arrangements, 9 have until March 31, 2020 to make payment arrangements, and 6 properties were discharged in October
Agenda Item 11.4.2 Page 1 of 1 105 Planning and Operations - Community Services
Monthly Report For October 2019 Presented to Council: November 12, 2019 FUNCTION HIGHLIGHTS – STATISTICS - TRENDS Community Centre • Exterior doors were painted. • VCT flooring bid was awarded to Kemway builders. A scheduled closure Jan 3- th 17 to complete the work. • Concrete splash pads completed, damage proof drain spots being manufactured, expected prior to end of November. • Kitchen deep clean performed & Claypool carpets steam cleaned Hall Activity: • Main hall – 159 hours of activity (17 days) • Braun hall – 56 hours of activity (25 days) • Dan Claypool room – 88 hours of activity (17 days) RECREATION, PARKS & EVENTS CULTURE • Family Halloween Dancy Party was held October 26 hosted by the LOCAL Youth Experience. • Upcoming Events o Christmas in the Park – November 30 from 4-8pm . Sponsorship is finalized . Volunteer Recruitment is ongoing • Providing support to community events o Outgrown It Sale – October 19 o Devon Business Expo – October 25 PROGRAMS • Drop in programs continue. Badminton on Tuesdays from 5-7pm at Robina Baker, Pickleball on Wednesdays from 7-9 at Riverview, Basketball on Thursdays from 6:30-8:30pm at Riverview. • Preparing the winter program guide set to be delivered early-mid December GENERAL • Assisting with the planning for the Youth Development Recreation Symposium to be held in Edmonton April 1&2, 2020. • Attended Devon Interagency Meeting to share upcoming programs & events • Prepared RiverFest 2019 report to present to Council
COMMUNITY Devon Communities in Bloom DEVELOPMENT • Sub-committee established to keenly review all of the aspects that Judges evaluate FACILITATOR • Regular Meeting Highlights: o Plan to replace Bloom 2000 sign (has deteriorated) in Centennial Park o Purchase community sign that features Devon being awarded 4 blooms in 2019 Walk the Talks: • Walk the Talks event on October 16th - Presentation by Dr. Erick Schmidt,
Page 1 of 3 Agenda Item 11.4.3
106 Planning and Operations - Community Services
Monthly Report For October 2019 Presented to Council: November 12, 2019 Executive Chairman & Chief Science Officer of BioRefinex, the company working toward establishing the Biorefinery in Lacombe.
Community Connections Café • The October 8th event featured Rob De Pruis of the Insurance Bureau of Canada whom presented on how our insurance policies in light of the growing natural catastrophe’s and severe weather. • The November 5th event will feature local resident Yvonne Bohme who was the first female Air Traffic Controller at EIA Virtues Project • The weekly virtues pick café continued weekly throughout October. Other • Assisting with engagement planning for the indigenous engagement framework • Meeting with Devon Historical Society • Rural Mental Health Animators’ meeting • Gord Macintosh Strategic Priorities Session
FAMILY AND Monthly Themes / Support Requests COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES Mental health, addictions, financial support and guidance, employment, counselling, housing, food, emotional and self awareness/regulation/expression, coping strategies, (FCSS) parent-child relationships, self-care, communication skills, Outreach Home Support, system navigation, eviction, government form filling.
Referrals / Connections Alberta Supports, Alberta Works, Karunia, community bus, Leduc Regional Housing, Food Bank, Leduc Mental Health and Addictions, Town programs, Library Programs, Ecumenical Outreach, Leduc Hub, St. Vincent de Paul, RCMP, Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee, AA, Service Canada, Landlord and Tenant Board
Courses / Programs Hosted / Attended: • FCSSC and CSOC hosted the interagency meeting, great attendance and sharing. • CSOC hosted Declutter Your Life presentation, well attended with 28 people registered. • FCSSC and CSOC initiated a regional ESS meeting to review current plans and future planning. • FCSSC hosted the Money Mentors session at the Library, low attendance but well received. • CSOC participated in the Cannabis Youth Toolkit forum in Leduc. • CSOC attended the webinar for Inter-generational programming. • CSOC attended the P73 Luncheon to share information.
Page 2 of 3 Agenda Item 11.4.3
107 Planning and Operations - Community Services
Monthly Report For October 2019 Presented to Council: November 12, 2019 • CSOC facilitated the Caregiver Support Group, one new member attended • Indoor Walking program up and running for the 2019/20 season. • CSOC completed a 2 day course on Motivational Interviewing. Very practical and useful training. • FCSSC hosted the adult / family trivia nights – there are still a few more to go and one Christmas special in December.
Planning and Highlights: • FCSSC and CSOC are in the process of putting together an eight-week mindfulness-based stress reduction program. • Program planning for the 2020 Winter Guide Book. • CSOC processed the 3rd quarter Outreach Home Support subsidies. • CSOC met with Drive Happiness (transportation program for seniors), reviewed the program details and the requirements for being able to offer this service in Devon. A minimum of 2 volunteers (who are reimbursed mileage) are required to get the service up and running for Devon residents. • FCSSC is trying to coordinate with CMHA to allow FCSS workers to host the Living Life to the Full program to make it easier for it to be hosted locally. • FCSSC attended the strategic planning and priorities session. • FCSSC met with the local early childhood network to plan our Christmas Joy events and firm up some of the universal training and special events for 2020 so we can bring a final plan to them in December / early 2020.
Direct Client Support
Youth and Family (ongoing caseload) New Referrals: 0 Closures: 0 Current Number of Clients: 12 Ages 0-6 = Ages 7-12 = Ages 13-17 = Adult = Family = 12
Adults and Early Years (no ongoing caseload – required action) Clients supported: 21
Seniors (ongoing caseload) Current number of Active Clients: 23
Page 3 of 3 Agenda Item 11.4.3
108
Legislative and Protective Services Monthly Report For October 2019 Presented to Council: November 12, 2019
FUNCTION HIGHLIGHTS – STATISTICS – TRENDS General Services • Cemetery Master Plan Open House • Devon Chamber Business Expo Communications • Developed messaging and materials to assist with the upcoming Single- Use Retail Bag Bylaw before it goes live for residents on Jan. 1, 2020. • Started working with Energy Efficiency Alberta on marketing plan for Devon launch of the Clean Energy Improvement Program • Assisted Indigenous Engagement Coordinator with promotion of programming through October and November. • Started work on Town of Devon website reskin to launch a new more user friendly site in 2020. Corporate Strategic • Strategic Priorities Planning session with Staff Planning Legislative Services • Council Open House • Indigenous Engagement Initiative Working Session • Strategic Priorities Planning session with Council
ECONOMIC • Leduc Economic Development Summit DEVELOPMENT • Devon Chamber Business Expo – Hosted BBQ for attendees • EMRB Golf Tournament discussions • Land collaboration with developer • Attendance at FDI Forum (Foreign Direct Investment) 1st time held in Canada • EDA Ministry Dinner – EDA Board of Directors hosted (I’m a Director) • Single use bylaw marketing strategy • Industrial land use strategy meetings • Annual Budget review • Ball diamond land strategy
Peace Officer October’s focus on the Alberta Traffic Safety Calendar was Pedestrian Safety. The CPO’s conducted 48 school zone patrols throughout the month. These patrols were conducted at key times such as morning, lunch and end of day. Our COP’s wrote numerous traffic violation tickets ranging from speeding, stop sign, regulatory, distracted driving, and equipment violations. On our regular patrols: • 1 motorist was charged for failing to yield for a pedestrian in a crosswalk. This offence carries a penalty of $776. • The crosswalk on HWY 60 and Miquelon was noted to be of concern
Agenda Item 11.4.4. Page 1 of 3
109 by RCMP and the CPO’s. Patrols of this area have been increased to show a presence. • During two of our regular playground zone patrols, a motorist was observed speeding back-to-back on two separate days at the same time of the morning. On both occasions, cannabis was found near the driver. A roadside alcohol screening device was utilized on the Driver by the RCMP and he as found to be just under the legal limit. • 6 motorists were found to be driving without insurance by the CPO’s. • 1 motorist failed to stop for the CPO’s and escaped into Parkland County. • CPO’s hosted a Joint Force Operation with the Alberta Sheriffs, RCMP, Edmonton Police Service and Leduc City Community Peace Officers targeting document violation and impaired driving. 5 drivers were arrested for impaired driving within a 3-hour window. 19 Law Enforcement Officers from various jurisdictions joined us. • A CPO conducted a traffic stop on vehicle for a burned-out headlight. The front seat passenger was holding a two-week-old newborn on her lap. No car seat was installed in the vehicle. The driver was disallowed to continue, and Child and Family Services were notified. • A CPO conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle in Voyageur Park; the occupant of the vehicle was subsequently discovered by the CPO to be a missing person and was forwarded to the RCMP. • CPO’s executed a warrant with the assistance of the RCMP. • CPO’s drove around Devon on Halloween night handing out candy and interacting with trick-or-treaters.
In Bylaw Services, 32 case files were investigated ranging from: - 2 assist RCMP. - 2 assist public. - 2 assist Devon Fire. - 1 assist Town Department. - 5 parking. - 3 unsightly properties. - 7 dog at large. - 3 cat at large. - 1 noise complaint. - 1 Cannabis complaint. - 1 fire bylaw. - 1 trespassing file. - 2 debris on roadway.
Fire Department Officer Making Report: Chief Main/Capt. Weber
Agenda Item 11.4.4. Page 2 of 3
110 Call Summary/ Breakdown Devon Parkland District 1, Devon TOTAL NUMBER OF CALLS 11 11 Fire Calls 1 1 Medical Aid Calls 1 0 Other 9 10 Number of hours dedicated to training 242 242 Number of hours dedicated to fire 3 3 prevention/public education Number of people presented to and/or visited hall 15 15
Training Summary Practiced assembling the single wheel mule and using it for river valley rescues. We went into the county to practice apparatus operation and the use of GPS and maps. We began vehicle extrication training by using stabilization bars and air bags to secure or lift vehicles. Continuing with extrication training, we practiced performing a roof flap. Fire Prevention / Public Fire Prevention Week - Went to IGA and Hardy’s to hand out smoke Education Summary detectors and CO detectors to anyone who required one.
Comments Regarding Past Seven recruits began their ten-week training program during October. Month
Agenda Item 11.4.4. Page 3 of 3
111