DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix B Noise Impact Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix B Noise Impact Assessment Enbridge Pipelines Inc. December 2006 Edmonton South Terminal Development 4685 APPENDIX B NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT aci Acoustical Consultants Inc. Suite 107, 9920-63Ave Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6E 0G9 Phone: (780) 414-6373, Fax: (780) 414-6376 www.aciacoustical.com Environmental Noise Impact Assessment For Edmonton South Terminal Prepared for: Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Prepared by: S. Bilawchuk, M.Sc., P.Eng. aci Acoustical Consultants Inc. Edmonton, Alberta APEGGA Permit to Practice #P7735 aci Project #: 06-066 December 12, 2006 Executive Summary aci Acoustical Consultants Inc., of Edmonton AB, was retained by Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (Enbridge) to conduct an environmental noise impact assessment (NIA) for the proposed new addition forming the Edmonton South Terminal. The purpose of the work was to conduct baseline noise monitorings, generate a computer noise model of the existing site, and determine the relative impact of the proposed addition. The results of the baseline noise monitorings indicated a noise climate at the Woodridge Farms location that was dominated by traffic on Hwy. 216, Baseline Road, and local Sherwood Park traffic. The noise climate at the Rundle Heights location was dominated by the Esso Strathcona Refinery to the south. At both locations, the Enbridge Terminal was completely inaudible at all times of the noise monitoring and did not contribute to the measured sound levels in any way. Baseline Noise Monitoring Results Leq24* (dBA) LeqDay* (dBA) LeqNight (dBA) Woodridge Farms 44.5 45.2 43.0 Rundle Heights 48.1 48.2 48.0 *Not a full 15 day-time hours were monitored The noise modeling of the existing Terminal resulted in noise levels which were very low and well below the Permissible Sound Levels for either nearby residential area. Addition of the proposed tanks and booster pumps had a negligible effect on the noise levels, increasing the noise by only 0.3 dBA at the Rundle Heights receptor and 2.4 dBA at the Woodridge Farms receptor. In addition, the noise levels associated with traffic on the surrounding roadways as well as the other industrial and energy facilities closer to both residential areas contributed significantly more to the local noise climate than the existing Terminal or proposed South Terminal. As such, it is highly likely that noise from the existing Terminal and South Terminal would be completely inaudible at both receptor locations. Proposed Night-Time Noise Levels Associated With Existing and South Terminals L Night 1 Relative PSL-Night eq Compliant (dBA) Increase (dBA) (dBA) Woodridge Farms Receptor 29.5 + 2.4 46.0 Yes Rundle Heights Receptor 23.3 + 0.3 46.0 Yes 1 The term Leq represents the energy equivalent sound level. This is a measure of the equivalent sound level for a specified period of time accounting for fluctuations. December 12, 2006 Enbridge, Edmonton South Terminal Project #06-066 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Description ...................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Measurement & Modeling Methods................................................................................................ 3 3.1. Environmental Noise Monitorings .............................................................................................. 3 3.2. Computer Noise Modeling .......................................................................................................... 4 4.0 Permissible Sound Levels............................................................................................................... 6 4.1. City of Edmonton Noise Bylaw No. 7255 .................................................................................. 6 4.2. Alberta Energy and Utilities Board ID99-8 ................................................................................ 7 4.3. Summary of Noise Criteria.......................................................................................................... 7 5.0 Results and Discussion.................................................................................................................... 8 5.1. Environmental Noise Monitorings .............................................................................................. 8 5.2. Weather Conditions..................................................................................................................... 9 5.3. Baseline Case Noise Modeling.................................................................................................. 10 5.4. Proposed Case Noise Modeling ................................................................................................ 10 6.0 Conclusion..................................................................................................................................... 11 7.0 References ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Appendix I MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT USED..................................................................... 18 Appendix II THE ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE (GENERAL) ....................... 26 Appendix III SOUND LEVELS OF FAMILIAR NOISE SOURCES .............................................. 38 Appendix IV NOISE MODELING PARAMETERS ........................................................................ 40 Appendix V WEATHER DATA....................................................................................................... 41 Appendix VI NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT................................................................................ 43 List of Tables Table 1. Basic Night-Time Sound Levels (as per EUB ID99-8)................................................................ 7 Table 2. Baseline Noise Monitoring Results.............................................................................................. 8 Table 3. Baseline Noise Monitoring Enbridge Terminal Operations......................................................... 9 Table 4. Baseline Night-Time Noise Levels Associated With Existing Terminal................................... 10 Table 5. Proposed Night-Time Noise Levels Associated With Existing and South Terminals............... 10 List of Figures Figure 1. Study Area ................................................................................................................................ 13 Figure 2. Woodridge Farms Noise and Weather Monitors ...................................................................... 14 Figure 3. Rundle Heights Noise Monitor ................................................................................................. 14 Figure 4. Broadband A-Weighted Leq Noise Monitor Results at Woodridge Farms ............................... 15 Figure 5. Broadband A-Weighted Leq Noise Monitor Results at Rundle Heights ................................... 15 Figure 6. Baseline Night-time Noise Levels ............................................................................................ 16 Figure 7. Proposed Night-time Noise Levels ........................................................................................... 17 i December 12, 2006 Enbridge, Edmonton South Terminal Project #06-066 1.0 Introduction aci Acoustical Consultants Inc., of Edmonton AB, was retained by Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (Enbridge) to conduct an environmental noise impact assessment (NIA) for the proposed new addition forming the Edmonton South Terminal. The purpose of the work was to conduct baseline noise monitorings, generate a computer noise model of the existing site, and determine the relative impact of the proposed addition. 2.0 Description The existing Enbridge Edmonton Terminal is located east of Edmonton in Strathcona County, north of Baseline Road and west of Hwy. 216, as shown in Fig. 1. The Terminal covers approximately one quarter-section of land and contains several large storage tanks, large electric motor driven pumps (typically located within buildings), smaller transfer pumps, and various valves and other small equipment associated with pipeline operations. The Terminal is located essentially in an industrial area known as Refinery Row. To the north of the Terminal is a petro-chemical facility with tank storage. Immediately to the west of the Terminal is a Kinder Morgan facility with additional industrial facilities further to the west (Including the ESSO Strathcona Refinery) and to the southwest. Immediately to the south are two currently un-developed Sections of land. Further to the south is an Alberta Enviro Fuels Inc. facility along with the Shell Sherwood Terminal. To the southeast is residential development within Sherwood Park. Finally, to the east and northeast is commercial and light industrial development within Sherwood Park. As mentioned previously, the major roadways in the area include Hwy. 216 and Baseline Road. In addition, Hwy. 16 is located approximately 3.2km north of Baseline Road and the Sherwood Park Freeway is located approximately 3.2km south of Baseline Road. All of these routes are heavily traveled with a considerable volume of heavy trucks. As such, the road noise is generally the dominant noise source in the area. 1 December 12, 2006 Enbridge, Edmonton South Terminal Project #06-066 The nearest residents to the Terminal include the area of Woodbridge Farms in Sherwood Park (approximately 1800m
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marketing Brochure
    TOWN OF MORINVILLE Cameron 2019: 9,893 Centre 50 Shopping Centre y y a a w w h h g i g i NE Corner of 98 Avenue & 50 Street H H projects A 8 8 2 2 throughout 37 Highway Greater EDMONTON ENERGY & y a hw ig H TECHNOLOGY PARK TO FORT 15 SASKATCHEWAN Edmonton EST 21,795 2019: 26,942 t s CFB EDM a -e h rt o NAMAO N e v ri Area D 2019: 13,300 g in n n a 24 M S t . 633 Highway Villeneuve Road A 3 l b e GOODRIDGE r t R CORNERS t o HORSE HILL s a e d w - h 2019: 1,681 t 2019: 2,388 r S T . A L B E R T o EST: 8,235 N e v EST: 71,467 i r 2019: 66,082 D CASTLE DOWNS EXPANSION EDMONTON g n 2019: 11,481 i PILOT n NORTH n EST: 22,295 a 25 2019: 32,549 SOUND 1 M EST: 45,258 2019: 26,934 t EST: 40,363 es -w th 2 or N THE ve ri D GRIESBACH y PALISADES da en 2019: 5,731 H 2019: 20,893 ny EST: 13,742 ho EST: 22,048 nt A t t s s e e w - w - h h t t r r o o N N t 1 Hollick Kenyon / t e e e e r BIG LAKE r t t S S 0 McConachie Plaza 7 5 2019: 3,851 9 Yellowhead Trail North-west 2 Manning Town Centre / EST: 25,874 Manning Village 16 Highway t 4 s e w 3 - h Horse Hill t r o N t e e r t S 2019: 53,608 0 7 4 Emerald Hills 1 TO STONY PLAIN 22 23 & SPRUCE GROVE E D M O N T O N 5 Centre 50 16A Highway Stony Plain Road North-west 10 2019 Metro Pop: 1,321,426 LEWIS 0 Avenue North-west 5 6 FARMS The Market at Centre in the Park S H E R W O O D 2019: 19,734 P A R K 7 Meyokumin EST: 46,564 6 y a erwoodP w Sh ark F h re g eway i H 8 Harvest Hills Market 6 Wye Road 1 THE 2 9 Harvest Pointe GRANGE STRATHCONA COUNTY 2019: 21,653 2019: 98,381 EST: 26,246 10 Montalet / WEST Canadian Tire Gallerie Beaumont JASPER PLACE st Centre 50 Shopping Centre is an existing retail centre -we North Whitemud 628 Highway Marks 11 South Edmonton Common SOUTH Drive Whitemud Drive 21 2019: 19,838 12 CAMERON servicing the mature Capilano area and Ottwell McDonalds Ellerslie Crossing EDGEMONT HEIGHTS 2019: 1,912 2019: 3,508 t s BMO EST: 4,488 e communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Board Meeting Comprehensive Agenda November 12, 2015 – 9:00 – Noon
    Board Meeting Comprehensive Agenda November 12, 2015 – 9:00 – Noon Chateau Louis, Grand Ballroom 11727 Kingsway, Edmonton 1. Call to Order 2. Chair’s Opening Remarks Consent Agenda Items: Motion: That the Capital Region Board approve the meeting agenda and its previous meeting minutes. 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes of October 8, 2015 Pg. 3 of 80 5. Review of CRB Committee Memberships Pg. 11 of 80 Recommended Motion: That the Capital Region Board direct administration to facilitate the process for selecting committee membership for the Housing Committee. 6. Land Use & Planning Committee a. Capital Region Energy Corridors Master Plan Pg. 17 of 80 Recommended Motion: That the Capital Region Board approve the Capital Region Energy Corridors Master Plan, as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Committee. 7. Board Information Requests Update Pg. 68 of 80 8. Committee/Task Force Minutes a. Land Use & Planning Committee – Draft Minutes, Chair Update Pg. 72 of 80 b. Growth Plan Update Task Force – Draft Minutes, Chair Update Pg. 75 of 80 Created: October 19, 2015 Updated: November 4, 2015 Page 1 of 2 CRB Mtg Pkg November 11/15 Page 1 of 80 9. Administrative Items a. CEO’s Update 10. Other Business a. Minister of Municipal Affairs Address b. Facilitated Mandate Discussion Pg. 78 of 80 Recommended Motion: That the Capital Region Board refer the facilitated conversation results to Administration for a recommendation(s) to be brought back to the Board no later than the March 10, 2016 Board meeting for a decision. 11. Adjournment Created: October 19, 2015 Updated: November 4, 2015 Page 2 of 2 CRB Mtg Pkg November 11/15 Page 2 of 80 Minutes of the meeting of the Capital Region Board held at Grand Ballroom, Chateau Louis Conference Centre on Thursday, October 8, 2015 Delegates in Attendance: Mayor Nolan Crouse – St.
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta Cities at the Crossroads: Urban Development Challenges and Opportunities in Historical and Comparative Perspective
    Volume 7 • Issue 12 • May 2014 ALBERTA CITIES AT THE CROSSROADS: URBAN DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES IN HISTORICAL AND COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Zack Taylor, University of Toronto Scarborough Marcy Burchfield, Neptis Foundation Anna Kramer, Neptis Foundation SUMMARY Fuelled by the province’s booming energy sector, Alberta’s two largest cities have experienced unprecedented levels of growth. As a result, they face a choice about how to best accommodate their expanding populations — whether to grow out or grow up. For decades, Calgary and Edmonton accommodated almost all growth through the former, suburban expansion. Indeed, the postwar period was marked by a focus on contiguous outward growth to ensure housing affordability and the efficient use of infrastructure, a policy that was widely supported by both the public and the development industry. In Calgary, at least, this has started to change. Beginning in the late 1990s, the city shifted its focus to livability and sustainability, a move that saw policies introduced to promote urban intensification and greater transit use. While this shift has proven popular in many quarters, it also has its fair share of detractors, including many in the development industry. In Edmonton, a city where growth has been relatively slower and authority over urban development dispersed among several local governments, this policy shift has not occurred. Although it is too early to see clear results from this policy shift, a spatial analysis shows that the density of Calgary’s built-up urban area increased in the first decade of the 21st century. Relatively high-density suburban growth led Calgary to consume less land compared with the previous decade (2 ha per 100 new residents in 2001–2011 versus 6.5 ha in 1991–2001).
    [Show full text]
  • From River Lots to Suburb: the Morris Family Farm and the Founding of Fulton Place
    From River Lots to Suburb: The Morris Family Farm and the Founding of Fulton Place Fulton Place Community League (Heritage Committee) 1 From River Lots to Suburb: The Morris Family Farm and the Founding of Fulton Place Preface: Edmonton’s Fulton Place community is typical of many North American residential neighborhoods built during the mid-1950s. From the outset the modestly priced and sized houses attracted young families. Over time, schools, places of worship, sports fields and recreational amenities, retail shops, seniors’ residences and green spaces were added. The population has ebbed and flowed as generations have come and gone, but the area continues to attract families – many staying for decades. Once considered suburban, Fulton Place and the adjacent neighborhoods of the Hardisty district are now referred to as mature. Given this description is applicable to hundreds of neighborhoods in towns and cities across Alberta, what secrets from the past could such a locale possibly harbour? As it turns out, more than one might think. For example, the oldest in-situ structure in Fulton Place is the former Morris family farmhouse believed to have been built during the First World War.1 Just prior to the war, the Morris family attempted to create a housing sub-division on their land. Had this venture succeeded, parts Edmonton’s Hardisty district, including Fulton Place, would be known by the names Ridgeway Park, Crescent View and College Heights. The following narrative traces the emergence of the Fulton Place neighborhood, beginning with the Dominion Land Survey of Edmonton Settlement in 1882-83. This document’s primary purpose is to provide context for several other components of the “River Lots to Suburb” arts and heritage project that includes oral histories, digitization and reproduction of a heritage mural, and photo-documentation of the Morris (Bishop) farmhouse.
    [Show full text]
  • Enbridge Pipelines Inc
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Application Overview/Executive Summary 2.0 Project Description 2.1 Engineering Design Details 2.2 Engineering Design Philosophy and Onshore Pipeline Regulations 2.3 Quality Assurance Program 2.4 Alternatives 3.0 Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment 3.1 Project Description 3.2 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting 3.3 Regulatory Consultation 3.4 Effects Assessment 3.5 Cumulative Effects Assessment 3.6 Inspection, Monitoring and Follow Up 4.0 Economics 4.1 Supply 4.2 Transportation Matters 4.3 Markets 4.4 Financing 5.0 Public Interest/Consultation 5.1 Principles and Goals of the Public Consultation Program 5.2 Design of the Public Consultation Program 5.3 Implementing the Public Consultation Program 6.0 Appendices Appendix 1 Drawings Appendix 2 Public Notification Letter to Stakeholders Appendix 3 Enbridge Corporate Social Responsibility Policy Appendix 4 Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment References Appendix 5 Filing Manual Checklists 1.0 APPLICATION OVERVIEW / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Name: Access Pipeline Receipt Facilities at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal Project Cost: $5,700,000 In response to a request from Access Pipeline Inc. (“Access”), Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) is applying for approval to construct a custody transfer metering system and associated facilities at Enbridge’s existing Edmonton Terminal. Access is planning to construct a new NPS 24 pipeline in a pipe rack across the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal with deliveries of commodities to Enbridge and Kinder Morgan, Inc. These facilities are required by Access in order to receive Devon Energy and MEG Energy heavy synbit blend production into the Enbridge system at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal.
    [Show full text]
  • Board Order No. Mgb 042/19 File: An18/Fort/C-01
    BOARD ORDER NO. MGB 042/19 FILE: AN18/FORT/C-01 IN THE MATTER OF THE Municipal Government Act being Chapter M-26 of the Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 (Act). AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by the City of Fort Saskatchewan, in the Province of Alberta, to annex certain territory lying immediately adjacent thereto and thereby its separation from Strathcona County. BEFORE: Members: S. Boyer, Presiding Officer J. Jones, Member D. Nickle, Member Case Manager: R. Duncan Case Manager Advisor: A. Drost SUMMARY After examining the submissions from the City of Fort Saskatchewan, Strathcona County, affected landowners, and other interested parties, the Municipal Government Board (MGB) makes the following recommendation for the reasons set out in the MGB report, shown as Schedule 3 of this Board Order. Recommendation That the annexation be approved in accordance with the following: The Lieutenant Governor in Council orders that 1 In this Order, “annexed land” means the land described in Schedule 1 and shown on the sketch in Schedule 2. 156/120-M42-19 Page 1 of 38 BOARD ORDER NO. MGB 042/19 FILE: AN18/FORT/C-01 2 Effective January 1, 2020, the land described in Schedule 1 and shown on the sketch in Schedule 2 is separated from Strathcona County and annexed to the City of Fort Saskatchewan. 3 Any taxes owing to Strathcona County at the end of December 31, 2019 in respect of the annexed land and any assessable improvements to it are transferred to and become payable to the City of Fort Saskatchewan together with any lawful penalties and costs levied in respect of those taxes, and the City of Fort Saskatchewan on collecting those taxes, penalties and costs must pay them to Strathcona County.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10 – Safety
    10…Safety Introduction It is important to provide Strathcona County residents and stakeholders with a safe environment in which to live, work and play. There is a need to ensure emergency and protective services are available for all areas of the County, as well as require neighbourhoods and infrastructure to be designed and developed to promote safety. As Strathcona County continues to grow, the number of vehicles travelling on our roads will increase. The public has indicated their concerns with the increased traffic on our rural roads and the need for upgrades in order to aid in preventing collisions. Strathcona County is policed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). At the time of writing this Bylaw, the County detachment consists of 71 police officers and 11 special constables. There is one police detachment/station located within the Urban Service Area of Sherwood Park and an RCMP office located at Heartland Hall, in the northern part of the County. The RCMP are responsible for general duty, traffic services, crime investigations, community policing and victim services. Strathcona County Emergency Services is responsible for, and involved in, fire suppression rescue response, dangerous goods response, emergency medical services at Advanced Life Support levels, fire investigation, fire inspection, public education, arson investigation, emergency preparedness and fire fighter recruitment and training. At the time of writing this Bylaw, the department consisted of 84 full time, 65 part time fire fighters and 15 public education officers. There are five fire stations located in Strathcona County (Sherwood Park (two), Heartland Hall, South Cooking Lake and Ardrossan). The rural area is a highly desirable place to live as witnessed by the demand for acreage developments within the County.
    [Show full text]
  • Resilient City
    i RESILIENT EDMONTON – WHY AND HOW? BY CRAIG APPLEGATH AND JONATHAN YAZER MAY 14, 2010 DRAFT – April 23, 2010 RESILIENT EDMONTON – WHY AND HOW? ■ ■ ■ i Table of Contents i Abstract ................................................................................................. 1 ii Acknowledgments .................................................................................... 1 iii Author Biographies .................................................................................. 2 iv Outline of Goals ...................................................................................... 3 Section 1 Resilience: The Conceptual Framework......................................................... 5 1.1 Defining Resilience .................................................................................... 5 1.2 Building Capacity ...................................................................................... 5 1.3 Understanding Disturbances ........................................................................ 6 1.4 Understanding Social-ecological Systems ........................................................ 7 1.5 Resilience, Planning and Design Principles ...................................................... 8 Section 2 Turning Threats into Opportunities: How Edmonton can Emerge as a Global Leader in Resilience ............................ 11 2.1 THREATS ............................................................................................... 13 2.2 WEAKNESSES ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Region Energy Corridors Master Plan
    Capital Region Energy Corridors Master Plan FEBRUARY 11, 2016 Capital Region Energy February 11, 2016 Corridors Master Plan Headwater Group Capital Region Energy Corridors Master Plan February 11, 2016 Page 2 of 45 Headwater Group Capital Region Energy Corridors Master Plan Executive Summary The Capital Region Board recently approved a vision statement for the first 5 year update to the Capital Region Growth Plan. Embedded in the vision are two elements at the core of energy corridor planning: “The Edmonton Metropolitan Region is the dominant hub for northern Alberta” and “is globally recognized for its… leadership in energy development”. If the Edmonton Metropolitan Region is the hub, then the petroleum pipelines and power transmission lines extending into and out of the Region are the spokes which drive the energy industry and the Canadian economy. Energy corridors are the essential networks that maintain the economic viability of the petrochemical energy cluster in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland and continued success of existing refining activities. Over 40% of Alberta’s GDP is generated in the Edmonton Region. While the current low price of oil may result in a slowing of the economy over the next year or two, the Region is fully aware of the cyclical nature of a boom and bust resource industry. Planning for the next economic boom is critical to ensuring the region remains globally competitive and continues to prosper and thrive. This means planning for the people that are going to come to the Region to take advantage of the opportunities. Between 2006 and 2011 the population of the Capital Region grew by over 12%, one of the fastest growing areas in Canada, driven mostly by the influx of skilled workers needed by the energy industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Josephburg Road North Industrial Area Structure Plan
    Josephburg Road North Industrial Area Structure Plan BYLAW C9-15 SCHEDULE A Prepared For: The City of Fort Saskatchewan Prepared By: Stantec Consulting Ltd. File: 1161 70800 Adopted as Bylaw C13-09 January 25, 2011 Reviewed and Updated for the City of Fort Saskatchewan by Scheffer Andrew Ltd. in 2014 Adopted as Bylaw C9-15 ____ This Page Left Intentionally Blank Bylaw C9-15, Adopted E.2 JOSEPHBURG ROAD NORTH INDUSTRIAL AREA STRUCTURE PLAN Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1.3 1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1.3 1.2 PURPOSE .......................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.3 LAND OWNERSHIP ........................................................................................................... 1.3 1.4 REGIONAL CONTEXT ....................................................................................................... 1.7 1.5 ORIENTATION ................................................................................................................... 1.7 2.0 STATUTORY AND POLICY CONTEXT ........................................................................... 2.11 2.1 CITY OF FORT SASKATCHEWAN MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (2010 – 2030) 2.11 2.2 ALBERTA’S INDUSTRIAL HEARTLAND AREA STRUCTURE PLAN ............................. 2.13 2.3 CITY OF FORT
    [Show full text]
  • Inter-Municipal Transit Governance: an Investigation of Challenges and Opportunities in the Alberta Capital Region Paul Szabo Western University
    Western University Scholarship@Western MPA Major Research Papers Local Government Program 7-30-2013 Inter-Municipal Transit Governance: An Investigation of Challenges and Opportunities in the Alberta Capital Region Paul Szabo Western University Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/lgp-mrps Part of the Public Administration Commons Recommended Citation Szabo, Paul, "Inter-Municipal Transit Governance: An Investigation of Challenges and Opportunities in the Alberta Capital Region" (2013). MPA Major Research Papers. 122. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/lgp-mrps/122 This Major Research Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Local Government Program at Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in MPA Major Research Papers by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Inter-municipal Transit Governance: An Investigation of Challenges & Opportunities in the Alberta Capital Region MPA Research Report Submitted to: Local Government Program Department of Political Science The University of Western Ontario Paul Fraser Szabo July 30, 2013 1 Inter-municipal Transit Governance: An Investigation of Challenges & Opportunities in the Alberta Capital Region Executive Summary: This major research paper will examine the possibilities for inter-municipal coordination of public transit services and regional transit in the Alberta Capital Region. Through a brief examination of historic inter-municipal conflict, and broader evaluation of transportation planning literature, this report aims to establish a foundation from which to analyze potential governance options and future directions. This topic and specific regional governance options for public transit in the Edmonton region will be evaluated by reviewing case studies of regional public transit delivery in a Canadian context.
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Land Backgrounder | 2 of 8
    INDUSTRIAL LAND BACKGROUNDER | 2 OF 8 A portion of Alberta’s Industrial Heartland exists within Strathcona County. There are approximately 36 sections of land (23,000 acres) within the County’s portion of the Industrial Heartland area. Some of this land is home to large petrochemical complexes but much of the land, while owned by industrial companies, is currently used for agriculture. INTRODUCTION Heavy industrial uses are also situated within the Urban Service Area of Sherwood Park (Refinery Row). Medium Strathcona County is home to Canada’s largest oil refining and light industrial uses are also found throughout the complex and North America’s third largest petrochemical Urban and Rural Service Areas. complex. This area is a source of significant employment and tax revenue for Strathcona County. Industries include Moilu nrefiningicipal D eandvel opupgrading,ment Plan transportation (rail, trucking), Strathcona County recognizes the importance of the chemicalAgri-I nanddustr ipetrochemicalal Transition Policy A manufacturingrea and other industry and38 energy sector38 in economic development, mediumAgric uandlture lightLarge Hindustrialoldings Polic uses.y Area but also acknowledges the need to ensure industrial Agriculture Small Holdings Policy Area and energy activities occur in a manner that reduces the Municipal Development Plan Industrial Heavy Policy Area potential for negative impacts on adjoining and nearby Agri-Industrial Transition Policy Area 38 38 Agriculture Large Holdings Policy Area land uses. AgricultIunre dSmuasll Htorlidaingls LPoiligcy hArte/aMedium Policy Area Industrial Heavy Policy Area IndustriCal Loighut/Mnetdriuym PRolicey sArieda ential Policy Area 830 Country Residential Policy Area 830 In Canada the Major Industrial Accidents Council of BeaverB Hilels aMovraeiner P Holiciyl Alsrea Moraine Policy Area 45 45 Other Policy Areas Canada (MIACC) land use criteria are considered to be Other Policy Areas 45 Canada’s best practice for measuring industrial risk and 15 the benchmark for land use planning decisions.
    [Show full text]