Aug. 16, 2021: Public Works Committee Agenda

- 35 -

Public Works Committee Agenda Council Chamber, Leduc County Centre, Nisku, AB Monday, September 13, 2021

1. Order – 1:30 p.m.

2. Adoption of agenda

3. Adoption of previous minutes - Monday, August 16, 2021 √

4. Public presentations a) 5. Department reports and recommendations a) General i) Current open files update Re: 101-21, 093-21, 086-21, 053-21 √ Des Mryglod ii) 2022 Public Works Committee meeting dates √ Des Mryglod b) Utilities i) Hamlet wastewater system connections √ Dean Downey c) Engineering i) d) Road Operations i) DRAFT 2022 gravelling program √ Darrell Stone

6. In-camera - in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP) a)

7. Information items a) PWC actions items list Re: 106-21 √ Des Mryglod b) Department activity report Re: 107-21 √ Des Mryglod c) Household hazardous waste funding Re: 110-21 √ Des Mryglod d) Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board solid waste collaborative √ Des Mryglod action plan e) Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board stormwater collaborative √ Des Mryglod action plan f) IFT 21-020, Nisku Spine Road construction from Township Road √ Amro Kotb 510 to Airport Road g) Electronic speed sign update √ Amro Kotb h) Municipal access agreements √ Amro Kotb i) Pavement network evaluation update √ Amro Kotb

8. Adjournment

√ Attachment provided

Leduc County is dedicated to serving its citizens and will create an enhanced quality of life through effective leadership, committed partnerships and open, transparent communication. - 32 -

Public Works Committee Minutes Council Chamber, County Center, Nisku, AB Monday, August 16, 2021

Order and roll call The meeting was called to order at 1:29 p.m. on Monday, August 16, 2021, by Kelly-Lynn Lewis as chair and committee members Rick Smith, Tanni Doblanko, Kelly Vandenberghe, Larry Wanchuk, Glenn Belozer, and Raymond Scobie. Public members at large Richard Nessler and Craig Millar were absent.

Other attendees • Duane Coleman, County Manager • Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities • Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering • Darrell Stone, Manager, Operations • Candida Pettigrew, Recording Secretary

Others  Susan Ludwig, North Vistas resident

Agenda adoption 099-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the agenda for the Monday, August 16, 2021 Public Works Committee meeting be adopted as circulated. Carried Unanimously

Previous Minutes July 12, 2021 Regular Public Works Committee Meeting

100-21 Committee member Tanni Doblanko – that the minutes for the Monday, July 12, 2021 Public Works Committee meeting be adopted as circulated. Carried Unanimously

Current open files update Re: 086-21 Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities provided an update regarding the current open files discussed at the previous Public Works Committee meeting. 101-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the Public Works Committee receives the report “Current open files update” as information. Carried Unanimously

Susan Ludwig Susan Ludwig exited council chamber at 1:40 p.m.

Draft 2022-2026 bridge program Re: 090-21 Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering provided a follow-up report to address previous inquiries by Public Works Committee in regards to a draft five year bridge plan.

PWC– Monday, August 16, 2021 – - 33 -

102-21 Committee member Glenn Belozer – that the Public Works Committee approves the Draft Five Year (2022-2026) Bridge Program for 2022 budgetary consideration. Carried Unanimously

Draft 2022-2026 road program Re: 092-21 Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering provided a follow-up report to address previous inquiries by Public Works Committee in regards to a draft five year road plan. 103-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the Public Works Committee approves the Draft Five Year (2022-2026) Road Program for 2022 budgetary consideration. Carried Unanimously

Ms. Wice, Director, Finance Ms. Natasha Wice entered council chamber at 1:48 p.m.

Township Road 510 update Re: 091-21 Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering provided a staff report regarding the current state of this road and options for improvement. Analyzing costs and long range planning, the recommended option is to widen on the south side of the existing road to a 9 metre finished width. 104-21 Committee member Kelly Vandenberghe – that the Public Works Committee directs administration to prepare a project profile document for Township Road 510 project - option 1 for 2022 capital budget consideration. Carried Unanimously

Ms. Wice, staff member Ms. Natasha Wice exited council chamber at 2:05 p.m.

RFQ 21-019, gravel supply and load 2021-2023 Darrell Stone, Manager, Operations provided information regarding bids received for RFQ 21-019. 105-21 Committee member Tanni Doblanko – that the Public Works Committee recommends that Leduc County Council award the gravel supply and load contract per RFQ 21-019 for two years, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023, to: • 1029527 Alberta Ltd. Boden Sand & Gravel Suppliers for an estimated 43,000t/year • Richardson Bros (Olds) Ltd. for an estimated 74,000t/year

Carried Unanimously

PWC action items list Re: 094-21 Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering & Utilities presented the PWC action items list as information. 106-21 Committee member Larry Wanchuk – that the Public Works Committee receives as information the PWC action items list for August 2021. Carried Unanimously

Department activity report Re: 095-21 Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering & Utilities presented the department activity report as information. 107-21 Committee member Kelly Vandenberghe – that the Public Works Committee receives as information the department activity report for August 2021. PWC– Monday, August 16, 2021 – - 34 -

Carried Unanimously

South Wizard Lake Road update Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering provided an update regarding the improved condition of South Wizard Lake Road after completing upgrades in 2020. 108-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the Public Works Committee receives as information the South Wizard Lake Road update. Carried Unanimously

Township Road 494 west of Highway 770 update Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering provided an update regarding the improved condition of Township Road 494 after completing base stabilization upgrades in 2020. 109-21 Committee member Tanni Doblanko – that the Public Works Committee receives as information the Township Road 494 west of Highway 770 update. Carried Unanimously

Household hazardous waste funding Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering & Utilities informed the Public Works Committee of reduced provincial funding for household hazardous waste. 110-21 Committee member Tanni Doblanko – that the Public Works Committee accept as information the household hazardous waste funding report. Carried Unanimously

Adjournment 111-21 Committee member Raymond Scobie – that the Public Works Committee meeting be adjourned.

Carried Unanimously

The Public Works Committee meeting adjourned at 2:54 p.m.

______Chair Director, Engineering and Utilities

5. a) i)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Current open files update Re: 101-21

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee receives the report “Current open files update” as information.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To update Public Works Committee on the status of various open files Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): N/A Amount of funding required: TBD Funding source: TBD

BACKGROUND Concern • Staff met with , another individual and Councillor Vandenberghe on site on June 1. re-iterated her current concerns related to the lack of a west swale along the development adjacent to her eastern property line. • The adjacent property owner has committed to installing a swale to capture the stormwater before it enters property. • The survey for the site has been received by Engineering and is being reviewed A cursory field review is of the survey was completed by staff. • The lot grading appears to be appropriate. • The swale was inspected by staff and additional work is required. The swale will be reinspected when complete. • Staff are encouraging communication between the landowners to resolve concerns. Concern • The survey for Lukas Estates, including the drainage swale from Diamond Estates, and Range Road 245 is complete and has been reviewed by Engineering. • Drainage works along Range Road 245 to allow the drainage issues within Lukas Estates to be addressed are being completed with the Range Road 245 surfacing project.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 1

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

• There are insufficient funds in the 2021 road program budget to complete the programs this year. A Project Profile Document (PPD) has been submitted for the 2022 budget consideration. • A meeting will be arranged with to provide an update. Concern • The drainage work within Kavanagh has been completed by Road Operations. • Determination of the available capacity within the Kavanagh lagoon is complete. • A report on the process and costs associated with new connections is on the September 13, 2021 agenda for discussion.

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 2 5. a) ii)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Proposed 2022 Public Works Committee meeting schedule

RECOMMENDATION That with reference to the Public Works Committee meetings for the 2022 calendar year, the Public Works Committee approves the following schedule of meetings to commence at 1:30 p.m. in the Leduc County Council Chamber: Scheduled dates (2nd Monday of the month) Recommended change or cancellation January 10, 2022 Monday, January 17, 2022 February 14, 2022 March 14, 2022 (RMA Spring Convention) March 7, 2022 April 11, 2022 May 9, 2022 June 13, 2022 July 11, 2022 August 8, 2022 (Council summer break) Monday, August 15, 2022 September 12, 2022 October 10, 2022 (Thanksgiving Day) Thursday, October 13, 2022 November 14, 2022 December 12, 2022

And at the 2022 Organizational meeting confirm the regular meeting dates for the Public Works Committee as follows: • Public Works Committee – the second Monday of each month, commencing at 1:30 p.m. or at the call of the Chair.

Options (if available): N/A

Submitted by: Donna Dunlop, Administrative Assistant Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 1

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

IMPLICATIONS Reason: Regular meeting of the Public Works Committee Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Leduc County Bylaw 16-18 Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND Meetings are scheduled on the second Monday of the month in the afternoon, following the Agricultural Service Board meetings. This practice is continuing from the schedule followed in 2021, with changes made on the dates that fell on holidays or conflicted with other Council commitments previously scheduled. • Monday January 17, 2022 provides an additional week for reporting following the holidays. • Monday March 7, 2022 accommodates the Rural Municipalities of Alberta convention. • Monday August 15, 2022 accommodates summer Council break. • Thursday October 13, 2022 accommodates Thanksgiving holiday. ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Donna Dunlop, Administrative Assistant Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 2 5. b) i)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Hamlet Wastewater System Connections

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee direct administration to: • Finalize and implement a hamlet wastewater system connection fee utilizing the Non-Subsidized Present Day Value Method. • Develop a hamlet wastewater system connection policy for the Municipal Policy Review Committee.

Options (if available): That the Public Works Committee direct administration to: • Finalize and implement a hamlet wastewater system connection fee utilizing the Subsidized Present Day Value Method. • Develop a hamlet wastewater system connection policy for the Municipal Policy Review Committee.

IMPLICATIONS Reason: Provide mechanism for evaluating and applying connection fees for hamlet wastewater systems. Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Municipal Government Act, RSA 2000 s.34(1) Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND At the March 8, 2021 Public Works Committee meeting, the committee requested administration to assess the cost for new customers wanting to connect to the existing hamlet wastewater systems. A financial analysis was conducted to develop a logical and defendable mechanism for calculating the lagoon capacity costs for customers to connect to county wastewater lagoons that were constructed utilizing a local improvement. This analysis does not address the construction of the service installation. There is already a process in place to address the construction of the service line and tie-in, but there is no procedure or policy in place to determine the capacity related costs for connecting to the wastewater lagoon. The utility industry refers to these capacity related costs as system development charges, but for the purposes of this analysis, they are referred to as connection fees. The wastewater lagoons outlined in Table 1 are the lagoons that were included in this analysis.

Submitted by: Dean Downey, Manager, Utilities Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 1

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

Table 1: County Hamlet Lagoon Information Year Lagoon Type of Wastewater Lagoon Capacity (m3) Constructed Buford 1984 Single cell stabilization 11,200 Kavanagh 1984 Single cell stabilization 10,750 Rolly View 1985 Single cell stabilization 11,000 Sunnybrook 1982 Single cell stabilization 15,470 Looma 2002 Facultative1 and stabilization2 cells 1,3141 and 9,3382

Methodology of Analysis The analysis was strictly a desktop exercise based on the best information available, such as drawings and local improvement documents. To complete the desktop analysis the following was conducted: 1. Confirmation of design capacity utilizing lagoon as-built drawings 2. County design criteria applied to each lagoon’s design, in order to calculate the lagoon capacity 3. Reviewed and summarized original local improvement and grant funding for each lagoon 4. Calculated present value for each lagoon 5. Calculated connection charge options Excess Lagoon Capacity Calculation The excess capacity for each lagoon is outlined in Tables 2 and 3. Being that the Looma lagoon has multiple cells, the lagoon capacity calculation differs, and therefore the Looma lagoon calculation has its own table. A population density of 2.5 people per lot (instead of 3.5 people per lot) was used as it aligns much better with the population provided in the 2016 census. Table 2: Buford, Kavanagh, Rolly View and Sunnybrook Lagoons Capacity Check (2.5 people per lot) Population Average Total Population Number of Lagoon Capacity Additional Additional Based on Daily Flow – Annual (2016 Lots Capacity Utilized Population Lots 2.5 people Residential Flow Census) Connected Vol. (m3) (%) Available Available per lot (m3) (m3) Buford 47 18 45 11900 11.3 4106 35% 89 25 Kavanagh 47 18 45 10750 11.3 4106 38% 76 22 Rolly View 71 29 73 11000 18.1 6616 60% 47 13 Sunnybrook 59 30 75 15470 18.8 6844 44% 74 21

Submitted by: Dean Downey, Manager, Utilities Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 2

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

Table 3: Looma Lagoon Capacity Check (2.5 people per lot) Total Population Lagoon Capacity Average Total Capacity Utilized (%) Population Number 60 Additional Additional Based on Facultative Storage Daily Annual Facultative Storage (2016 of Lots days Population Lots 2.5 people Cell (m3) Cell Flow Flow Cell Cell Census) Connected Flow Available Available per lot (m3) (m3) (m3) (m3) Looma 30 14 35 1314 9338 8.75 525 3194 40% 34% 45 18

According to the calculations, all five lagoons have available capacity to accommodate additional customers, ranging from 13 and 25 lots. Present Value The present value of the lagoons was calculated by applying the compound interest to the original construction cost for each lagoon. The present value for the local improvement levy portion was also calculated. Table 4: Inflation Calculation Using Compound Interest Formula Original Local Average Present Local Original N (Number Present Year Improvement Annual Improvement Construction of Years Construction Built Contribution Inflation Contribution Cost Compound) Cost (2021) Cost (%) Cost (2021) Buford 1984 $ 169,847.00 $ 42,462.00 37 2.30 $ 393,963.81 $ 98,491.53 Kavanagh 1984 $ 159,199.00 $ 39,800.00 37 2.30 $ 369,265.54 $ 92,316.97 Rolly View 1985 $ 284,975.00 $ 71,244.00 36 2.26 $ 637,111.06 $ 159.278.32 Sunnybrook 1982 $ 367,232.00 $ 70,529.00 39 2.53 $ 973,033.64 $ 186,876.66 Looma 2002 $ 578,731.25 $ 172,755.25 19 1.73 $ 801,694.27 $ 239,311.24 Note: Average Annual Inflation (%) is obtained from www.inflationtool.com The present value for the lagoons ranges from ~$369,000 to ~$973,000 and for the local improvement portion ranges from ~$92,300 to ~$239,300. Connection Charge To calculate the connection charge, the local improvement cost in present day was divided by the maximum total lots the lagoon can accommodate. This method provides a present day cost for a single connection to each lagoon, but does not account for present day construction costs (excludes grant-funded portion). See Table 5 below outlining the subsidized service connection cost for each lagoon.

Submitted by: Dean Downey, Manager, Utilities Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 3

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

Table 5: Service Connection Cost per Lot (Subsidized Present Day Value of Local Improvement Contribution Method) Number of Lots from Maximum Total Number Local Service Number Additional Previous Number of of Lots the Improvement Connection of Lots Lots Local New Lagoon can Contribution Contribution Connected Available Improvement Connections Accommodate Cost (2021) Cost Per Lot Hasn’t Been Available Connected Buford 43 18 25 5 20 $ 98,491.53 $ 2,290.50 Kavanagh 40 18 22 6 16 $ 92,316.97 $ 2,307.92 Rolly View 42 29 13 1 12 $ 159,278.32 $ 3,792.34 Sunnybrook 51 30 21 18 3 $ 186,876.66 $ 3,664.25 Looma 32 14 18 3 15 $ 239,311.24 $ 7,478.48 Average $3,906.70 The subsidized connection cost in present day value ranges from ~$2,300 to ~$7,500. Utilizing the average of the costs (Table 5), customers who connected to the hamlet wastewater system would be required to pay a connection fee of ~$3,900. Administration also examined the unsubsidized cost to connect and completed the necessary calculations (Table 6). It is administration’s recommendation that this scenario is more representative of the actual financials as the grant isn’t indexed over time; it was a lump sum contribution to construction at the time. Table 6: Service Connection Cost per Lot (Non-Subsidized Present Day Value of Full Cost Method)

Number of Maximum Total Number Lots from Service Number Additional Number of Present of Lots the Previous Local Connection of Lots Lots New Construction Lagoon can Improvement Contribution Connected Available Connections Cost (2021) Accommodated Hasn’t Been Cost Per Lot Available Connected Buford 43 18 25 5 20 $393,964 $9,162 Kavanagh 40 18 22 6 16 $369,266 $9,232 Rolly View 42 29 13 1 12 $637,111 $15,169 Sunnybrook 51 30 21 18 3 $973,034 $19,079 Looma 32 14 18 3 15 $801,694 $25,053 Average $635,014 $15,539 The non-subsidized connection cost ranges from ~$9,200 to ~$25,000. Utilizing the average of the costs (Table 6), customers who connected to the hamlet wastewater system would be required to pay a connection fee of ~$15,500. Considerations The following items should be taken into consideration when choosing the best path forward for developing connection fees:

Submitted by: Dean Downey, Manager, Utilities Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 4

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

• Connection fee calculation o The calculations in this analysis are based on the per lot connection cost in present day 2021. For future connections, the County should recalculate the per lot connection charge based on the actual year of the service being connected, as interest rates and inflation will change over time. o The present day lagoon value and the debenture interest rate should be updated at the time of the future connection, to reflect the most current value. • Application of connection charge o The lagoon connection charge should apply to new development in existing vacant lots, subdivide of existing lots, or any lots where previous local improvement taxation assessments were not applied. o In situations where the applicant requests a connection(s) that exceed the number of available capacity, the applicant would be subject to 100% of the capacity charges (capital improvements to increase capacity). • Application process o The maximum number of new connections should not exceed the additional lots available in Table 5. o Prior to approving new connections, verification of lagoon capacity and supporting systems should be conducted to confirm sufficient capacity is available. Verification should consider, but not be limited to: . Sludge and vegetation accumulation . Water quality impacts . Regulatory impacts . Wastewater collection system capacity o The cost to construct the service tie-in is a separate application. The applicant is responsible for all costs associated with the construction and permitting for the service tie-in and service install, both on private and public property. This is in accordance with the wastewater bylaw. • Policy o Consideration should be given for a connection policy or procedure, outlining the connection fee process and methodology. • Financial feasibility o Due to the financial feasibility challenges of the wastewater lagoons, the County should consider increasing the connection fee to help cover future lagoon renewal and replacement. The two highest rate-setting objectives for the 2018 rate analysis were revenue stability and equity. In order to maintain customer affordability (3rd ranked objective), all the wastewater utilities were combined into a single wastewater utility. Under this approach, the hamlet lagoons are being subsidized by the other wastewater utilities. Increasing the connection fee to an unsubsidized rate would better align with the top two rate setting objectives, revenue stability and equity (see definitions below). . Revenue Stability • Yielding necessary revenue in a stable and predictable matter. • Promotes long-term revenue sufficiency and stability for the utility. . Equity (Fairness)

Submitted by: Dean Downey, Manager, Utilities Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 5

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

• Rate structure that is cost based, promotes fairness and avoids discrimination. • Apportions cost to individual utility, customer demand requirements and/or customer class. • Applied to all customer groups and utility(s). o The connection analysis assumed new customers who connect to the wastewater system pay the grant funded subsidized connection fee. Alternatively, new connected customers would pay a non-subsidized connection fee. Recommendation Administration recommends the following: • Finalize and implement a hamlet wastewater system connection fee utilizing the Non-Subsidized Present Day Value of Full Cost Method (Table 6). This fee would be the average cost per lot of the non- subsidized present day costs of the five lagoons. • That a policy be developed outlining customer connection process and requirements, and the policy is taken to the Municipal Policy Committee for consideration. Alternatively, the committee could support the following: • Finalize and implement a hamlet wastewater system connection fee utilizing the Subsidized Present Day Value (Local Improvement Contribution Portion) (Table 5). This fee would be the average cost per lot of the subsidized present day costs of the five lagoons. • That a policy be developed outlining customer connection process and requirements, and the policy is taken to the Municipal Policy Committee for consideration. Table 7: Connection Fee Cost Comparison for Present Day Value of Local Improvement Contribution Portion Method and Present Day Value of Full Cost Method

Connection Fee Method (Average Cost)

Subsidized Cost $ 3,900 Non-subsidized Costs $ 15,500

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Dean Downey, Manager, Utilities Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 6 5. d) i)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME

2022 DRAFT gravelling program (winter 2021/22)

RECOMMENDATION That the Publics Works Committee approves the DRAFT 2022 gravelling program.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To review the DRAFT 2022 gravelling program Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): MGA RSA 2000, Division 2 Roads, s. 18 Amount of funding required: $2,888,408.25 Funding source: General taxes

BACKGROUND The annual gravelling program is reviewed by the Public Works Committee prior to budget. The DRAFT 2022 gravelling program is outlined on attachment 1. The program is developed with input from the grader operators and their supervisors, and consists of applying 117,000 t of gravel over 360 miles (576 kms). At the 2022 combined supply and haul price of $24.69 per tonne, the DRAFT 2022 Gravelling Program is budgeted to be $2,888,408.25 • $24.69/t = Supply @ $12.41/t (50.26%)/ Haul @ $12.28/t (49.74%) • $8,023/mile = $4,983/km Leduc County currently has a 1-year extension to our existing agreement with our 25 registered truckers at 0% increase from the 2021 rates. This is in effect thru to September 2022 after which the rates will be reviewed. Administration is mindful of the costs associated to the gravelling program and regularly compares neighboring municipal hauling rates to our own. It is proposed that Leduc County enter into a 2-year supply and load agreement with gravel suppliers 1029527 Alberta Ltd. Boden Sand & Gravel Suppliers and Richardson Bros. (Olds) Ltd. per RFQ 21-019 Gravel Supply & Load 2021-2023, that will encompass 2022 & 2023. This multi-year commitment requires a resolution of council and will be presented to Leduc County Council on September 14, 2021.

ATTACHMENTS • 2022 DRAFT gravelling program map

Submitted by: Darrell Stone, Manager of Operations, Road Operations Reviewed by: Garett Broadbent, Director, Road Operations and Agricultural Services. Date: 09/13/21 1 Attachment 1

45 44 43 42 41A 41 35 34 33 32 31 25 24 23 22A 22 21

14 13 12A 281 275 273 271A 265A 262 261 234 233 231 225 224 223 222A 222 215 214 213 15 12 11 274 272 271 265 264 263 232 221

1stST

40 30 20 10 280 270

91st ST 91st 230 220

75thST 50thST 34thST 17thST

RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD

RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD

111th ST 111th

RGE RGE

101stST

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE ST184th ST170th ST156th

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE

142nd 142nd ST 122nd ST

RD RD RD RD RD RD

RD RD

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE

RGE RGE

255A 255 254 253 252 251 245 244 243 242A 242 241 235 234

250 240

RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE

RD RD

RGE RGE

RGE 4 RGE M 4 5W RGE M 3 5W

RGE 1 RGE M 1 5W RGE 27 M 4W RGE 3 RGE M 3 5W RGE M 2 5W RGE M 2 5W RGE M 1 5W RGE 28 M 4W RGE 28 M 4W RGE 27 M 4W RGE 26 M 4W RGE 23 M 4W RGE 22 M 4W

RGE RGE 22 M 4W RGE 21 M 4W

PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING RGE 3 RGE 25 M 4W RGE 24 M 4W RGE 24 M 4W RGE 23 M 4W SUITE 101, 1101 - 5 TH STREET

NISKU, ALBERTA T9E 2X3 FIFTH MERIDIAN 22 23 ± TWP 51

TWP TR512A RD 512A 15 RGE 25 RGE 24

TWP TR512 RD 51-3 TWP 512 RD 512 TR511A

TWP RD 511A 11 12 TWP 8 9 RD 511A

TWP TR511 RD 511 TWP 51-2 51-23 RD 511 RGE 26 51-25 51-24 TWP RGE 23 RGE 22 RGE 21 RD 510A 5 3 2 TR510A 6 TWP RGE 2 5 4 3 RD 510A 2022 TWP 51 TWP TWP 51 CORRECTION LINE TR510 TWP RD DRAFT

RD TWP 50 TWP 50 510

235 240

510 241

242 243

244

245

252

251

250

255 254 253 UV 260

60 TWP TWP TR505A 34 35 36 31 RD 505A RD 505A 33 34 35 36 34 36 32 33 32 33 RGE 1 RGE 27 36 31 32 36 32 770 U V Looma TWP TWP Beaumont TR505 RD 505 RD 505 RGE 28 Devon TR504A TWP Gravel Program 2021/22 TWP 28 26 30 29 RD 504A RD 504A 29 28 25 30 29 28 27 25 30 29 28 26 25 30 29

26 25 30 29 28 27 27 26 25 30 29 Nisku 30 29 RR222A RGE 4 TWP TWP RD RD 504 TR504 504 UV19 UV625 Total Miles = 342.5 miles TWP TWP RD 503A RD 23 21 22 23 24 503A 19 20 21 22 24 19 20 21 TR503A 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 HAY LAKES19 TR 20 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 19 20 19 21

TWP TWP 50-4 TR503 RD 503 RD 503 TWP 50 50-3 50-23 RR225 50-22 TWP 50 50-27 50-25 RR244A 50-24 RR222 50-21 50-2 TWP TWP 16 RD 502A RD 502A 15 14 13 15 14 13 18 17 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 TR502A 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 14 13 14 13 17 16 15 13 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 18 16

TWP TWP RD 502 50-1 50-26 TR502 UV RD 502 50-28 21 TWP TWP RD 501A 8 9 10 11 12 9 10 11 8 RD 501A 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 TR501A 11 12 7 8 9 10 7 8

9 10 11 12 7 9 10 11 12 11 12 8 9 10 12 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 7 8 9 10

RR240 RR221

TWP TWP RR271A

RD RR235 501

RD 501 TR501

RR223 RR232

RR270 5 4 3 2 1 4 3 2 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 6 5 4 3 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 6 3 2

RR45

TWP TWP 50 TWP 50 TWP RD 500 TWP 49 St. Francis TR500 UV21A TWP 49 RD 500

Telfordville RR12 32 RR44 33 34 35 36 32 33 34 35 36 31 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 34 35 31 32 33 34 35 36 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 32 33 34 35 36

TWP TR495 TWP RD 495 UV622 New Sarepta 49-21 RD 495

49-4 RR234 RGE 21 814

RR34 V Calmar U 29 28 27 26 28 27 26 25 30 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 Leduc 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 26 25 30 29 28 27 29 28 27 26 25

RR35

TWP UV TWP RD 494 TR494 Rolly View 49-22 RD 494

RR43 623

RR31 Buford UV RR231 21 22 23 24 20 21 22 23 24 RR220 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 19 20 21 22 23 24 19

22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 19 20 21 22 RR224

RR265 RR233

RR240A TWP RR264 TWP RD 493 RR40 49-3 TR493 49-2 49-1 RD 493 TWP 49 RR42 49-28 49-27 49-24 TWP 49

RR272 49-26 49-25 RR230

RR280 RR275 RR274 RR260 RR262 TWP RR261 TR492A TWP RD 492A 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 14 13 18 17 16 15 Thorsby 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 RD 492A 14 13 18 17 16 13 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 14 13 18 17 16 15

TWP RD TWP 492 TR492 RD 492 RR273

RR41 49-23 RR255 11 12 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 TR491 10 11 12 8 9 10 11 12 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11

RR11 RR250

RR21

RR15

RR245 RR263

RR281 1 6 5 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 3 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2

RR41A

TWP TWP 49 39 TWP 49 TWP UV TR490 RR250A RD 490 TWP 48 Sunnybrook TWP 48 RD 490

RR10

31 32 33 34 35 RR244 34 35 36 31 36 31 32 RR254 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36

RR271

RR252 RR251 RR243 TWP TWP RD 485 TR485 RD 485 20 Warburg

UV Kavanagh

48-1 RR253 RR241

RR23

RR20 RGE 4 RR14 UV 2A 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 27 26 25 30 29 28 27

TWP TWP RD 484 48-3 TR484 48-24 RD 484 48-28 19 RR22 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 24 19 20 21 48-22 TWP TWP RD 483 48-2 TR483 48-27 RD 483 TWP 48 RR25 48-25 RR30 TWP 48 RR13 48-26 48-23

17 16 15 14 13 18 17 14 13 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 14 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 15 14 13 17 16 15 RR282

TWP TR482 TWP RD 482 616 RD 482 RR24 UV

8 10 11 12 7 8 11 12 8 9 10 11 12 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 10 11 12 7 8 9 10

RR33

RR32

TWP TWP TR481 RD 481

RD 481 795

U V 822 V RGE 28 U 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 4 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 3

TWP 48 TWP TR480 TWP 48 RD RGE 22 TWP 480 TWP 47 RGE 24 RGE 23 RD 778 TWP 47 U V 480

TWP RD 34 35 36 475A 31 32 33 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 RGE 27 TWP RD 475 47-1 Sundance Subdivision RGE 26 RGE 25 TR474A 27 26 25 30 29 28 47-2 27 Iron Horse 30 27 26 Kerr Cape TWP TR474 RD 474 47-3

TWP 22 TR473A RD 473A 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 23 TWP 47

771UV PERMIT TO PRACTICE: RGE 3 RGE 2

RGE 1 PROJECT: Draft 2022 Gravel Program

LOCATION: Leduc County

DATE: 2021-08-25 km DRAWN BY: SML 0 3 6 12 18 FIFTH MERIDIAN CHECKED BY:

RGE 4 RGE M 4 5W RGE M 3 5W

RGE 3 RGE M 3 5W RGE M 2 5W RGE M 2 5W RGE M 1 5W RGE M 1 5W RGE 28 M 4W RGE 28 M 4W RGE 27 M 4W

RGE RGE 27 M 4W RGE 26 M 4W RGE 26 M 4W RGE 25 M 4W RGE 25 M 4W RGE 24 M 4W RGE 24 M 4W RGE 23 M 4W RGE 23 M 4W RGE 22 M 4W RGE 22 M 4W RGE 21 M 4W APPROVED (M/D/Y):

30 20

10 280 270 260 250 240 230 220

45 44 43 42 41A 41

35 34 33 32 31 25 24 23 22A 22 21 15 14 13 12A 12 11 281 275 274 273 272 271A 271 265A 265 264 263 262 261 255 254 253 252 251 245 244 243 242 241 240A 235 234 233 232

231 225 224 223 222 221 215 214 213

RD RD RD

RD RD RD RD RD RD RD

RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD

RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD RD

RGE RD RD RD

RGE

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE

RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE RGE PWC MOTION NUM.:

SCALE: N/A

DRAWING No. 1 of 1 7. a) PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS September 13, 2021

# DATE ASSIGNED AGENDA ITEM ACTION REQUIRED STATUS RECALL INITIATED TO

1 Nov 18, 2019 New Sarepta Reservoir and 177-19 Committee Member Vandenberghe -- that Dean Letter has been sent, November 2019. July 2022 Pumphouse Upgrade the Public Works Committee directs administration to: Analysis 1. Send a letter to the Capital Region Southwest Water There was no interest from the CRSWSC for a joint Services Commission to see if they would be interested endeavor. in the possibility of a joint endeavor for future reservoir expansion as per option A, B, C and D referenced in the Upgrade analysis provided to the September 14 New Sarepta Report and further; 2020 Public Works Committee meeting. 2. Bring back a recommendation to the Public Works Committee for the upgrade of the New Sarepta Public Works Committee deferred a decision to this reservoir and pumphouse once a response is received matter to the July 2022 Public Works Committee from the Capital Region Southwest Water Services meeting. Commission.

012-20 Committee Member Doblanko -- that the Public Works Committee directs administration to: 1. Accept as information the response from the Capital Region Southwest Water Services Commission regarding their interest in acquiring the existing pumphouse and reservoir and their interest in joint endeavors in the reservoir and pumphouse upgrade; and 2. Instruct administration to further assess upgrade options and bring back recommendations to the May 2020 Public Works Committee meeting. 3.

053-20 Committee Member Vandenberghe - that the Public Works Committee directs administration to bring this matter back to September PWC after consultation with the Fire Department and with Finance regarding insurance risk and further that the cost for above ground Option B water storage design be provided.

066-20 Committee member Smith – that the public works committee defer this item to July 2022 public works committee meeting.

2 March 8, 2021 RCMP data update 033-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the Des Administration drafted a letter for the Minister of December 2021 public works committee receives this report as information and Transportation that administration provide a report to the Public Works • Being reviewed internally Committee in Q2 of 2021 with an action plan to address PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS September 13, 2021

# DATE ASSIGNED AGENDA ITEM ACTION REQUIRED STATUS RECALL INITIATED TO

identified incident hotspots under county jurisdiction or shared Administration will also be placing necessary jurisdiction. signage as per the action plan • Airport Road and Range Road 244 085-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that • Airport Road and Looking Back Lake Road administration draft a letter for the Public Works Committee Chair’s signature to Minister of Transportation regarding the Highway 2A & Glen Park Road and the Highway 795 & Glen Park Road intersections requesting that a safety assessment be conducted at both intersections and that administration complete the remainder of the action plan.

3 March 8, 2021 New connections to lagoons Due to requiring two discharges at Rolly View lagoon in 2020, Des Q3 2021 Public Works and Engineering will look into having the residential Name change to: weeping tiles and sump pumps flow into the alley and not the Hamlet wastewater system lagoon/septic system and further, perform upgrades to the alley connections in Rolly View for better drainage flow.

4 May 10, 2021 Current open files 053-21 Committee member Kelly Vandenberghe – that Des/Garett Location 1, intake 20-7030 – Beau Vista North: in September 2021 the public works committee accepts the information provided process. regarding current open files and further that a status update be • Information provided by landowner is brought back to the next public works committee meeting. currently being verified

067-21 Committee member Kelly Vandenberghe – that Location 2 – Lukas Estates: in process • the public works committee receives the report “Current open Determining budget availability

files update” as information. Location 3, intake 20-7258 – Kavanagh: drainage

work complete. Lagoon connections still 093-21 Committee member Kelly Vandenberghe – that outstanding, scheduled to return in Q3 2021 administration review the surfacing program budgets and • Report to be provided in September PWC funding sources to determine if funding is available from the meeting 2021 surfacing program, and if so, prepare a report for Council consideration to reallocate 2021 surfacing program funding to the Lukas Estates drainage improvement project and if not available that administration prepare a project profile document for the Lukas Estates drainage improvement project for 2022 capital budget consideration.

101-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the Public Works Committee receives the report “Current open files update” as information.

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS September 13, 2021

# DATE ASSIGNED AGENDA ITEM ACTION REQUIRED STATUS RECALL INITIATED TO

COUNCIL WORKSHOP

1 Jan 16, 2019 Strategic Waste At the March 24th, 2016 Council Workshop on the subject of D. Downey Data collection and review underway. September 2021 Management Plan Solid Waste Management Vision and Goals, Council directed Recommendation to follow. (combined with administration to bring back waste management items to the Sunnybrook Transfer Station monthly Public Works Committee meetings. The intent is to Presented to the November 15, 2014 Public Works Design) provide the Public Works Committee with the appropriate Committee meeting. information so as to provide administration direction regarding the strategic plan, work plan, and level of service for the County’s Renamed: Strategic Waste Management Plan waste management. Administration to present waste management Previous PWC Resolutions: 083-16, 099-17, 148-17, 175-17, items regularly at the Public Works Committee. 039-18 Administration develop public outreach plan 137-18 Committee Member Scobie -- that the Public Works Committee receive as information the Sunnybrook Public Outreach Plan deferred until other options Transfer Station Relocation and Conceptual Design report, and for the Sunnybrook Transfer Station have been due to the high costs to redevelop or relocate the transfer station investigated. and the identified site constraints for each option, direct administration to reassess the report after the waste Strategic Waste Management Plan will be management strategic plan is completed developed in house with a target completion date of Q4 2019 Develop long term plan for metal storage Workshop in October

150-19 Committee Member Vandenberghe -- that Completed workshop 2, going to public the Public Works Committee directs administration to refer the consultation process Transfer Station Metal Management Improvements to the Strategic Waste Management Plan for further evaluation. Public consultation process is underway; survey is scheduled to close September 15, 2020 151-19 Committee Member Vandenberghe -- that the matter of metal management be discussed at the Strategic Waste Management Plan workshop to examine the level of service versus the cost of service provision

2 Sept 14, 2020 Utility Master Plan Priorities 067-20 Committee member Doblanko – that the Dean Q1 2022 public works committee receive this report as information and direct administration to include utility planning for new service areas in a workshop in early 2022.

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS September 13, 2021

# DATE ASSIGNED AGENDA ITEM ACTION REQUIRED STATUS RECALL INITIATED TO

3 June 14, 2021 Intersection assessment 075-21 Committee member Kelly Vandenberghe – that Des/Amro Report is part of the July 12, 2021 agenda. December 2021 the public works committee directs administration to develop a stop and yield installation guidelines for public works committee by next committee meeting for review and discussion.

November workshop is full, will bring to December 087-21 Committee member Tanni Doblanko – that Des/Amro workshop administration bring back the traffic bylaw to Council workshop in November of 2021 for discussion and review.

POLICY COMMITTEE

1 March 8, 2021 Last link policy discussion 034-21 Committee member Rick Smith – that the public Des Q3 2021 works committee directs administration to develop a policy for a “developer pay” for last link based on pros provided in report and further that administration bring back comparable information to public works committee in Q2 2021. 051-21 Committee member Tanni Doblanko – that administration complete the policy for review by municipal policy review committee for early Q3 2021.

7. b) ROAD OPERATIONS ACTIVITY REPORT Reporting Period: September 2021 ______

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Highlights • RFQ 21-019 Gravel Supply and Load two year contract will be presented to Council on September 14. • Anticipate completion of the Rural Road Initiative program by the end of Q3. • Will begin the Line Painting program after the Crack Sealing program is complete, likely the week of September 13. • Currently developing the 2022 Operational Plan. • Developing the 2022-2024 Operating Budget. • Have begun fall preparation for winter operations. • Will be installing the Nisku Shop oil/grit interceptor in September. • Planning the Nisku water reservoir parking lot upgrades. • Anticipating completion of minor ditching projects  Wait times for locates continue to delay operations.

Rural road initiatives

RRI drainage 98

RRI spot repairs 98

RRI shoulder pulls 96

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PER CENT COMPLETE AS OF SEPTEMBER 3

Crack sealing program Historical dust control Completion days 46 20

5 Days to complete 0 204.89 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Kilometres completed Kilometres remaining First round Second round ENGINEERING ACTIVITY REPORT Reporting Period: September 2021

ENGINEERING

Highlights • 2021 road construction program – construction is in progress. • Bridge maintenance projects, construction is in progress,  Two bridges are completed (BF 01090 and 08878)  BF 08883 will start on September 13, 2021 • Nisku Spine Road Phase 1 (25 Avenue to Township Road 510) & Phase 2 (Airport Road to 17 Avenue) the contract has been awarded to Carmacks Enterprises Ltd. • Township Road 510 Design (Nisku Spine Road east to the City of Beaumont boundary “Range Road 244”)  Design coordination with the City of Beaumont & City of Edmonton • Transportation Master Plan:  Public engagement sessions are scheduled for September 01 & 02  Council Workshop is scheduled for September 14, 2021

Capital Projects

Project Anticipated Project Anticipated Project Contract Completion Start Date Completion Date Date Cloverlawn Road South May 25, 2021 Completed September 30, 2021 From TR 490 to Hwy 616 Glen Park Road May 25, 2021 Completed September 30, 2021 From Hwy 795 to RR 273 Glen Park Road May 25, 2021 Completed September 30, 2021 From RR 273 to RR 275 Glen Park Road May 25, 2021 Completed September 30, 2021 From Hwy 2A to RR 245 Glen Park Road May 25, 2021 Completed September 30, 2021 From RR 251 700m to the East North Vista Road (RR 245) July 15, 2021 September 15, 2021 September 15, 2021 From TR 510 to Hwy 625 10 Street (Nisku) May 03, 2021 Completed September 15, 2021 From 15 Avenue to South end Caywood Subdivision Road - June 01, 2021 Completed September 15, 2021 including Range Road 230 New Sarepta June 21, 2021 October 31, 2021 October 31, 2021 1st Avenue New Sarepta June 21, 2021 October 31, 2021 October 31, 2021 2nd Avenue New Sarepta June 21, 2021 October 31, 2021 October 31, 2021 2nd Street Drainage New Sarepta June 07, 2021 October 31, 2021 October 31, 2021 Main Ditch Drainage Bridge Program (12 bridges)** July 05, 2021 December 15, 2021 December 31, 2021 BF 08883 - RR33, emergency repairs July 05, 2021 September 20, 2021

ENGINEERING ACTIVITY REPORT Reporting Period: September 2021 ______

BF 08878 - RR255, accident repairs August 01, 2021 Completed * Legend: Green – on track Yellow – early warning of potential risk Red – in jeopardy **The updated schedule is to be provided by the contractor

UTILITIES ACTIVITY REPORT Reporting Period: September 2021

UTILITIES

Highlights • Second month of the new contract with EIA for the provision of water and wastewater services was successfully completed.

Capital Projects

Project Anticipated Project Budget* Completion Date* Nisku Septage Receiving Station Improvement November 30, 2021

New Sarepta Lift Station Replacement December 15, 2021 Kavanagh and Sunnybrook Lagoon Renewals – design September 30, 2021

15 Avenue Storm Pond Outfall Replacement – design September 30, 2021 * Legend: Green – on track Yellow – early warning of potential risk Red – in jeopardy

Leduc County – Utilities Level of Service Report Reporting Period – August 1 to August 31, 2021 Minimum Service Level Level of Service Indicator Value Target Nisku - Bulk Water - Lane 1 Uptime 100.0 % 95% annually Nisku - Bulk Water - Lane 2 Uptime 100.0 % 95% annually Nisku – East Pumphouse - Reservoir Level - Above Emergency Storage* 100.0 % N/A Nisku – East Pumphouse - Reservoir Level - Above Fire Storage* 100.0 % N/A Nisku - Portable Bulk Water - Lane Uptime 100.0 % 95% annually Nisku - Transfer Station - East Lane - Lane Uptime** 0.00 % 95% annually Nisku - Transfer Station - West Lane - Lane Uptime 100.0 % 95% annually Nisku - West Pumphouse - Reservoir Level - Above Emergency Storage* 100.0 % N/A Nisku - West Pumphouse - Reservoir Level - Above Fire Storage* 100.0 % N/A Nisku - East Pumphouse - Dist. Pressure Above Service Setpoint* 100.0 % N/A

*Internal service level items that require further evaluation before setting service level or KPI. **During the upgrade only one lane will remain open.

UTILITIES ACTIVITY REPORT Reporting Period: September 2021 ______

Waste Diversion in Tonnes Year to Date 2021

Oil Filters, 1.72 Glycol , 1.57 Plastic Pails , 0.62 Electronics, 18.6 HHW, 0.35 Plastic Bags, 0.64

Other, 0.56

Metal, 0.1

Used Oil , 19.44 Batteries, 0.11

Total tonnage year to date: 43.15 tonnes

NOTE: Tires are calculated annually at year end in December

Regulatory BacT Water Sampling January to August 2021

35 33 30 29 30 28 28 28 28 28

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Ju Jul Aug

Target Actuals

7. c)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Household hazardous waste funding Re: 110-21

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee accept the “Household hazardous waste funding Re: 110-21” report as information.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To provide a response to the Public Works Committee on the processing of household hazardous waste. Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Amount of funding required: Additional ~$5,000 per year Funding source: TBD

BACKGROUND At the August 16, 2021 Public Works Committee meeting, a question was asked in regards to where the household hazardous waste (HHW) is being processed while the Swan Hills Treatment Centre is not available. In the interim, any materials collected by our contractors is shipped off to another company for processing and disposal.

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 1 7. d)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board solid waste collaborative action plan

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee receives the report “Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board solid waste collaborative action plan” as information.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To update Public Works Committee on the work of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board solid waste collaborative. Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulation s.16 Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND Leduc County is part of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB). One of the plans generated by the board was the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan (MRSP). The MRSP recommended the initiation of collaboratives in regionally significant municipal service areas: • Solid Waste • Stormwater • Emergency Management • Fire/EMS The work of the solid waste collaborative is intended to examine regional level planning and/or service delivery, and prioritization of regional investments on a regional basis. Within the collaborative’s framework, a series of goals were developed: 1. To develop and maintain a regional Action Plan for solid waste that drives progress towards a shared regional vision of zero waste. 2. Establish interim measures of success to track progress in achieving regional solid waste priorities and to assess the performance of the Collaborative against its stated goals. 3. To foster collaboration through shared accountability for risk, investment, and prioritization of projects and services.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 1 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

4. To hold all members accountable for Collaborative success through shared responsibility and established processes. 5. To align prioritization and funding of solid waste projects at the regional level. 6. To maximize value through effective management and allocation of regional solid waste resources. To accomplish these goals, a series of actions, under the four categories of strategic planning; service harmonization; communication and education; and policy, advocacy, and resources.

Strategic Planning

This category of actions includes all activities related to growing regional knowledge or systems. Projects in this space include understanding the current and forecasted states, exploring best practices, and service modelling. These actions support a better understanding of where to focus regional initiatives. Strategic Planning actions include:

• Regional Data Strategy – Develop and implement a strategy that builds on investments already made in data through the Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program and the EMRB Geographical Information System. This project will increase the value and utility of regional solid waste data. Strategy elements include the data vision; data governance; procurement of data; reporting requirements; analysis tools and data visualization; policies for access, sharing and re-use; data type and format standards; storage and retention policies; and data security. • Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study – Developing a detailed understanding of regional ICI waste including material types and volume. This study will provide a more complete picture of the regional waste profile and will inform decisions regarding waste reduction and diversion strategies. A Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study is an important prerequisite for conducting regional waste modelling and development of a Regional ICI Waste Strategy. • Regional CRD Waste Characterization Study – Developing a detailed understanding of regional CRD waste including material types and volume. This study will provide a more complete picture of the regional waste profile and will inform decisions regarding waste reduction and diversion strategies. A Regional CRD Waste Characterization Study is an important prerequisite for the development of a CRD Waste Strategy and is an important input into regional waste modelling. • Agricultural Waste Study – This study involves developing a greater understanding of agricultural waste in the Region. This includes working with Cleanfarms and other stakeholders to develop an estimate of the material types and volume. This work also includes a review of best practices used in other jurisdictions, including existing EPR programs within Canada. Opportunities and potential incentives to achieve better waste diversion in the agricultural industry will be explored. An Agricultural Waste Study is an important input into regional waste modelling. • Regional Waste Modelling – A material flow analysis of the waste streams in the Region. This project includes mapping existing waste generation against regional waste facility capacity to identify

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 2 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

opportunities for more efficient recycling/composting solutions, to optimize existing assets, and to forecast future processing needs. See Appendix D for a Regional Map of Waste Facilities. • Organics Strategy – Assess organics volume against regional processing capacity and identify regional priorities and next steps to enable growth. Priorities could be related to contamination, land use planning, addressing NIMBY for new organics facilities, strategies to attract processors and end use markets, etc. across all sectors. This project builds on the organics collection and processing systems currently planned or in place and considers whether additional composting or other organics processing capacity is needed across the Region. • ICI Waste Strategy – Develop a comprehensive ICI Waste Management Strategy that addresses long term capacity, considers available similar models to provide a reward and encouragement system, and uses a social marketing approach to motivate change. • CRD Waste Strategy – Engage the CRD sector and develop an overall strategy to address diversion and disposal of waste. Explore voluntary program options as well as regulatory levers such as a Building Permit system.

Service Harmonization

Actions in service harmonization are intended to drive consistency, identify efficiencies, and create economies of scale within municipal solid waste across the Region. These activities will focus on the benefits of collaboration while maintaining the autonomy of each municipality in managing this service area. Activities in this category include: • Harmonize Collection Services – In alignment with an anticipated Alberta EPR framework, determine opportunities for intermunicipal collaboration within solid waste collection services, including service and cost efficiencies. This includes identifying opportunities for harmonization of acceptable materials, implementing strategies to increase diversion and reduce contamination, and sharing best practices across the Region. • Expand Land Used for CRD at Landfill – Expand or create space at existing landfills to provide areas to sort out recyclable CRD materials while other materials are stockpiled for other uses such as alternate daily cover at the landfill or feedstock for energy-to-waste facilities.

Communication and Education

Currently, each municipality develops and delivers its own communications on solid waste with residents. Collaborative members identified areas for collaboration to leverage resources and achieve efficiencies. Communication and Education includes actions such as: • Regional Waste Communication Strategy – Determine opportunities for municipal cooperation on the design and messaging for promotion and educational materials. • Waste App Consolidation – Review waste app performance data and identify opportunities for municipal cooperation on the design and implementation of a standardized Regional Waste App.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 3 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

• Consolidated School Program – Partner with regional School Boards to develop and deliver recycle and composting programs for schools. • ICI Waste Reduction and Diversion Toolkit – Development of an ICI Waste Diversion Tool Kit will educate management and staff about the benefits of proactive waste management and about convenient and cost-saving procedures and will provide a step-by-step approach on how to develop a waste reduction plan for any type of business. The kit provides a framework upon which to build practical waste reduction and recycling programs appropriate for small and large businesses across the Region. • Construction Site Diversion Toolkit – Develop a resource for contractors when they receive a building permit. The Toolkit will have information on CRD waste, information on how to and why to participate in source separation on construction sites and educates the contractors on how to properly sort material and where the materials can be taken for recycling/processing. The toolkit will be largely based on existing construction toolkits that have been successful such as Metro Vancouver’s.

Policy, Advocacy and Resources

While municipalities typically act as the primary interface with residents for solid waste service delivery, other orders of government play an important role in the legal and regulatory environment for waste management. The Collaborative identified important areas for advocacy and collaboration. Actions under the Policy, Advocacy and Resources category include: • Industry Engagement – Work with industry associations, generators, haulers, and processors to determine opportunities for increased waste diversion and/or management, including sharing information on waste collection and processing, voluntary reporting, technical innovations, and joint partnerships and infrastructure investments. • Regional Collaboration – Work with other regions (e.g., Calgary Metropolitan Region Board, Metro- Vancouver, etc.), municipal associations (e.g., the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association and Rural Municipalities of Alberta), and other regional stakeholders (e.g., the Alberta Recycling Management Authority, Recycling Council of Alberta, the Alberta Plastics Recycling Association, etc.) to inform and coordinate regional action on solid waste. • Provincial Regulation – Advocate for changes to provincial regulations, policies, standards, and resources in solid waste management, including funding for Solid Waste initiatives, bridge funding for HHW, an Alberta Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) System, landfill bans for certain materials, expanding the number of materials legislated under the Designated Material Recycling and Management Regulation. • Federal Policy – Advocate for changes to federal regulations, policies, standards, and resources for solid waste management, including a national EPR System, a national labelling system, and national recycling standards.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 4 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

A proposed regional opportunity can be supplied by any member. It will need to be prioritized, and if selected to proceed, a business case will need to be developed. This needs to be supported by two-thirds plus one of the collaborative members, ensuring that at least one rural municipality agrees. It then goes to the MRSP Standing committee for the determination if it should move forward and be resourced. While participation in the collaborative is mandatory, participation in the initiatives falling out of the action plan is not. Administration will continue to participate in the collaborative and provide updates to Council.

ATTACHMENTS • Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board’s Solid Waste Collaborative Action Plan

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 5 Attachment 1

Solid Waste Collaborative

DRAFT Action Plan

July August 2021

August 2021 Page 1 of 21 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

Solid Waste Collaborative Purpose In 2019, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board unanimously approved the inaugural Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan (MRSP)1. The MRSP represents the ongoing work of the Board toward fulfilment of its mandate as a growth management board under the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulation and is an essential plan to support implementation of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan2. Moreover, the MRSP also represents a commitment to working together with a focus on responsible growth.

To help achieve enhanced municipal collaboration and service coordination, the MRSP recommended the initiation of Collaboratives in regionally significant municipal service areas, including Solid Waste. The Solid Waste Collaborative leverages regional efforts and expertise, provides a supportive forum to foster research, supports sharing best practices, and enables evidence-based decisions and actions.

The Solid Waste Collaborative is comprised of representatives from each of the 13 EMRB member municipalities and identified stakeholders. Through a commitment to working together for shared benefits, the Collaborative identifies opportunities to find measurable cost savings, process efficiencies, and to leverage economies of scale. Through regional cooperation, member municipalities are better able to address complex problems that would challenge each municipality on their own.

The important work of the Solid Waste Collaborative is guided by the MRSP Standing Committee comprised of elected officials from member municipalities. The MRSP Standing Committee provides ongoing guidance and direction to the Collaboratives and monitors development, opportunities, and challenges for all services areas to ensure continued alignment with the growth plan.

Each Regional Collaborative is guided by a Vision Statement that reflects the desired future state and demonstrates alignment with the Vision of the growth plan and the MRSP Guiding Principles (See Appendices A and B). Each Collaborative is responsible for defining its goals and objectives within an Action Plan to be approved by the EMRB.

The expected outcomes of this regional collaboration, in time, include regional level planning and/or service delivery, and prioritization of regional investments. Above all, the inaugural MRSP recognizes that our thinking and decisions must embrace a regional mindset; the MRSP Collaboratives are enablers of responsible growth as one interconnected Region that will continue to provide value and enhanced quality of life for current citizens and future generations.

1 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board. 2019. Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan. Accessed June 21, 2021. 2 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board. 2020. Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan: Re-Imagine. Plan. Build. Accessed June 21, 2021

July August 2021 Page 2 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

Regional Solid Waste Landscape Municipal services form the backbone of healthy communities and make a competitive regional economy possible. High-quality solid waste management is critical for a sustainable, safe, and livable Region.

The Edmonton Metropolitan Region is 9,879 km2 of land in the heart of Alberta. As of 2016, the Region was home to approximately 1.3 million people. Over the next 25 years, the Region is expected to reach approximately 2.2 million people. As a result of the Region’s demographic and waste trends, solid waste management services will need to meet complex challenges:

• Without intervention, increases in population and employment are expected to increase the amount of waste generated, which will require additional resources and infrastructure to manage. • Densification and intensification of the Region’s population will increase pressure for improvements to solid waste service delivery for multi-family buildings. • While much of the focus is on individuals and families and the amount of waste they generate, residential waste is only a fraction of the garbage produced. • Every year, Canadians throw away 3 million tonnes of plastic waste, only 9% of which is recycled, meaning the vast majority of plastics end up in landfills and about 29,000 tonnes finds its way into the natural environment3. • Continued landfilling of organic material generates greenhouse gases which accelerate climate change. • In 2017, Canada's estimated total waste generation was the highest in the world at 1.33 billion metric tonnes of waste4.

Despite these significant challenges, the Region is well-positioned to capitalize on potential opportunities in managing waste, including:

• New solid waste management service delivery strategies for multi-family homes, and a focus on the industrial, commercial, and institutional (ICI) sector, and the construction, renovation, and demolition sector. • Robust municipal climate change adaptation plans. • Anticipated changes to provincial and federal guidelines for solid waste management. • Development and implementation of Circular Economy models for municipalities and businesses. • Implementation of an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework in Alberta. • Local, provincial, and federal bans on single use plastic items and materials of specific concern. • Growing government, industry, and consumer interest in solutions higher up on the waste hierarchy, such as design changes that make packaging recyclable, reusable or compostable.

3 Government of Canada. 2020. Canada one-step closer to zero plastic waste by 2030. Accessed July 5, 2021.

4 USA Today. 2019. Canada Produces the Most Waste in the World. The US Ranks Third. Accessed June 21, 2021.

July August 2021 Page 3 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

• Organics processing at industrial scale composting or anaerobic digestion facilities. • Developments in recycling processing technology. • Development of local recycling processing capacity to generate locally available raw material for processing into goods. • Growing markets for recycled material.

Together we are stronger, more efficient, and effective. A shared regional approach to solid waste management planning has the potential to help the Region meet the economic and climate challenges of today and into the future.

Zero Waste Vision The vision statement for solid waste management in the Region is:

Leading the way to a zero waste Edmonton Metropolitan Region.

The Zero Waste International Alliance, a world leader on the subject, provides the following generally accepted definition:

“Zero Waste is the conservation of all resources by means of responsible production, consumption, reuse and recovery of products, packaging and materials without burning, and with no discharges to land, water, or air that threaten the environment or human health.”

Achieving Zero Waste will require reducing the solid waste generated and maximizing recycling and composting across the Region. The Zero Waste Hierarchy describes a progression of policies and strategies to support the Zero Waste system, from highest and best to lowest use of materials. It enhances the Zero Waste definition by providing guidance for planning and a way to evaluate proposed programs and solutions.

Building on Zero Waste guiding principles for eliminating waste, new and exciting strategies for building circular economies are emerging. As many circular economy opportunities are focused on building profitability, businesses are helping to drive this shift. To succeed, new circular economy business models must have a large and varied supply of materials, and a high potential market demand for the goods and services derived from them. These conditions are more likely to be met when considering materials as a Region.

There are often non-financial barriers that limit growing circular economies at scale. The Region can play an important role in addressing these barriers and can help to create the conditions required to accelerate the transition to a circular economy. Regional progress towards zero waste and a more circular economy allows the Region to achieve more together.

July August 2021 Page 4 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

Solid Waste Collaborative Goals Within the Solid Waste Collaborative Framework, members documented their agreement on how they will work together to build and achieve their shared goals. The following Collaborative goals were outlined:

1. To develop and maintain a regional Action Plan for solid waste that drives progress towards a shared regional vision of zero waste. 2. Establish interim measures of success to track progress in achieving regional solid waste priorities and to assess the performance of the Collaborative against its stated goals. 3. To foster collaboration through shared accountability for risk, investment and prioritization of projects and services. 4. To hold all members accountable for Collaborative success through shared responsibility and established processes. 5. To align prioritization and funding of solid waste projects at the regional level. 6. To maximize value through effective management and allocation of regional solid waste resources.

Building on work already completed within individual municipalities and across the Region, the Solid Waste Collaborative agreed to identify or confirm relevant actions of regional significance. Actions viewed as having regional significance are those that:

• Require agreement across the Region to drive consistency, efficiencies, or economies of scale. • Would exceed existing staff complements or require technical expertise not available within all member municipalities. • Require funding outside of existing municipal budgets or capacity for member municipality contributions. • Would be more successful executed as a Region or would benefit from a unified voice.

Assessment and Prioritization When determining work of regional significance, the Solid Waste Collaborative had a substantial body of research to pull from in determining which actions will have the greatest impact. When prioritizing actions, the Collaborative considered:

• Foundational work completed by the Edmonton Region Waste Advisory Committee (ERWAC) 5 in their Integrated Waste Management Plan. • Priority actions recommended by the MRSP Task Force and Solid Waste Technical Committee. • Leading municipal initiatives. • Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program data.

5 The Capital Region Waste Minimization Advisory Committee was renamed to the Edmonton Region Waste Advisory Committee in 2018.

July August 2021 Page 5 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

• New Provincial plans for introducing an Extended Producer Responsibility framework that will shift responsibility for managing recyclables from the municipalities to producers.

5.1 ERWAC Integrated Waste Management Plan

In its 2013 Integrated Waste Management Plan6, ERWAC completed an assessment exercise to identify regional needs. From the needs identified, actions were shortlisted based on their suitability for implementation in a five-year timeline. From the short-listed actions, ERWAC identified several mandatory initiatives required to establish management and administration of the regional system. Actions were prioritized using a triple-bottom-line assessment based on:

• Economic Effect Potential: o Potential to increase efficiency. o Potential to increase business performance and economic opportunities. o Potential to be financially sustainable over the long-term. o Potential to receive provincial grant funding for start-up. • Environmental Effect Potential: o Potential to Reduce Solid Waste. o Potential to reduce current GHG emissions. o Potential to Reduce Toxics discharged into the environment. • Social Effect Potential: o Potential to improve convenient diversion opportunities to ACR residents and visitors. o Potential to develop or enhance partnerships to achieve positive outcomes. o Potential to be transferrable to all member municipalities. Relative weightings were agreed to for each criterion and each initiative was assessed to arrive at a relative score. The Solid Waste Collaborative used the prioritized actions as a starting point for their work.

5.2 Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan

An Environmental Scan was completed to support the MRSP in October 2018. The Environmental Scan provided a snapshot in time to better understand regional solid waste and to determine the next steps. Building on this information, the Solid Waste Technical Committee identified priority actions within the MRSP. There is a high degree of alignment between the initiatives prioritized by ERWAC and the priority actions identified within the MRSP.

See Appendix C for the MRSP priority actions.

6 Capital Region Waste Minimization Advisory Committee. 2013. Alberta Capital Region Integrated Waste Management Plan: A Partnership of Plans. Retrieved June 21, 2021.

July August 2021 Page 6 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

5.3 Leading Municipal Projects

Since the completion of ERWAC’s Integrated Waste Management Plan, EMRB member municipalities have continued to make advances in their local Municipal Solid Waste Plans. This includes leading initiatives, such as Spruce Grove’s Single-Use Items Reduction Strategy7 and Strathcona County’s Waste Management Roadmap8, that could have applications at the regional level. These activities will have an impact on how municipalities view the urgency or importance of prioritized actions and must be considered prior to initiating any work at the regional level.

5.4 Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program

In 2021, the Solid Waste Collaborative advanced several of the foundational initiatives identified within ERWAC’s Integrated Waste Management Plan. This included completion of the Collaborative’s first formal project to develop a Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program. Through this project, the Collaborative agreed to a common set terms, definitions and a material classification system that will improve regional data quality and comparability. A data model is now in place to better understand system performance, support data and trend analysis, and enable evidence-based decision-making regarding future actions.

5.5 Extended Producer Responsibility

Last year, the province announced its intention to pursue enabling legislation to support an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Framework for Alberta. EPR is an environmental / economic policy approach in which producers of products and packaging bear responsibility for ensuring those products and packages are properly managed at the end of their lifecycle9. An EPR framework would shift responsibility for residential recycling programs from municipalities to producers. The direction and timing of the anticipated transition to an EPR Framework has implications for the work the Collaborative undertakes.

5.6 Prioritization

The Collaborative started with the ERWAC prioritizations as a foundation and then considered the potential implications or impact suggested from the additional sources. Finally, the following questions were considered to help tentatively schedule key actions:

• Is there current capacity that could be leveraged? • Are there available resources now? • Is there time to complete smaller (but impactful) initiatives between larger projects? • Is there a champion for an initiative or project that increases the chances of success?

7 City of Spruce Gove. 2019. Single-Use Items Reduction Strategy. Accessed June 21, 2021

8 County of Strathcona. 2021. Managing Waste Together: Our Community’s commitment to rethinking waste. Accessed June 21, 2021

9 Ontario Waste Management Association, 2013. Extended Producer Responsibility Policy Paper. Retrieved June 21, 2021.

July August 2021 Page 7 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

This exercise resulted in a list of high-level list actions with regional significance. These actions will form the basis of a high-level roadmap to focus the work of the Collaborative over the next five years.

See Appendix E for alignment of proposed actions with the priority rankings based on the ERWAC assessment criterion.

Key Actions The regionally significant actions were grouped into four general categories, including:

• Strategic Planning. • Service Harmonization. • Communication and Education. • Policy, Advocacy, and Resources.

6.1 Strategic Planning

• Regional Data Strategy - Develop and implement a strategy that builds on investments already made in data through the Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program and the EMRB Geographical Information System. This project will increase the value and utility of regional solid waste data. Strategy elements include the data vision; data governance; procurement of data; reporting requirements; analysis tools and data visualization; policies for access, sharing and re-use; data type and format standards; storage and retention policies; and data security. • Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study – Developing a detailed understanding of regional ICI waste including material types and volume. This study will provide a more complete picture of the regional waste profile and will inform decisions regarding waste reduction and diversion strategies. A Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study is an important prerequisite for conducting regional waste modelling and development of a Regional ICI Waste Strategy. • Regional CRD Waste Characterization Study – Developing a detailed understanding of regional CRD waste including material types and volume. This study will provide a more complete picture of the regional waste profile and will inform decisions regarding waste reduction and diversion strategies. A Regional CRD Waste Characterization Study is an important prerequisite for the development of a CRD Waste Strategy and is an important input into regional waste modelling.

July August 2021 Page 8 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

• Agricultural Waste Study - This study involves developing a greater understanding of agricultural waste in the Region. This includes working with Cleanfarms and other stakeholders to develop an estimate of the material types and volume. This work also includes a review of best practices used in other jurisdictions, including existing EPR programs within Canada. Opportunities and potential incentives to achieve better waste diversion in the agricultural industry will be explored. An Agricultural Waste Study is an important input into regional waste modelling. • Regional Waste Modelling - A material flow analysis of the waste streams in the Region. This project includes mapping existing waste generation against regional waste facility capacity to identify opportunities for more efficient recycling/composting solutions, to optimize existing assets, and to forecast future processing needs. See Appendix D for a Regional Map of Waste Facilities. • Organics Strategy - Assess organics volume against regional processing capacity and identify regional priorities and next steps to enable growth. Priorities could be related to contamination, land use planning, addressing NIMBY for new organics facilities, strategies to attract processors and end use markets, etc. across all sectors. This project builds on the organics collection and processing systems currently planned or in place and considers whether additional composting or other organics processing capacity is needed across the Region. • ICI Waste Strategy - Develop a comprehensive ICI Waste Management Strategy that addresses long term capacity, considers available similar models to provide a reward and encouragement system, and uses a social marketing approach to motivate change. • CRD Waste Strategy - Engage the CRD sector and develop an overall strategy to address diversion and disposal of waste. Explore voluntary program options as well as regulatory levers such as a Building Permit system.

6.2 Service Harmonization

• Harmonize Collection Services – In alignment with an anticipated Alberta EPR framework, determine opportunities for intermunicipal collaboration within solid waste collection services, including service and cost efficiencies. This includes identifying opportunities for harmonization of acceptable materials, implementing strategies to increase diversion and reduce contamination, and sharing best practices across the Region. • Expand Land Used for CRD at Landfill - Expand or create space at existing landfills to provide areas to sort out recyclable CRD materials while other materials are stockpiled for other uses such as alternate daily cover at the landfill or feedstock for energy-to- waste facilities.

July August 2021 Page 9 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

6.3 Communication and Education

Today, each municipality develops and delivers their own communications on solid waste with residents. Collaborative members identified areas for collaboration to leverage resources and achieve efficiencies. Communication and Education includes actions such as:

• Regional Waste Communication Strategy - Determine opportunities for municipal cooperation on the design and messaging for promotion and educational materials. • Waste App Consolidation - Review waste app performance data and identify opportunities for municipal cooperation on the design and implementation of a standardized Regional Waste App. • Consolidated School Program - Partner with regional School Boards to develop and deliver recycle and composting programs for schools. • ICI Waste Reduction and Diversion Toolkit - Development of an ICI Waste Diversion Tool Kit will educate management and staff about the benefits of proactive waste management and about convenient and cost-saving procedures and will provide a step- by-step approach on how to develop a waste reduction plan for any type of business. The kit provides a framework upon which to build practical waste reduction and recycling programs appropriate for small and large businesses across the Region. • Construction Site Diversion Toolkit - Develop a resource for contractors when they receive a building permit. The Toolkit will have information on CRD waste, information on how to and why to participate in source separation on construction sites and educates the contractors on how to properly sort material and where the materials can be taken for recycling/processing. The toolkit will be largely based on existing construction toolkits that have been successful such as Metro Vancouver’s.

6.4 Policy, Advocacy and Resources

• Industry Engagement - Work with industry associations, generators, haulers, and processors to determine opportunities for increased waste diversion and/or management, including sharing information on waste collection and processing, voluntary reporting, technical innovations, and joint partnerships and infrastructure investments. • Regional Collaboration - Work with other regions (e.g., Calgary Metropolitan Region Board, Metro-Vancouver, etc.), municipal associations (e.g., the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association and Rural Municipalities of Alberta), and other regional stakeholders (e.g., the Alberta Recycling Management Authority, Recycling Council of Alberta, the Alberta Plastics Recycling Association, etc.) to inform and coordinate regional action on solid waste.

July August 2021 Page 10 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

• Provincial Regulation - Advocate for changes to provincial regulations, policies, standards, and resources in solid waste management, including funding for Solid Waste initiatives, bridge funding for HHW, an Alberta Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) System, landfill bans for certain materials, expanding the number of materials legislated under the Designated Material Recycling and Management Regulation. • Federal Policy - Advocate for changes to federal regulations, policies, standards, and resources for solid waste management, including a national EPR System, national material bans (single-use, non-recyclable plastics), a national labelling system, and national recycling standards.

These actions were reviewed and agreed to by the Collaborative and have been placed into a high-level roadmap in the following section. Foundational projects are the most important to tackle first. While some data and research actions are viewed as prerequisites to future service harmonization actions, these could potentially be consolidated under a single project depending on capacity. Policy, Advocacy and Resources actions have already begun and are expected to evolve over the next five years. The roadmap is to provide regional planning guidance only and adjustments to the scope of actions and expected timelines are inevitable as realities on the ground evolve.

July August 2021 Page 11 of 21

Solid Waste Roadmap

Action Plan 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Actions Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program Regional Data Strategy Organics Strategy Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study Agricultural Waste Study Regional Waste Modelling ICI Waste Strategy Regional Waste Modelling Regional CRD Waste Characterization Study CRD Waste Strategy Harmonize Collection Services Expand Land Used for CRD Recycling at Landfill ICI Waste Reduction and Diversion Toolkit Consolidated School Program Regional Waste Communication Strategy Construction Site Diversion Toolkit Waste App Consolidation Regional Collaboration Activities Provincial Regulation Industry Engagement Federal Policy Roadmap Legend Strategic Planning Service Harmonization Communication and Education Policy Advocacy and Resources Complete

August 2021 Page 12 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Approval Process While the Solid Waste Roadmap lays out a high-level forecast of the work, each action will need to be approved individually. Actions identified within the roadmap range from ongoing initiatives that are likely to evolve over time (e.g., advocating for policy change at the federal level) to discrete projects with a start and end date (e.g., a Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study). The initiatives identified within the roadmap can be started at any time and are only constrained by the capacity for Collaborative members to advance them. Discrete projects are likely to require funding from the EMRB, municipalities or external partners. Where funding is required, the Collaborative will follow a formal process to achieve a decision.

The following graphic represents the repeatable approach that the Solid Waste Collaborative will utilize for project approval.

Graphic 8.1 Solid Waste Collaborative Project Approval Process

•Complete / •Propose •Update the Review •Complete •Submit for •Develop a Regional Solid Waste Prioritization Business Case Decision Project Charter Opportunity Roadmap Assessment

8.1 Propose Regional Opportunity

Each project the Collaborative chooses to undertake will begin through a proposal from an individual member or group of members. The project may be proposed verbally during a meeting by any attendee, or through a written proposal submitted by a member. All proposals should be detailed enough to allow the Collaborative to understand the outcomes to be achieved and the magnitude of the work considered within the scope of the project.

8.2 Complete / Review Prioritization Assessment

Where a proposed project is considered foundational (it must be completed to support future projects), it will be treated as mandatory. For all other projects, the Collaborative will either complete an assessment for the project or review the existing assessment to confirm the level of priority as compared to other regionally significant projects.

8.3 Complete Business Case

Once the Collaborative has confirmed the project is high priority, a business case will be created. The business case will include:

• Participant municipalities. • Expected benefits. • Resources needed. • Funding required. • Estimated timelines August 2021 Page 13 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

The business case must contain sufficient information to determine if the value of the project warrants the time and costs associated with completing the work. Although the project must be considered regionally significant, participation in a project will be voluntary for each municipality. The business case must be formally approved by the Collaborative to move forward for decision. Decision-making is through consensus which is defined as two-thirds majority plus one, requiring at least one county to support the project to reach consensus.

The Business Case will be used as a key input to the Request for Proposal, if required.

8.4 Submit for Decision

The completed business case will be submitted to the MRSP Standing Committee as a formal agenda item. The MRSP Standing Committee will be responsible for determining if the project should move forward to be resourced. If the project is approved, it moves forward in the process. If the project is not approved, it may be abandoned or returned to an earlier phase in the process for additional work.

8.5 Develop Project Charter

An approved business case will serve as input to the Project Charter. The Project Charter will more fully define the requirements and the scope of work and will include:

• A detailed statement of work. • The project structure and governance. • Project stakeholders. • A Resource Plan. • The Project Budget. • A detailed Project Schedule.

8.6 Update the Solid Waste Roadmap

As an approved project may have implications for the scope and/or timing of other planned regional actions, the roadmap will be reviewed and updated annually. This will help keep the roadmap current and provides an opportunity to interrogate the existing prioritization process and to update priorities, if required.

Measuring our Progress The MRSP indicated the importance of monitoring, evaluating, and reporting on the performance of the Collaboratives. The Solid Waste Collaborative is responsible for establishing the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that determine the effect of the Action Plan in achieving the desired outcomes of the growth plan and the MRSP. The measures must also provide feedback on the Collaborative’s success in supporting a circular economy and leading towards a zero waste Edmonton Metropolitan Region.

July August 2021 Page 14 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

The KPI’s for solid waste are:

• Gross Value Added10. • Direct, indirect, and induced jobs created. • Avoided greenhouse gas emissions. • Cost per tonne of waste generated. • Reduced tonnes of waste per capita. • Recycled rate (recycled and composted). • Percentage of citizens with access to recycling facilities11. • Tonnes of agriculture plastics diverted.

The measures required to support these indicators provide important information on the current state as well as provide a baseline so that progress can be measured over time. These indicators also provide valuable information on the performance of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region compared to other regions.

The Solid Waste KPI’s, including sources, frequencies, methodologies, and governance will be confirmed as part of the scope of the Regional Data Strategy project to ensure data quality and auditability.

See Appendix F for performance measures alignment to gGrowth Pplan objectives.

10 The Gross Value Added (GVA) measures the value of goods or services added in a sector of the economy. The model created for this study uses the income approach to measuring GVA. The income approach sums up all of the income earned by individuals or businesses involved in the production of goods and services.

11 Access will need to be defined based on the maximum distance travelled to access a recycling facility.

July August 2021 Page 15 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Appendix A – Growth Plan: 50 Year Vision

Source: Edmonton Metropolitan Growth Plan: Re-Imagine. Plan. Build.

August 2021 Page 16 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Appendix B – Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Guiding Principles

Creating common understanding of the shared servicing challenges is vital to creating an environment where municipalities can think and act in the best interest of the Region. The Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan12 (MRSP) Principles reflect the regional imperative for working together and will provide critical guidance for the planning, investment, and coordination of the delivery of metropolitan services. The MRSP Principles are aligned with the guiding principles of the gGrowth Pplan.

The MRSP Principles are to:

• Lead with a metropolitan mindset for the greater good.

• Pursue leading and innovative research, technology, and best practices.

• Build, collect, and share regionally relevant data, information, and knowledge.

• Prioritize regionally scaled service investments informed by evidence.

• Leverage sub-regional service initiatives to benefit the Region.

• Recognize the unique municipal service contexts.

• Guarantee the safety and wellness of citizens.

• Act in a regional manner with a unified voice.

12 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board. 2019. Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan. Accessed June 21, 2021. August 2021 Page 17 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Appendix C – Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Priority Actions

While not yet resourced nor approved by the Board, the following provides the intended direction for action plans for the four municipal service area Regional Collaboratives.

• Develop a common set of solid waste terminology, measures, indicators, criteria for prioritization of investments. • Discuss regional solid waste efforts with the Edmonton Region Waste Advisory Committee (ERWAC) and determine the best strategy for the future of ERWAC. • Gather a foundation of regional level solid waste data and information for residential solid waste management. • Advance regional discussion and advocacy of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) focused on enacting legislation. • Conduct an enhanced Environmental Scan of processing capacity and waste generation rates including organics, construction, and demolition waste, and industrial, commercial, and institutional (ICI) waste. • Consider disaster debris management. • Identify and assess opportunities for innovation in solid waste management. • Review success of landfill bans on successful waste diversion. • Develop policy recommendations on single use items. • Advance a regionally relevant and common toolkit for communications related to solid waste management. • Identify and assess opportunities for regionally scaled investments (e.g., organics processing, material recovery facilities, waste processing). • Develop a common full cost accounting and life cost analysis including carbon footprint and the impact of greenhouse gases in the Region. • Conduct a detailed service delivery analysis and best practices review for service delivery models; and make recommendations to EMRB.

August 2021 Page 18 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Appendix D – Regional Map: Waste Facilities

August 2021 Page 19 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Appendix E – Actions by Assessed Priority13

ERWAC Action Plan Related Program Rank Actions B.1 Foundational Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program B.1 Foundational Regional Data Strategy B.1 Foundational Regional ICI Waste Characterization Study B.1 Foundational Regional CRD Waste Characterization Study B.1 Foundational Agricultural Waste Study B.2 Foundational Regional Waste Modelling B.1 Foundational Organics Strategy D.1 4 ICI Waste Strategy E.2 3 CRD Waste Strategy F.1, F.4 7, 9 Harmonize Collection Services C. 2, C.3, D.2, D.4, H.1 8, 11, 12, 14, 15 Expand Land Used for CRD Recycling at Landfill F.2 13 Regional Waste Communication Strategy C.4 1 Waste App Consolidation C.4 1 Consolidated School Program C.4 1 ICI Waste Reduction and Diversion Toolkit E.3 2 Construction Site Diversion Toolkit F.3 6 Industry Engagement E.1, G.1 5, 17 Regional Collaboration I.1 5, 10, 17 Provincial Regulation I.1 10 Federal Policy I.1 10

13 Related programs and ranks are taken from the Capital Region Waste Minimization Advisory Committee. 2013. Alberta Capital Region Integrated Waste Management Plan: A Partnership of Plans. August 2021 Page 20 of 21

Solid Waste Collaborative –Action Plan

Appendix F – Solid Waste Alignment to Growth Plan

The following table outlines alignment of the Solid Waste actions to gGrowth Pplan policy objectives and the relevant performance measures that will demonstrate progress within each policy area.

Policy Area Economic Natural Living Communities and Integration of Transportation Agriculture Competitiveness Systems Housing Land Use and Systems and Employment Infrastructure

SOLID WASTE CONTRIBUTES TO…

Policy Objective 1.1 Promote global 2.3 Plan development 3.1 …the planning and 4.4 Plan for and 4.6 …Prioritize 6.2 ...minimize the economic to promote clean air, development of accommodate rural investment and conversion of agricultural competitiveness and land, water, and complete communities, growth in appropriate funding of regional lands for nonagricultural use diversification of the address climate to accommodate locations with infrastructure to regional economy change impacts people’s daily needs sustainable levels of support planned 6.3 …the diversification and servicing growth value-added agriculture sector

Solid Waste Solid waste diversion Solid waste reduction Solid waste services Costs associated with Solid waste Regional appetite for Actions can create opportunity will decrease will need to evolve to providing solid waste infrastructure could developing new landfills on for recyclers and waste environmental impacts, provide collection for management services be built with a agricultural land is processors to build and proper waste areas of increased to rural communities regional funding decreasing local presence management practices densification, while tend to be high, and and operations will decrease GHG continuing to provide may benefit from approach to Opportunities exist for Market Opportunities emissions and impacts service to rural areas regionalizing services decrease cost to diverting biosolids and to groundwater deliver to rural areas rate payers compost material and International Collection Service applying to agricultural land recognition for Solid Organics Diversion Capacity Regional waste Shared investment for increased yields waste management disposal facilities in solid waste sustainability goals Solid Waste Efficiency of service infrastructure Organics Processing, Management delivery Efficiencies from Biosolids Land Application, Regulations and Policy regional service Recycling Initiatives (AEP) Service Delivery delivery Innovation

Performance Gross value added Avoided greenhouse Cost per tonne Reduced tonnes of % of citizens with Tonnes of agriculture Measures gas emissions waste per capita access to recycling plastics diverted Direct, indirect, and facilities induced jobs created Recycled rate

August 2021 Page 21 of 21

7. e)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board stormwater collaborative action plan

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee receives the report “Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board stormwater collaborative action plan” as information.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To update Public Works Committee on the work of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board stormwater collaborative. Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulation s.16 Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND Leduc County is part of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB). One of the plans generated by the board was the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan (MRSP). The MRSP recommended the initiation of collaboratives in regionally significant municipal service areas: • Solid Waste • Stormwater • Emergency Management • Fire/EMS The work of the stormwater collaborative is intended to examine regional level planning and/or service delivery, and prioritization of regional investments on a regional basis as well as engagement and ongoing collaboration with key stakeholders towards the implementation of the MRSP. Within the collaborative’s framework, a series of goals were developed: 1. To develop and maintain a regional Action Plan for stormwater that drives progress towards a shared regional vision of protected natural assets while achieving resilience from stormwater impacts. 2. To establish interim measures of success to track progress in achieving regional stormwater priorities and to assess the performance of the Collaborative against its stated goals.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 1 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

3. To foster collaboration through shared accountability for risk, investment, and prioritization of projects and services. 4. To enable Collaborative success through shared alignment, accountability, and established processes. 5. To align prioritization and funding of stormwater projects and strategic initiatives at the regional and sub-regional level. 6. To maximize value through effective management and allocation of regional stormwater resources. 7. To strive for community resiliency from flood-related impacts and provide public education regarding flood-related risks.

To accomplish these goals, a series of actions, under the five categories of data and research; standards and best practice; communication and education; policy, advocacy and resources; and service harmonization.

Data and Research This category of actions includes activities related to growing regional knowledge or systems. Projects in this category are intended to provide municipalities with accurate and timely tools and data upon which to base stormwater management decisions and practices. Where appropriate, regional perspectives and approaches to stormwater management will be explored and pursued. Data and Research actions include:

• Regional River and Creek Assessment – Assess current and future capacity of rivers and creeks to handle current and expected stormwater runoffs; include water quality implications; establish strategies to operate within defined water quality guidelines/standards and to enable flood mitigation. Leverage related work previously completed (e.g., Whitemud/Blackmud Surface Water Management Study and subsequent agreements). o Outcome/Benefit - Shared understanding of capacity for anticipated future flows; implications for future design and development. Strategies to enable flood mitigation. • Regional Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) Curves – Update current IDF curves in use for design and development of stormwater infrastructure. o Outcome/Benefit - Up-to-date and accurate curves to enable design and development and to inform flood management needs. • Insurance Industry Flood Maps – Explore opportunities to procure insurance industry flood maps for the Region; prioritize high-risk areas within the Region. o Outcome/Benefit - Cost-effective flood maps to inform design/development and infrastructure needs and flood mitigation measures. • Regional Flood Risk Assessment – Analysis of high-risk flood areas across the Region. Identification of areas prone to high-risk flood events; quantification of flood risk and associated costs. o Outcome/Benefit - Identification of areas within the Region prone to high frequency and/or high consequence flood events to inform future development decisions and mitigation measures for existing developments.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 2 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

• Identification of Flood Risk Mitigation Measures – Based on risk assessment, determine risk mitigation measures to enable risk management of flood-prone areas. o Outcome/Benefit - Flood risk mitigation measures to enable risk management of future development decisions and mitigation measures for existing developments. • Regional Stormwater Management Strategy – Explore opportunities for regional or sub-regional, watershed-based “fence-line” strategies for stormwater management that meet provincial requirements; strategy would respect municipal boundaries and encourage collaboration to promote positive environmental, social, economic outcomes within watersheds. Leverage related work previously completed (e.g., Whitemud/Blackmud Surface Water Management Study and subsequent agreements). o Outcome/Benefit - Identification of consistent stormwater management practices within a watershed to assist community planning and development; streamlined approval processes, regional view of stormwater management. Standards and Best Practices Stormwater management practices vary across the Region, and new innovative approaches are being developed in response to growth pressures and climate change uncertainty. There are several areas for sharing best practices to achieve stormwater management outcomes. Actions proposed under the Standards and Best Practices category include:

• Develop a common set of stormwater terminology, measures, indicators, criteria for prioritization of investments – Gather a foundation of regional level stormwater data and information - a library and repository. o Outcome/Benefit - Ensures a common stormwater language and terminology and enables performance evaluation/measurement, and basis for investment consideration/priorities. • Sharing Design Standards/Best Practices – Facilitate best practices for design/maintenance of green infrastructure, stormwater pond operation and maintenance, ditches and swales, pond infrastructure upgrades, etc. o Outcome/Benefit - Knowledge sharing to enable best practices for design and maintenance of stormwater management infrastructure, and where appropriate, consistency in application across the Region. Communication and Education Despite similar programs with similar goals, today each municipality develops and delivers its own communications on stormwater with residents. Collaborative members identified areas for collaboration to leverage resources and achieve efficiencies. Communication and Education would include actions such as:

• Regional Flood Proofing Strategy/Communication Strategy – Investigate opportunities for multi- municipality cooperation on the design and messaging for promotion and educational materials.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 3 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

o Outcome/Benefit - Consistent messaging across the Region, reduced costs to participating municipalities, increased efficacy. • Shared Virtual Space for Data/Information Sharing – Develop a shared virtual cloud-based data storage space for sharing regional stormwater data/information/reports. o Outcome/Benefit - Enables a common platform for information sharing, a common repository for best practices, management strategies/plans, master plans, etc. • Facilitate Information Sharing Sessions – Facilitate information-sharing sessions on stormwater management issues/topics (e.g.: standards/regulation review, best practices for design, operation & maintenance, etc.). o Outcome/Benefit - Collaborative forum among the Stormwater Collaborative and other stormwater management stakeholders; enables information sharing idea generation, project discussions, etc. • Targeted Information Sessions on Climate Change and Anticipated Impacts – Host/facilitate education sessions with a focus on the anticipated impacts of climate change on stormwater management in the Region. o Outcome/Benefit - Informs common understanding among Collaborative members to anticipate and prepare for climate changes to enable resiliency from flood impacts. Policy, Advocacy, and Resources While municipalities typically interface with other orders of government and industry stakeholders individually, the Collaborative identified areas for advocacy and collaboration. Actions under the Policy, Advocacy and Resources category include:

• Other Regional Collaborations – Work with other regions with established regional approaches to stormwater management to inform and coordinate regional stormwater management. Access to best practices and lessons learned. o Outcome/Benefit - Learn from other agencies engaged in a regional approach to stormwater management; opportunities to better understand operation and maintenance, policy, governance, etc. issues related to regional approaches. • Provincial Level Advocacy – Advocate for changes/clarity/direction on provincial regulations, policies, standards, and resources for stormwater management. Monitor provincial policy discussion/direction and share with Collaborative. o Outcome/Benefit - Potential to influence provincial participation/interaction on stormwater management standards, design, water quality, flood forecasting, data availability, etc. Greater ability to speak with one voice on stormwater management priorities. Ability to harmonize/standardize data collection and analysis.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 4 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

• Industry Stakeholder Engagement – Engage and advocate with industry stakeholders (development industry, utilities industry, regulatory authorities, conservation agencies, etc.) to influence approaches, roles/responsibilities regarding stormwater management. o Outcome/Benefit - Potential to learn from and influence stakeholders' role/responsibility in stormwater management (e.g.: stormwater pond construction/maintenance methods, green infrastructure, community design standards, etc.). Greater ability to speak with one voice on stormwater management priorities. Service Harmonization Service harmonization actions are largely related to emergency management and, as such, require leadership and direction from municipal and/or regional emergency management agencies. The Stormwater Collaborative will play a supporting role in emergency management, providing subject matter expertise input as requested. These activities will focus on the benefits of collaboration while maintaining the autonomy of each municipality in managing this service area. Activities in this category include:

• Regional Emergency Flood Response Strategy – Providing support and advice to the development of a regional flood response strategy that considers multiple flood scenarios and includes all 13 EMRB municipalities. o Outcome/Benefit - Coordinated, transparent strategy for flood response that encourages and formalizes cooperation with clearly defined roles and expectations • Regional Mutual Flood Response Agreements – Where required, and to enable regional emergency response, providing support and advice to the development of cooperation agreements to facilitate emergency response to flood events. o Outcome/Benefit - Established service level agreements to inform cooperation in response to flood events across the Region. • Regional Residential Flood Inspection Service – Explore opportunities to provide flood inspection services to private homes and landowners at a regional scale. o Outcome/Benefit - Informed home/landowners can make informed decisions regarding flood- proofing, the potential for decreased risk to municipalities. Shared cost efficiencies, consistent messaging and delivery. • Cross-municipality Storm Water Management Areas for Future Work – Identify multi-municipality areas in need of stormwater management policies, practices, infrastructure to enable more effective management and better outcomes o Outcome/Benefit - Collaborative stormwater management to enable positive, efficient, effective management across municipal boundaries; areas for investment identified; watershed-based management practices.

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 5 Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

Like the solid waste collaborative, a proposed regional opportunity can be supplied by any member. It will need to be prioritized, and if selected to proceed, a business case will need to be developed. It then goes to the MRSP Standing committee for the determination if it should move forward and be resourced. While participation in the collaborative is mandatory, participation in the initiatives falling out of the action plan is not. Administration will continue to participate in the collaborative and provide updates to Council.

ATTACHMENTS • Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board’s Stormwater Collaborative Action Plan

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 6 Attachment 1

Stormwater Collaborative

Action Plan

August 2021 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

Stormwater Collaborative Purpose

In 2019, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approved the inaugural Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan (MRSP). The MRSP represents the ongoing work of the Board toward fulfilment of its mandate as a growth management board under the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Regulation and is an essential plan to support the implementation of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan. Moreover, the MRSP is representative of a commitment to working together with a focus on planning regionally to achieve responsible growth.

The MRSP recommended the initiation of Regional Collaboratives to achieve enhanced municipal collaboration and service coordination in regionally significant municipal service areas, including Stormwater. The Stormwater Collaborative leverages regional efforts and expertise, provides a supportive forum to foster research, shares best practices, and creates an environment supporting evidence-based decisions and actions.

The Stormwater Collaborative is comprised of representatives from each of the 13 EMRB member municipalities. The Stormwater Collaborative’s work is guided by the MRSP Standing Committee, which is comprised of elected officials from EMRB member municipalities. The MRSP Standing Committee provides ongoing guidance and direction to the Collaboratives and monitors development, opportunities, and challenges for all services areas to ensure alignment with the Growth Plan.

Each Regional Collaborative is guided by a Vision Statement that reflects the desired future state and demonstrates alignment with the Growth Plan and the MRSP Guiding Principles (See Appendices A and B). Each Collaborative is responsible for defining its goals and objectives within an Action Plan.

The expected outcomes of this regional collaboration include regional level planning and/or service delivery, prioritization of regional investments, as well as engagement and ongoing collaboration with key stakeholders towards the implementation of the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan.

Above all, the inaugural MRSP recognizes that our thinking and decisions must embrace a regional mindset. The MRSP is focused on regionally significant services to ensure responsible growth as one interconnected region and will continue to provide value to citizens of the Region for current and future generations. Regional Stormwater Landscape

As defined in the MRSP Report, stormwater management means the collection, conveyance, storage, and discharge of stormwater runoff (e.g., rainfall, snow melt).

The Edmonton Metropolitan Region is 9,879 km2 of land and, as of 2016, is home to approximately 1.3 million people and approximately 725,000 jobs, representing 30% of Alberta’s total population and economic activity. The Region is expected to reach approximately 2.2 million people and approximately 1.2 million jobs in the next 25 years, which will put significant pressure on municipalities to plan, design, and manage stormwater infrastructure that will meet the demands of anticipated growth.

August 2021 Page 2 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

In addition, while the scale of anticipated impacts due to climate change are difficult to quantify, intense storms are becoming more frequent, resulting in changes to the intensity, frequency, and timing of flood events and their associated effects on infrastructure and the environment. A changing climate and increased intensity of storms will result in increased demands on not only built infrastructure, but also the creeks, streams, and other natural water bodies that receive stormwater discharges.

The MRSP Report identified specific areas of concern supporting the regional imperative for collaborative action for regional stormwater management. Growth pressures from within will challenge municipal stormwater management, while external pressures will further exacerbate the challenges for municipalities and necessitate a regional approach to stormwater management. Some of the growth pressures identified in the MRSP Report include:

 Impacts of climate destabilization and increasing unpredictability of weather.  Effects of densification and urban growth increasing pressure on stormwater management infrastructure.  Impacts to community safety and public and private property.  Impacts of stormwater drainage in natural water systems and the environment.

The Stormwater Collaborative will address the challenges presented by municipal growth pressures on stormwater infrastructure and will work to protect the Region’s natural assets while striving for resiliency from the impacts of stormwater impacts. Vision for Stormwater Management

Municipal services contribute to vibrant, healthy communities and a competitive regional economy. In advancing a regional approach to stormwater management, municipalities can share best practices related to stormwater management, operation and maintenance, and data on current and projected service levels. By working collaboratively, municipalities can make more informed, efficient, and cost-effective decisions about investment and service delivery.

A collaborative regional approach to stormwater management also has the potential to create opportunities for shared investment and management delivery models to meet the needs of growing communities and increased demands on stormwater management and infrastructure.

In addition to developing sustainable cost-effective plans for stormwater management as a Region, we are also challenged to identify and advance strategies to protect and leverage our natural assets as part of a goal of increased regional sustainability and environmental stewardship.

The vision for stormwater management in the Region is: The Edmonton Metropolitan Region will have protected natural assets while achieving resilience from stormwater impacts.

August 2021 Page 3 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

Stormwater Collaborative Goals

Within the Stormwater Framework Collaborative, members documented their agreement on how they would work together to build and achieve their shared goals. The Collaborative identified the following goals to guide their work:

 To develop and maintain a regional Action Plan for stormwater that drives progress towards a shared regional vision of protected natural assets while achieving resilience from stormwater impacts.  To establish interim measures of success to track progress in achieving regional stormwater priorities and to assess the performance of the Collaborative against its stated goals.  To foster collaboration through shared accountability for risk, investment, and prioritization of projects and services.  To enable Collaborative success through shared alignment, accountability, and established processes.  To align prioritization and funding of stormwater projects and strategic initiatives at the regional and sub-regional level.  To maximize value through effective management and allocation of regional stormwater resources.  To strive for community resiliency from flood-related impacts and provide public education regarding flood-related risks.

Assessment of Stormwater Initiatives

When determining and initiatives and project to advance, the Stormwater Collaborative will consider the following assessment criteria prioritize work that:

 Advances the Region’s ability to understand and plan for the impacts of anticipated climate change and variability.  Enables collaboration among the EMRB members to advance regional stormwater management initiatives and projects.  Promotes consistency in the development and application of stormwater management standards.  Provides learning and information sharing opportunities to advance best practices in stormwater management.

In addition to the assessment criteria, the Stormwater Collaborative will assess potential projects based on alignment to the guiding principles and objectives set out in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan (the Growth Plan).

August 2021 Page 4 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

Proposed Stormwater Actions

The MRSP Report states that each Regional Collaborative will have distinct goals and objectives including specific action plans and provides a list of proposed actions to inform the intended direction for action plans for each of the Collaboratives. The Stormwater Collaborative established the following objectives to guide their work. Stormwater Collaborative members will work together to:

 Monitor developments, opportunities, and challenges in stormwater management.  Identify existing gaps in stormwater management and develop potential solutions.  Support regional stormwater management data collection and sharing for informed planning and decision-making.  Explore ways to deliver efficient and cost-effective stormwater services.  Prioritize and recommend regional projects or strategic initiatives to the MRSP Standing Committee.  Develop and maintain an Action Plan for regional stormwater management.  Monitor municipal issues and risks arising from implementation of the Action Plan.  Report Collaborative performance to the MRSP Standing Committee and the Board.  Enhance the quality of stormwater management in the Region.  Educate the public on risk management and mitigation strategies for flood-related impacts.

While not resourced or prioritized, the MRSP provides the intended direction for a Stormwater Action Plan:

 Develop a common set of stormwater terminology, measures, indicators, criteria for prioritization of investments.  Gather a foundation of regional level stormwater data and information – a library and repository.  Conduct an enhanced environmental scan of creeks, trunks, etc. – measures and monitoring.  Determine risks (e.g.: impacts, liability) of current practices.  Advance and facilitate good practices and lessons learned.  Consider projects for design standards, sedimentation, and erosion.  Advance/elevate regional discussion and advocacy of water quality and design standards.  Determine opportunities for regionally scaled investments.

Building on the intended direction provided in the MRSP, the Stormwater Collaborative developed a list of proposed actions to pursue. The proposed actions were grouped into five general categories, including:

1. Data and Research 2. Standards and Best Practices

August 2021 Page 5 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

3. Communication and Education 4. Policy, Advocacy, and Resources 5. Service Harmonization

Actions identified range from discrete projects with a start and end date (e.g., an update of Regional Intensity Duration Frequency Curves) to ongoing initiatives that are likely to evolve over time (e.g., advocating for policy change/direction at the provincial level). Most projects will require funding from the EMRB, municipalities or external partners while other initiatives can be advanced through regional cooperation.

There is an understanding among Collaborative members that while strategic initiatives, such as communication or education initiatives, may apply regionally across the Edmonton Metropolitan Region, capital infrastructure projects may be focused on a sub-regional or watershed-specific area.

There have been notable sub-regional watershed-based stormwater management initiatives undertaken in the Region in the past, such as the Whitemud/Blackmud Surface Water Management Study and subsequent agreements, which have provided positive management outcomes to partnering municipalities and agencies and can inform future Collaborative initiatives at a sub-regional watershed level. The Stormwater Collaborative will leverage past initiatives and apply key learnings and best practices to future work.

Given the dynamic and watershed-focused nature of stormwater management, proposed projects may be assessed based on their impacts at the regional, sub-regional, or local level. Participation in any project proposed by the Collaborative will be voluntary, based on municipalities’ priorities.

1. Data and Research

This category of actions includes activities related to growing regional knowledge or systems. Projects in this category are intended to provide municipalities with accurate and timely tools and data upon which to base stormwater management decisions and practices. Where appropriate, regional perspectives and approaches to stormwater management will be explored and pursued. Data and Research actions include:

 Regional River and Creek Assessment - Assess current and future capacity of rivers and creeks to handle current and expected stormwater runoffs; include water quality implications; establish strategies to operate within defined water quality guidelines/standards and to enable flood mitigation. Leverage related work previously completed (e.g., Whitemud/Blackmud Surface Water Management Study and subsequent agreements). o Outcome/Benefit - Shared understanding of capacity for anticipated future flows; implications for future design and development. Strategies to enable flood mitigation.  Regional Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) Curves - Update current IDF curves in use for design and development of stormwater infrastructure.

August 2021 Page 6 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

o Outcome/Benefit - Up-to-date and accurate curves to enable design and development and to inform flood management needs.  Insurance Industry Flood Maps - Explore opportunities to procure insurance industry flood maps for the Region; prioritize high risk areas within the Region. o Outcome/Benefit – Cost-effective flood maps to inform design/development and infrastructure needs and flood mitigation measures.  Regional Flood Risk Assessment - Analysis of high-risk flood areas across the Region. Identification of areas prone to high-risk flood events; quantification of flood risk and associated costs. o Outcome/Benefit – Identification of areas within the Region prone to high frequency and/or high consequence flood events to inform future development decisions and mitigation measures for existing developments.  Identification of Flood Risk Mitigation Measures – Based on risk assessment, determine risk mitigation measures to enable risk management of flood prone areas. o Outcome/Benefit – Flood risk mitigation measures to enable risk management of future development decisions and mitigation measures for existing developments.  Regional Stormwater Management Strategy- Explore opportunities for regional or sub-regional, watershed-based “fence-line” strategies for stormwater management that meet provincial requirements; strategy would respect municipal boundaries and encourage collaboration to promote positive environmental, social, economic outcomes within watersheds. Leverage related work previously completed (e.g., Whitemud/Blackmud Surface Water Management Study and subsequent agreements). o Outcome/Benefit – Identification of consistent stormwater management practices within a watershed to assist community planning and development; streamlined approval processes, regional view of stormwater management.

2. Standards and Best Practices

Stormwater management practices vary across the Region, and new innovate approaches are being developed in response to growth pressures and climate change uncertainty. There are several areas for sharing best practices to achieve stormwater management outcomes. Actions proposed under the Standards and Best Practices category include:

 Develop a common set of stormwater terminology, measures, indicators, criteria for prioritization of investments - Gather a foundation of regional level stormwater data and information - a library and repository. o Outcome/Benefit - Ensures a common stormwater language and terminology and enables performance evaluation/measurement, and basis for investment consideration/priorities.  Sharing Design Standards/Best Practices - Facilitate best practices for design/maintenance of green infrastructure, stormwater pond operation and maintenance, ditches and swales, pond infrastructure upgrades, etc.

August 2021 Page 7 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

o Outcome/Benefit - Knowledge sharing to enable best practices for design and maintenance of stormwater management infrastructure, and where appropriate, consistency in application across the Region.

3. Communication and Education

Despite similar programs with similar goals, today each municipality develops and delivers their own communications on stormwater with residents. Collaborative members identified areas for collaboration to leverage resources and achieve efficiencies. Communication and Education would include actions such as:

 Regional Flood Proofing Strategy/Communication Strategy - Investigate opportunities for multi-municipality cooperation on the design and messaging for promotion and educational materials. o Outcome/Benefit - Consistent messaging across the Region, reduced costs to participating municipalities, increased efficacy.  Shared Virtual Space for Data/Information Sharing - Develop a shared virtual cloud- based data storage space for sharing regional stormwater data/information/reports. o Outcome/Benefit - Enables common platform for information sharing, common repository for best practices, management strategies/plans, master plans, etc.  Facilitate Information Sharing Sessions - Facilitate information sharing sessions on stormwater management issues/topics (e.g.: standards/regulation review, best practices for design, operation & maintenance, etc.). o Outcome/Benefit - Collaborative forum among the Stormwater Collaborative and other stormwater management stakeholders; enables information sharing idea generation, project discussions, etc.  Targeted Information Sessions on Climate Change and Anticipated Impacts – Host/facilitate education sessions with a focus on the anticipated impacts of climate change on stormwater management in the Region. o Outcome/Benefit – Informs common understanding among Collaborative members to anticipate and prepare for climate changes to enable resiliency from flood impacts.

4. Policy, Advocacy, and Resources

While municipalities typically interface with other orders of government and industry stakeholders individually, the Collaborative identified areas for advocacy and collaboration. Actions under the Policy, Advocacy and Resources category include:

 Other Regional Collaborations - Work with other regions with established regional approaches to stormwater management to inform and coordinate regional stormwater management. Access to best practices and lessons learned. o Outcome/Benefit – Learn from other agencies engaged in a regional approach to stormwater management; opportunities to better understand operation and maintenance, policy, governance, etc. issues related to regional approaches.

August 2021 Page 8 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

 Provincial Level Advocacy - Advocate for changes/clarity/direction on provincial regulations, policies, standards, and resources for stormwater management. Monitor provincial policy discussion/direction and share with Collaborative. o Outcome/Benefit - Potential to influence provincial participation/interaction on stormwater management standards, design, water quality, flood forecasting, data availability, etc. Greater ability to speak with one voice on stormwater management priorities. Ability to harmonize/standardize data collection and analysis.  Industry Stakeholder Engagement – Engage and advocate with industry stakeholders (development industry, utilities industry, regulatory authorities, conservation agencies, etc.) to influence approaches, roles/responsibilities regarding stormwater management. o Outcome/Benefit - Potential to learn from and influence stakeholders' role/responsibility in stormwater management (e.g.: stormwater pond construction/maintenance methods, green infrastructure, community design standards, etc.). Greater ability to speak with one voice on stormwater management priorities.

5. Service Harmonization

Service harmonization actions are largely related to emergency management and, as such, require leadership and direction from municipal and/or regional emergency management agencies. The Stormwater Collaborative will play a supporting role in emergency management, providing subject matter expertise input as requested. These activities will focus on the benefits of collaboration while maintaining the autonomy of each municipality in managing this service area. Activities in this category include:

 Regional Emergency Flood Response Strategy – Providing support and advice to the development of a regional flood response strategy that considers multiple flood scenarios and includes all 13 EMRB municipalities. o Outcome/Benefit - Coordinated, transparent strategy for flood response that encourages and formalizes cooperation with clearly defined roles and expectations  Regional Mutual Flood Response Agreements – Where required, and to enable regional emergency response, providing support and advice to the development of cooperation agreements to facilitate emergency response to flood events. o Outcome/Benefit - Established service level agreements to inform cooperation in response to flood events across the Region.  Regional Residential Flood Inspection Service - Explore opportunities to provide flood inspection services to private home and landowners at a regional scale. o Outcome/Benefit - Informed home/landowners can make informed decisions regarding flood-proofing, potential for decreased risk to municipalities. Shared cost efficiencies, consistent messaging sand delivery.  Cross-municipality Storm Water Management Areas for Future Work - Identify multi-municipality areas in need of stormwater management policies, practices, infrastructure to enable more effective management and better outcomes.

August 2021 Page 9 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan

o Outcome/Benefit - Collaborative stormwater management to enable positive, efficient, effective management across municipal boundaries; areas for investment identified; watershed-based management practices.

These proposed actions were reviewed and agreed to by the Collaborative and will be placed into a high-level roadmap. Additional projects may be added by the Collaborative over time. Projects related to data and research and information sharing, were identified as foundational to other projects by the Collaborative and, as such, are recommended as priority projects. The roadmap will support planning guidance and adjustments to the scope of actions and timelines are expected as work proceeds.

Moving forward, EMRB administration will facilitate conversations to determine opportunities to move forward with stormwater projects. Next steps will include discussions to further understand proposed projects, including project assessments, prioritization, and roadmap development.

Project Approval Process

Actions identified range from discrete projects that will have a defined start and end date (e.g., Purchase of Insurance Industry Flood Risk Maps) to projects that will be undertaken using a phased approach that focuses on one watershed per project phase (e.g., Regional River / Creek Assessment) to ongoing initiatives that are likely to evolve over time (e.g., industry or government engagement and advocacy). Ongoing initiatives can be initiated at any time and are only constrained by the capacity for Collaborative members to advance them. Discrete projects that will require funding will follow a formal process to achieve approval.

The following graphic represents the repeatable approach that the Storm Water Collaborative will utilize for project approval.

Stormwater Collaborative Project Approval Process

Complete / Propose Update the Regional Review Complete Submit Project Develop a StormWater Opportunity Prioritization Business Case for Approval Project Charter Roadmap Assessment

a. Propose Regional Opportunity

Each project the Collaborative chooses to undertake will begin through a proposal from an individual member or group of members. The project can be proposed verbally during a meeting by any attendee, or a written proposal submitted by a member. All proposals should be detailed enough to allow the Collaborative to understand the outcomes to be achieved and the

August 2021 Page 10 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan magnitude of the work considered in scope for the project. EMRB administration also has a role in the project proposal stage to facilitate conversations to determine opportunities to advance projects.

b. Complete / Review Prioritization Assessment

Collaborative members will assess proposed projects using the assessment criteria outlined in Section 5 and with consideration for alignment to the Growth Plan. Decisions will be based on consensus, but Collaborative members may decline to participate in projects based on the needs and priorities of their municipality. For proposals that the Collaborative wants to move ahead with, a business case will be created.

c. Complete Business Case

Once approved by the Collaborative members, the Business Case will be submitted to the MRSP Standing Committee as a recommendation and if approved, will be added to the Collaborative Action Plan.

d. Submit Project for Approval

Following the completion and review of a business case for a proposed project, Collaborative members will submit a proposal to initiate a project to the MRSP Standing Committee. Collaborative members may also be required to present details of the proposal to the MRSP Standing Committee.

e. Develop Project Charter

For proposals that are approved by the MRSP Standing Committee, a project charter will be developed and shared with the MRSP Standing Committee.

f. Update the Storm Water Roadmap

A further requirement of the Stormwater Action Plan, the Stormwater Roadmap will provide high-level project priorities and set a broad schedule for initiating and completing the projects. The roadmap will be periodically updated and refined to reflect progress made or changes in priorities.

Measuring Stormwater Management Progress

Monitoring, evaluating, and reporting on MRSP progress, including the work of the Regional Collaboratives action plans and/or projects, is essential to ensure continued and ongoing incremental progress towards an implementable MRSP while ensuring continued support and alignment to the Growth Plan.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be developed by the Storm Water Collaborative based on approved action plans and projects. Critical to the measurement of results are the adoption and incorporation of the MRSP Guiding Principles into our actions and decisions as a Region. The action plans and/or projects of the Regional Collaboratives will propose measurable

August 2021 Page 11 of 16 Stormwater Collaborative – Action Plan timelines and identify significant milestones to ensure continued progress the goals and objectives for each service area.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be used to determine the effect of the initiatives of the Collaborative Action Plan in achieving the desired outcomes of the service area and the Growth Plan.

August 2021 Page 12 of 16 Appendix A – Growth Plan: 50 Year Vision Appendix B – MRSP Guiding Principles

Creating common understanding of the shared servicing challenges is vital to creating an environment where municipalities can think and act in the best interest of the Region. The MRSP Principles reflect the regional imperative for working together and will provide critical guidance for the planning, investment, and coordination of the delivery of metropolitan services. The MRSP Principles are aligned with the guiding principles of the Growth Plan.

The MRSP Principles are to:

 Lead with a metropolitan mindset for the greater good.

 Pursue leading and innovative research, technology, and best practices.

 Build, collect, and share regionally relevant data, information, and knowledge.

 Prioritize regionally scaled service investments informed by evidence.

 Leverage sub-regional service initiatives to benefit the Region.

 Recognize the unique municipal service contexts.

 Guarantee the safety and wellness of citizens.

 Act in a regional manner with a unified voice. Appendix C – Stormwater Alignment to Growth Plan

The following table illustrates alignment of the Stormwater service area to Growth Plan policy objectives along with examples of touchpoints or initiatives reflecting current and future planning and service delivery, and relevant performance measures.

Policy Area Economic Natural Living Natural Living Communities and Integration of Land Use Agriculture Competitiveness and Systems Systems cont’d Housing and Infrastructure Employment

STORMWATER CONTRIBUTES TO…

Policy 1.4 Promote the livability 2.1 Conserve and restore 2.3 Plan development to 3.1 Plan and develop 4.2 Enable growth within built- 6.2 Minimize the Objective of the Region and plan for natural living systems promote clean air, land complete communities up urban areas to optimize fragmentation and conversion the needs of a changing through an ecological and water and address within each policy tier existing infrastructure and of prime agricultural lands for population and workforce network approach climate change impacts to accommodate minimize the expansion of the non-agricultural uses people’s daily needs development footprint 2.2 Protect regional 2.4 Minimize and for living at all ages watershed health, mitigate the impacts of 4.7 Ensure compatible land watershed quality and regional growth on use patterns to minimize risks quantity natural living systems to public safety and health

Touchpoints Stormwater management Plan, design, operate, Infrastructure and Infrastructure and Leverage existing Ensure that infrastructure will need to adapt to manage infrastructure management practices management practices infrastructure; promote does not negatively impact growth, densification, and through an ecological that plan for anticipated that plan provide for alternative management prime agricultural lands the needs of increased network lens. Integrate climate change impacts. safe and efficient practices such as green through location of community and natural assets where management of infrastructure; flood-proofing infrastructure; management commercial/industrial appropriate. Infrastructure and stormwater. of private property. practices that protect development. management practices agricultural lands. Infrastructure and that minimize and Ensure infrastructure and Anticipated increases in management practices mitigate effects on management practices population will increase that protect watershed receiving water bodies, prioritize health and safety; pressures on existing health and water quality / wetlands, riparian areas. effective flood prevention and infrastructure. quantity from stormwater response. impacts.

Performance Measures

TBD

7. f)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME IFT 21-020, Nisku Spine Road construction from Township Road 510 to Airport Road

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee receives the report “IFT 21-020, Nisku Spine Road construction from Township Road 510 to Airport Road” as information.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To update Public Works Committee on the results of the Nisku Spine Road construction tender Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Municipal Government Act, RSA 2000, s.18 Amount of funding required: $23,470,000 (Government of Canada: $17,700,000, Leduc County: $5,770,000) Funding source: Western Economic Diversification Canada, Government of Canada

BACKGROUND The tender was advertised on July 15, 2021 and five bids were received and opened in public on August 17, 2021 by Kelly-Lynn Lewis, Chair, Public Works Committee and Khushnud Yousafzai, Senior Infrastructure Engineer. The official tender results are as follows:

Contractor Total Bid Price (excluding Remarks GST) 1 Carmacks Enterprises Ltd $ 17,737,497.67 Lowest 2 Sureway Construction Management Ltd. $ 18,092,339.57 3 Ledcor Highways Ltd. $ 18,838,076.24 4 Park Paving Ltd. $ 20,102,285.04 5 PME Inc. $ 20,416,583.8

Leduc County’s consultant, WSP Inc., completed the review of all the tenders and there are no issues with the bids. The tender was awarded to Carmacks Enterprises Ltd and the contract is expected to be executed by September 10, 2021.

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 1 7. g)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Electronic Speed Sign Update

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee receives the Electronic Speed Sign Update report as information.

Options (if available): n/a

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To inform the Public Works Committee on the locations of the signs as well as issues encountered. Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): N/A Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND Leduc County currently has 12 solar powered electronic speed signs set up throughout Leduc County. Seven signs are in permanent locations, while five signs rotate to new locations depending on current needs. The permanent locations are: • Township Road 510A (Genesee Area), • Mission Beach, Pigeon Lake near the park, • Centre Street, New Sarepta at the school, and • Township Road 510 near the East Vista’s. The temporary locations are: • Nisku Spine Road • South Wizard Lake Road, close to the Leduc County/Wetaskiwin County boundary. • Glen Park Road, heading into Sunnybrook. In September 2020, the eastbound sign on Glen Park Road near Michigan Centre was stolen shortly after the speeds were reduced. A police report was filed, however that sign has never been located. The westbound sign was subsequently knocked down. The sign was then moved to Glen Park Road, heading into Sunnybrook.

Submitted by: Tracey Chipchase, Utility Coordinator Reviewed by: Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering Date: 09/13/21 1

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

In order to determine the effectiveness of the signs, Engineering will be performing a trial project. The project will consist of first moving signs to a new location then turning off the speed display for a defined period. We will continue to collect the data during this time. Once the initial period is over, the speed display will be turned back on. The data will be collected, and analyzed to determine the effectiveness of the signs and their impact on the speed.

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Tracey Chipchase, Utility Coordinator Reviewed by: Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering Date: 09/13/21 2 7. h)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Municipal access agreements

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee receives the report “Municipal Access Agreements” as information.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To update Public Works Committee on the status of the County’s municipal access agreements Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Telecommunications Act s.43(3) & (4) Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND Leduc County has received a request from a telecommunications provider for a Municipal Access Agreement (MAA). The MAA does not exclude the provider from obtaining the necessary permits, but outlines the terms and conditions for the installation of infrastructure within the County’s’ right of way. The MAA is being reviewed internally and when complete, forwarded to Council for approval. Leduc County also has an MAA with Telus. However, some of the terms and conditions of the MAA, specifically related to the locations of buried facilities, are not being followed. Telus is to locate the facilities within 48 hours of the request, sooner in the case of an emergency and this level of service is not being met. The agreement (c.2012) itself is also dated, and requires an update. Administration will be reaching out to Telus to update the agreement, once a final approved version has been developed by the municipality.

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Reviewed by: Date: 09/13/21 1 7. i)

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

REPORT NAME Pavement network evaluation update

RECOMMENDATION That the Public Works Committee accept as information the pavement network evaluation update report.

Options (if available): N/A

IMPLICATIONS Reason: To update Public Works Committee on pavement network evaluation update. Authority (MGA section/bylaw/policy number): Amount of funding required: N/A Funding source: N/A

BACKGROUND Pavement network evaluation has been used as a guide to assist in developing the annual five year road surfacing program. The evaluation of the surfaced roads is based on PASER (PAvement Surface Evaluation and Rating) rating system, which was developed by University of Wisconsin. It is a visual inspection of the paved surface. The inspections are performed in the summer on annual basis. The data is collected in the field and incorporated into Leduc County’s GIS system. The GIS system reflects a yearly map of the condition rating of the roads for historical reference and relative comparisons. Table 1 shows the road rating categories with the assigned weighting. The overall rating for each road section is out of 10.

Table1: Road rating catergories with the assigned weighting

Structural

Parameters Weight Rating Score none - 3 1 mild - 2 0.75 Alligator 2 moderate - 1 0.5 extensive - 0 0 none - 3 0.5 Longitudinal/Transverse 1 mild - 2 (less than ¼”) 0.3

Submitted by: Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 1

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

moderate – 1 (¼” – ½”) 0.2 extensive – 0 (more than ½”) 0 none - 3 0.5 mild - 2 0.3 Block 1 moderate - 1 0.2 extensive - 0 0 none - 3 1 mild - 2 0.75 Patches 2 moderate - 1 0.5 extensive - 0 0 none - 3 0.5 mild - 2 0.3 Potholes 1 moderate - 1 0.2 extensive - 0 0 none - 3 1 mild - 2 (½”- 1”) 0.75 Rutting 2 moderate - 1 (1” - 2”) 0.5 extensive – 0 (more than 2”) 0 none - 3 1 mild - 2 0.75 Raveling 1 moderate - 1 0.5 extensive - 0 0 Total Ratings 10

The evaluation tool provides a comparative analysis based on the inspections as well as tracking the condition of the surfaced road network. This is the first comparative analysis completed as the rating program started in 2020. Table 2 shows comparing 2020 and 2021 condition rating. Table 2: The comparison of the road network condition for 2020 & 2021 Condition Rating 2020 2021 2020 2021 1 Fail 1.9% 0.2% 2 Very Poor 4.2% 1.8% 34.4% 18.2% 3 Poor 7.5% 3.4% 4,5 Fair 20.8% 12.7% 6,7 Good 30.3% 35.8% 65.6% 81.8% 8,9 Very Good 35.3% 46.1%

The condition of the roads has substantially improved as the percentage of the roads with condition rating of 5/10 and lower has decreased from 34.4% to 18.2%.

Submitted by: Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 2

Recommendation to Public Works Committee Public ______

The entire surfaced road network is in a good condition as 81.8% of the network’s condition rating is over 6/10. The Capital program and maintenance programs are improving the rating of the road network. These programs are essential to maintain the roads. The comparative analysis presented is only based on two years of data. The analysis will continue on an annual basis with further detailed analysis.

ATTACHMENTS • None

Submitted by: Amro Kotb, Manager, Engineering Reviewed by: Des Mryglod, Director, Engineering and Utilities Date: 09/13/21 3