Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Approve the Consent Agenda of August 12, 2021

Board Meeting Agenda

Thursday, August 12, 2021, 8:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Chateau Louis Conference Centre, Grand Ballroom 11727 Kingsway NW, Edmonton, AB Public Viewing via YouTube

1. Opening

1.1 Call to Order Action: Declaration Lead: Chair Choy 1.2 Chair’s Opening Remarks Action: Information Lead: Chair Choy

2. Approval of Consent Agenda Action: Approval Lead: Chair Choy i. Approval of July 9, 2020 Executive Committee Minutes ii. Approval of June 10, 2021 Board Minutes iii. Approval of June 30, 2021 Special Board Minutes iv. Approval of July 8, 2021 Committee of the Whole Minutes v. Approval of July 15, 2021 RAMP Task Force Minutes vi. Approval of July 23, 2021 IRTMP Task Force Minutes vii. July 8, 2021 Audit and Finance Committee Minutes viii. Q1 Quarterly Financial Report ix. July 14, 2021 MRSP Standing Committee Minutes x. Extended Producer Responsibility Letter of Support xi. CEO Update Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Consent Agenda of August 12, 2021.

July 9, 2020 Executive Committee Minutes Page 4 - 52 June 10, 2021 Board Minutes June 30, 2021 Special Board Minutes July 8, 2021 Committee of the Whole Minutes July 15, 2021 RAMP Task Force Minutes July 23, 2021 IRTMP Task Force Minutes July 8, 2021 Audit and Finance Committee Minutes Q1 Quarterly Financial Report July 14, 2021 MRSP Standing Committee Minutes Extended Producer Responsibility Letter of Support CEO Update

Page 1 of 228

3. Approval of Meeting Agenda Action: Approval Lead: Chair Choy Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Meeting Agenda of August 12, 2021.

4. Audit and Finance Committee 4.1 Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget Page 53 - 56 Action: Approval Lead: Chair Doblanko/CEO Wichuk Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget.

Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget

5. Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Task Force

5.1 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process Page 57 - 84 Action: Approval Lead: Chair Katchur Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process.

IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process 5.2 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report Page 85 - 107 Action: Approval Lead: Chair Katchur Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report.

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report

6. Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP) Task Force 6.1 Final Regional Agriculture Master Plan Page 108 - 188 Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Final Regional Agriculture Master Plan.

Final Regional Agriculture Master Plan

7. Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan (MRSP) Standing Committee

7.1 Chair Update Action: Information Lead: Chair Ralph

Page 2 of 228

7.2 MRSP Solid Waste and Stormwater Collaborative Action Plans Page 189 - 227 Action: Approval Lead: Chair Ralph Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the MRSP Solid Waste and Stormwater Collaborative Action Plans.

MRSP Solid Waste and Stormwater Collaborative Action Plans

8. Standing Down Task Forces Action: Approval Lead: Chair Choy/CEO Wichuk Recommended Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board stand down Task Forces that work has been completed: • Shared Investment for Shared Benefit (SISB) • Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) • Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP)

Standing Down Task Forces Page 228

9. Next Meeting Action: Information Lead: Chair Choy/CEO Wichuk • First Onboarding Session– November 25, 2021, 3:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m., location TBC

10. Adjournment Action: Declaration Lead: Chair Choy

Page 3 of 228 Executive Committee

Thursday, July 9, 2020 9:00 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Via Zoom

Members: Guests: Dr. Jodi L. Abbott, Board Chair Mayor William Choy, Town of Stony Plain Mayor Bob Young, City of Leduc (Vice Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon Chair) Mayor Rod Frank, Strathcona County Mayor Barry Turner, Town of Morinville Mayor Don Iveson, City of Edmonton Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County Mayor Rod Shaigec, Parkland County

EMRB Staff: Karen Wichuk, CEO Charlene Chauvette, Office Manager Dan Rose, Senior Communications Advisor Raquel Chauvette, Executive Assistant Carol Moreno, Project Coordinator Joseana Lara, Summer Student

Executive Committee Meeting Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 9, 2020 Page 1 of 3

Page 4 of 228 1. Opening

1.1 Quorum

Quorum achieved; five of five voting members present.

1.2 Call to Order

Chair Abbott calls the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m.

1.3 Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Abbott thanks everyone for their time and states that today’s agenda is focused on the continuation of the CEO Contribution Agreement.

2. Approval of Agenda

EC2020-05 Motion: That the Executive Committee approve the July 9, 2020 meeting agenda. Moved by: Mayor Doblanko Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Minutes

EC2020-06 Motion: That the Executive Committee approve the November 14, 2019 and June 10, 2020 meeting minutes. Moved by: Mayor Iveson Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

4. In Camera

4.1 In Camera Motion

EC2020-07 Motion: That the Executive Committee move In Camera, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17, of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP), R.S.A. 2000, c.F-25. Moved by: Mayor Turner Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

4.2 CEO Performance Contribution Agreement – Section 17 – Disclosure Harmful to Personal Privacy

4.3 Out of Camera Motion

EC2020-08 Motion: That the Executive Committee move out of camera. Moved by: Mayor Turner Executive Committee Meeting Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 9, 2020 Page 2 of 3

Page 5 of 228 Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

(4.2) CEO Performance Contribution Agreement – Section 17 – Disclosure Harmful to Personal Privacy

Motion: That the Executive Committee recommend the CEO Contribution Agreement EC2020-09 to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board. Moved by: Mayor Iveson Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

5. Adjournment

Motion: That the Executive Committee meeting of July 9, 2020 be adjourned at 9:49 EC2020-10 a.m. Moved by: Mayor Turner Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

Committee Chair, Dr. Jodi L. Abbott

Executive Committee Meeting Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 9, 2020 Page 3 of 3

Page 6 of 228 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting

Thursday, June 10, 2021 8:30 p.m. – 12:30 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Mayor William Choy, Town of Stony Plain (Board Mayor Barry Turner, Town of Morinville Chair) Councillor Sarah Hall, Town of Morinville Mayor Alanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon County (Vice Chair) (Alternate) Mayor John Stewart, City of Beaumont Mayor Rod Shaigec, Parkland County Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon Mayor Cathy Heron, City of St. Albert Mayor Don Iveson, City of Edmonton Mayor Stuart Houston, City of Spruce Mayor Gale Katchur, City of Fort Saskatchewan Grove Mayor Bob Young, City of Leduc Mayor Rod Frank, Strathcona County Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County Dale Beesley, Government of Alberta

EMRB Administration: Guests: Karen Wichuk, CEO CAO Mike Schwirtz, City of Beaumont Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning CAO Tony Kulbisky, Town of Devon Cindie LeBlanc, Director, Corporate and CAO Andre Corbould, City of Edmonton Stakeholder Relations CAO Troy Fleming, City of Fort Charlene Chauvette, Office Manager Saskatchewan Debra Irving, Senior Project Manager CAO Derek Prohar, City of Leduc Taylor Varro, Project Manager CAO Duane Coleman, Leduc County Alex Bonokoski, Project Manager CAO Stephanne Labonne, Town of Ron Cook, Manager, GIS and Business Intelligence Morinville Raquel Chauvette, Executive Assistant CAO Kevin Scoble, City of St. Albert Chelsea Levesque, Administrative Assistant Nancy Lyzaniwski, Strathcona County CAO Reegan McCullough, Sturgeon Consultants: County Shannon Troke, King & Company Partner Stephen Power, HDR Inc. Craig Lametti, Urban Strategies Dalibor Petrovic, Deloitte Stewart Young, Deloitte

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 1 of 8

Page 7 of 228 1. Opening

1.1. Call to Order

The meeting began at 8:33 a.m.

1.2. Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Choy welcomed everyone and acknowledged that the EMRB convenes on the traditional lands of Treaty 6, as the home of members of the Métis Nation of Alberta (Zone 4 and Zone 2), Inuit, and non-status Indigenous peoples sharing this land. We acknowledge that we are all Treaty People, bound to one another by the spirit and intent of Treaty “as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the river flows.”

Chair Choy stated there is a lengthy agenda today focused on significant deliverables coming forward for the Boards consideration and approval, followed by a closed In Camera session.

2. Approval of Consent Agenda

B2021-31 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Consent Agenda of June 10, 2021.

Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Board Minutes of April 8, 2021.

Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Committee of the Whole Minutes of May 13, 2021

Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the SISB Task Force Minutes of April 23, 2021.

Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board endorse and reaffirm the appointment of Mayor Turner as Chair of the Governance and Human Resources Committee.

Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board endorse and reaffirm the appointment of Mayor Katchur as Vice Chair of the Governance and Human Resources Committee.

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 2 of 8

Page 8 of 228 Moved by: Mayor Young Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Meeting Agenda

B2021-32 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Meeting Agenda of June 10, 2021. Moved by: Mayor Katchur Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

4. Audit and Finance Committee

4.1. 2020 – 2021 Audited Financial Statements

Mr. Troke summarized the 2020 – 2021 Audited Financial Statements and walked the Committee Members through the document from the meeting package and took questions.

Mr. Troke declared the audit to be a clean audit. As of March 31, 2021, the accumulated surplus totaled $2,755,316, comprised of an unrestricted accumulated surplus of membership contributions. Mr. Troke noted the surplus is expected to be fully expended by March 2023. The provincial contributions have been fully utilized.

CEO Wichuk confirmed a revised budget would come forward at the August Board meeting.

B2021-33 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the 2020 – 2021 Audited Financial Statements, as prepared by King & Company. Moved by: Mayor Doblanko Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

5. Governance and Human Resources Committee

5.1. 2020-2021 Annual Report

CEO Wichuk provided an overview of the development of the 2020-2021 Annual Report.

Board members provided suggestions for edits including: · Updating the sentence on the Regional Agriculture Master Plan page, “Preserving prime agriculture lands will preserve an estimated $10 billion

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 3 of 8

Page 9 of 228 economic opportunity in the Region…”, to substitute 'preserve' with either 'generate' or "contribute" and to clarify the timeframe for this assertion; · Changing the Leduc Library image on the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit page for an arial photo; · Updating the ‘How we’re getting there’ RAMP timeline section to August 2021; and · Addressing any remaining grammatical errors.

CEO Wichuk confirmed the edits would be made to the Annual Report.

B2021-34 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the 2020-2021 Annual Report. Moved by: Councillor Hall Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

5.2. New Initiative Assessment Framework

CEO Wichuk provided an overview of the New Initiative Assessment Framework.

Board members discussed potential equity issues related to capacity of EMRB Administration and member municipalities to bring forward new initiatives and to use the framework tool.

Board members also suggested adding a potential risk assessment component, perhaps as a second step, specifically as it relates to legislative and regulatory requirements.

CEO Wichuk confirmed EMRB Administration would reflect this input into the tool and process.

B2021-35 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the New Initiative Assessment Framework. Moved by: Mayor Katchur Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

6. Member Motions

6.1. City of Edmonton – ESG Opportunities

Mayor Iveson thanked the Board for the rich discussion and engagement at the Committee of the Whole meeting in May and provided background on the City of Edmonton – ESG Opportunities motion. He acknowledged that we need to consider

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 4 of 8

Page 10 of 228 how we manage that transition in ways that are smooth and fluid for industry, and that get us to our carbon goals, while maintaining housing affordability. He also reaffirmed the City of Edmonton’s commitment to lead and support this work.

There was a discussion on the importance of language in the motion. Mayor Iveson accepted two friendly amendments to replace 'harmonize' with 'coordinate' and 'neighbourhood development' with 'communities'.

B2021-36 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board direct its Administration to work with regional CAOs on addressing the following Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) opportunities, with a report back to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board following the 2021 Municipal Elections:

1. Identify the steps needed to coordinate regional standards for climate resilient communities and building energy efficiency, and coordinate approaches to support job creation through energy efficiency and resilient construction and retrofits;

2. Explore the concept of a region-wide carbon budget and climate risk assessment and how the board could incorporate these into the Growth Plan review and implementation plans, so the region can align to Canada’s commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

Moved by: Mayor Iveson Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

Break from 10:14 a.m. - 10:26 a.m.

Mayor Turner replaced Councillor Hall at 10:27 a.m.

7. Shared Investment for Shared Benefit (SISB) Task Force

Chair Frank provided his final update as Chair of the SISB Task Force noting that the June 10, 2021 Board meeting marks the culmination of the EMRB’s collective efforts to advance the SISB Framework and Model over the last two years. Mayor Frank underscored the deliverables were delivered on time and within budget.

Mayor Frank invited Dalibor Petrovic and Stewart Young, consultants from Deloitte, to present the proposed framework, model, and final report, and took questions.

7.1. Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Framework

Mr. Petrovic stated the objectives of the project were to create a framework and a model that will allow our Region to come together to co-invest in opportunities and create material that will advance Edmonton's regional global competitiveness and

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 5 of 8

Page 11 of 228 sustainability in the long run. He walked the Board members through a presentation explaining how the framework and model achieve the key objectives. The Board had a discussion focused on mandatory municipal participation.

B2021-37 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Framework and Conceptual Model Final Document. Moved by: Mayor Heron Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried. 10 in favour and 3 opposed. Supported by 2/3 of the representatives from participating municipalities that collectively have at least 2/3 of the population of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region.

7.2. Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Model

Chair Frank provided an overview of the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Model.

B2021-38 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Model. Moved by: Mayor Frank Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried. 11 in favour and 2 opposed. Supported by 2/3 of the representatives from participating municipalities that collectively have at least 2/3 of the population of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region.

7.3. Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Final Report

Chair Frank provided an overview of the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Final Report.

B2021-39 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit Final Report. Moved by: Mayor Frank Decision: Carried unanimously

8. Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Task Force

8.1. Final Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Chair Katchur provided opening remarks, marking the culmination of two years of regional collaboration to develop a forward-looking Integrated Regional Transportation Plan.

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 6 of 8

Page 12 of 228 Chair Katchur invited Stephen Power, consultant with HDR Inc to provide an overview of the key inputs of the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan and Craig Lametti, consultant with Urban Strategies to provide background on the concepts and relationship to the growth plan. Both consultants took questions.

Many Board members expressed appreciation to the IRTMP Chair, Task Force and Project Team for their commitment and contributions to the final body of work.

Some members underscored that this is a great example of the Board coming together and the value of the EMRB in feeding into the efforts of other orders of government. Chair Katchur added that while other orders of government will be accountable for making their own funding decisions, already the province had indicated using the IRTMP as the basis for its planning in the Region.

Mayor Ralph raised a concern as to the absence of future intermunicipal transit routes on the map of Planned Regional Higher Order Transit Network on page 395 of the Board package. CEO Wichuk noted that EMRB Administration would take a further look at the concerns raised.

B2021-40 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Final Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan. Moved by: Mayor Katchur Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

9. In Camera

9.1. In Camera Motion

B2021-41 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board move In Camera, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17, of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP), R.S.A 2000, c.F-25. Moved by: Mayor Turner Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

The In Camera session started at 12:12 p.m.

9.2. CEO Performance Evaluation – Section 17 Disclosure Harmful to Personal Privacy

CEO Wichuk left the In Camera session at 12:25 p.m.

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 7 of 8

Page 13 of 228 In Camera Participants:

Mayor William Choy, Mayor Gale Katchur, Mayor Cathy Heron, Town of Stony Plain Fort Saskatchewan City of St. Albert (Board Chair)

Mayor Alanna Hnatiw, Mayor Bob Young, Mayor Stuart Houston Sturgeon County City of Leduc City of Spruce Grove (Vice Chair)

Mayor John Stewart, Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Mayor Rod Frank, City of Beaumont Leduc County Strathcona County

Mayor Ray Ralph, Mayor Barry Turner, Dale Beesley, Town of Devon Town of Morinville Government of Alberta

Mayor Don Iveson, Mayor Rod Shaigec, Karen Wichuk, CEO City of Edmonton Parkland County

9.4. Out of Camera Motion

The In Camera session ended at 12:32 p.m.

B2021-42 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board move out of camera. Moved by: Mayor Houston Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

10. Next Meetings

Chair Choy stated that the next Committee of the Whole Meeting is on July 8, 2021, and next Regular Board Meeting is on August 12, 2021.

11. Adjournment

Chair Choy declared the meeting adjourned at 12:34 p.m.

EMRB Chair, William Choy EMRB CEO, Karen Wichuk

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Thursday, June 10, 2021 Page 8 of 8

Page 14 of 228 Special Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting

Wednesday, June 30, 2021 8:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Mayor William Choy, Town of Stony Plain (Board Mayor Rod Shaigec, Parkland County Chair) Councillor Ken MacKay, City of St. Albert Mayor Alanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon County (Vice Chair) (Alternate) Mayor John Stewart, City of Beaumont Mayor Stuart Houston, City of Spruce Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon Grove Mayor Don Iveson, City of Edmonton Councillor Botterill, Strathcona County Mayor Gale Katchur, City of Fort Saskatchewan (Alternate) Mayor Bob Young, City of Leduc Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County

Regrets: Mayor Barry Turner, Town of Morinville Dale Beesly, Government of Alberta

EMRB Administration: Guests: Karen Wichuk, CEO CAO Troy Fleming, City of Fort Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning Saskatchewan Cindie LeBlanc, Director, Corporate and CAO Laura Swain, Parkland County Stakeholder Relations CAO Kevin Scoble, City of St. Albert Debra Irving, Senior Project Manager CAO Dean Screpnek, City of Spruce Taylor Varro, Project Manager Grove Ron Cook, Manager, GIS and Business Intelligence Kevin Cole, Strathcona County Raquel Chauvette, Executive Assistant CAO Reegan McCullough, Sturgeon Chelsea Levesque, Administrative Assistant County

Consultants: Stephen Power, HDR Inc Arth Vin, HDR Inc Karen Gilchrist, Karen Gilchrist & Associates

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 Page 1 of 3

Page 15 of 228 1. Opening

1.1. Call to Order

The meeting began at 8:32 a.m.

1.2. Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Choy stated the purpose of the special Board meeting is a workshop to help members familiarize themselves with the transportation prioritization process and to gain insight into the work going into the development of the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities List.

2. Approval of Meeting Agenda

B2021-43 Motion: That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Meeting Agenda of June 30, 2021. Moved by: Mayor Houston Accepted by: Chair Choy Decision: Carried unanimously

3. IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process

IRTMP Chair Katchur provided opening remarks and stated the material before the Board remains a work in progress, with the intent of finalizing the priorities process for approval in August. She added that the EMRB’s prioritization process has grown to be an important input into the Government of Alberta’s capital budget process, having been used throughout two growth plans.

Mr. Power, HDR consultant, walked the Board members through the presentation, outlining the prioritization process, programming, and the scoring system. Mr. Power noted the previous process was based on project outcomes, but new methodology adds funding and readiness criteria. Evaluation remains qualitative but is supported by evidence and relies less on interpretation.

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 Page 2 of 3

Page 16 of 228 Mr. Power took questions including some related to the difference between the prioritization process and programming, transit related priorities, priorities groupings, and how the weighting was determined for the scoring criteria.

Mayor Iveson left the meeting at 9:31 a.m.

Mayor Doblanko left the meeting at 9:51 a.m.

Chair Choy confirmed the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process will be brought to Board for approval in August.

4. Adjournment

Chair Choy declared the meeting adjourned at 10:02 a.m.

EMRB Chair, William Choy EMRB CEO, Karen Wichuk

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 Page 3 of 3

Page 17 of 228 Committee of the Whole Meeting

Thursday, July 8, 2021 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Mayor William Choy, Town of Stony Plain (Chair) Mayor Barry Turner, Town of Morinville Mayor Alanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon County (Vice Chair) Mayor Rod Shaigec, Parkland County Mayor John Stewart, City of Beaumont Mayor Cathy Heron, City of St. Albert Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon Mayor Stuart Houston, City of Spruce Mayor Don Iveson, City of Edmonton Grove Mayor Gale Katchur, City of Fort Saskatchewan Mayor Rod Frank, Strathcona County Mayor Bob Young, City of Leduc Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County

EMRB Staff: Karen Wichuk, CEO Guests: Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning Matthew Wispinski, City of Edmonton Cindie LeBlanc, Director, Corporate and CAO Derek Prohar, City of Leduc Stakeholder Relations CAO Duane Coleman, Leduc County Charlene Chauvette, Office Manager CAO Laura Swain, Parkland County Chelsea Levesque, Administrative Assistant CAO Dean Screpnek, City of Spruce Grove CAO Tom Goulden, Town of Stony Plain CAO Darrell Reid, Strathcona County

Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021 Page 1 of 3

Page 18 of 228 1. Opening

1.1. Quorum

Quorum achieved; thirteen of thirteen members present.

1.2. Call to Order

The meeting began at 8:32 a.m.

2. Objective of the Meeting

Chair Choy outlined that today's meeting administration will be seeking Board members feedback and thoughts on the work and implementation of the growth plan to date, as well as advice to help scope out the work for the project charter for the growth plan’s five-year interim review.

3. Growth Plan 5-Year Interim Review

Ms. Shuya provided an overview of the process to develop the growth plan and the 50-year vision, including the structure of policy tiers, intended outcomes, and performance indicators.

CEO Wichuk provided details on the various types of reviews that are mandated in the growth plan and provided an overview of the work that has been completed to date to implement the growth plan. She also provided an overview of the initial scoping of work for the five-year interim review, which EMRB Administration expects to start towards the end of Q4 2021-22 and be completed by Q4 2023 24.

Chair Choy facilitated a discussion to seek Board members thoughts on whether there is something specific the EMRB wishes to achieve as part of the review. While there was broad consensus among members that the growth plan remains relevant, there were varying perspectives on the scope of the review to be undertaken at this time. There was interest by several members in exploring to see if the growth plan could be reframed to coincide with milestones in population growth rather than by time.

Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021 Page 2 of 3

Page 19 of 228 Among the topics members would like the interim review to cover include affordable housing, broadband, relationship building, communications, and advocacy, Indigenous engagement, land use density, infill targets, regional partnerships, and the effects of COVID-19 on the Region.

Break from 10:15 a.m. -10:27 a.m

CEO Wichuk thanked members for their participation and feedback and confirmed that next steps include incorporating feedback and direction from the Committee into the project charter to bring back to the Board post- election.

4. Next Meeting

Chair Choy stated that members will be meeting again at the August 12, 2021 Board meeting and it will be in person.

5. Adjournment

Chair Choy declared the meeting adjourned at 11:27 a.m.

William Choy, Committee Chair

Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021 Page 3 of 3

Page 20 of 228 Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting

Thursday, July 15, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Consultants: Mayor Rod Shaigec, Parkland County (Chair) Andy Haden, Haden & Associates Councillor Michael Walters, City of Edmonton (Vice Chair) Councillor Kathy Barnhart, City of Beaumont Guests: Mayor Barry Turner, Town of Morinville Mayor Bob Young, City of Leduc Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County Councillor Robert Parks, Strathcona Councillor Paul Smith, Strathcona County County Mayor Alanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon County Councillor Neal Comeau, Sturgeon County Karen Sundquist, Government of Alberta

Regrets: Candace Vanin, Government of Canada Malcolm Bruce, Edmonton Global

Technical Members: Gibby Davis, City of Edmonton Laurie Johnson, Leduc County John Knapp, Parkland County Ryan Hall, Strathcona County Michael Klassen, Sturgeon County Angela Veenstra, Sturgeon County

EMRB Staff: Karen Wichuk, CEO Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning Cindie LeBlanc, Director, Corporate and Stakeholder Relations Taylor Varro, Project Manager Ron Cook, Manager, GIS and Business Intelligence

Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 15, 2021 Page 1 of 4

Page 21 of 228 1. Opening

1.1 Quorum

Quorum achieved; 7 of 7 voting members present.

1.2 Call to Order

Chair Shaigec called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

1.3 Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Shaigec welcomed members of the Task Force and members of the public viewing on YouTube. Chair Shaigec’s opening remarks included a Treaty Six Land Acknowledgement and introduction to the agenda. Chair Shaigec acknowledged that RAMP is the first ever plan for agriculture for this Region and province and advances the policies included in the regional growth plan.

Chair Shaigec applauded the Task Force for their willingness to tackle the important issue of reducing future fragmentation and conversion of prime agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. He also noted that an important component of RAMP is the need to establish a consistent approach to monitoring and reporting of changes in land supply based on local decisions.

2. Approval of Agenda

Chair Shaigec suggested to amend the agenda to add a new item, 4. Responses to RAMP Task Force Questions – Round 2 RAMP Stakeholder Engagement.

RAMP21-37 Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the July 15, 2021 meeting agenda, as amended. Moved by: Councillor Smith Accepted by: Chair Shaigec Decision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Minutes

RAMP21-38 Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the June 30, 2021 meeting minutes. Moved by: Councillor Walters Accepted by: Chair Shaigec Decision: Carried unanimously

Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 15, 2021 Page 2 of 4

Page 22 of 228 4. Responses to RAMP Task Force Questions – Round 2 RAMP Stakeholder Engagement

Ms. Shuya provided the Task Force with a response to questions raised at the last Task Force meeting’s presentation of the RAMP Engagement Round 2 “What We Heard” report. The discussion was around the IAP2 spectrum, geographic breakdown of survey results, the expectations that stakeholders were given in regard to how their feedback would be used, and specific areas where feedback was incorporated into RAMP policies.

Task Force members were pleased with the briefing note and the discussion. Mayor Hnatiw requested a breakdown of survey results based on stakeholder type. EMRB Administration confirms that this analysis can be done and will be distributed to the Task Force.

RAMP21-39 Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force receive the responses to questions arising from the “What We Heard” report presented on June 30, 2021, for information. Moved by: Councillor Barnhart Accepted by: Chair Shaigec Decision: Carried unanimously

5. Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP)

Ms. Shuya introduced the final draft RAMP for endorsement by the Task Force including a review of the work which began in 2018, the Situation Analysis, Vision, Guiding Principles, Policy Area Approach, Economic Imperative, two rounds of Stakeholder Engagement, and accomplishments of the Task Force and plan. Ms. Shuya also provided an update regarding how feedback from the Working Group was incorporated in one last review, following the last Task Force meeting on June 30, 2021.

Following the presentation, Task Force members discussed the importance of establishing a policy framework and commitment to agriculture, the importance of implementation including monitoring and reporting to ensure RAMP is successful, the need to ensure supportive policies, consideration of RAMP policies as part of the growth plan in future annexations, enabling economic diversification, and how the policies will have different impacts to different municipalities. Chair Shaigec concluded by saying that RAMP will continue to be an iterative process and that it advances quality of life for residents in the Region.

RAMP21-40 Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the RAMP to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval. Moved by: Councillor Walters Accepted by: Chair Shaigec

Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 15, 2021 Page 3 of 4

Page 23 of 228 Decision: Carried unanimously

6. Next Steps

Chair Shaigec and EMRB Administration confirm that RAMP will go to the August 12, 2021 Board meeting for approval by the EMRB.

Chair Shaigec, Vice Chair Walters, Task Force members, Sharon Shuya, working group members, consultants, and EMRB Administration were thanked for their contributions, leadership, and commitment in enabling successful completion of the final RAMP.

7. Next Meeting

This is the last scheduled RAMP Task Force meeting.

8. Adjournment

Chair Shaigec declared the meeting adjourned at 10:36 a.m.

Task Force Chair, Rod Shaigec

Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 15, 2021 Page 4 of 4

Page 24 of 228 Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force Meeting

Friday, July 23, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Consultants: Mayor Gale Katchur, City of Fort Saskatchewan Stephen Power, HDR (Chair) Karen Gilchrist, Karen Gilchrist & Mayor John Stewart, City of Beaumont Associates Councillor Tim Cartmell, City of Edmonton Councillor Nicole Boutestein, Town of Morinville Councillor Justin Laurie, Town of Stony Plain Guests: Councillor Bill Tonita, Strathcona County Robert Parks, Strathcona County Mayor Alanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon County Wayne Bokenfohr, Sturgeon County

Regrets: Michael Botros, Alberta Transportation

Working Group Members: David Hales, City of Edmonton Shawn Olson, City of Leduc Kevin Cole, Strathcona County

EMRB Staff: Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning Debra Irving, Senior Project Manager Taylor Varro, Project Manager Chelsea Levesque, Administrative Assistant

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Friday, July 23, 2021 Page 1 of 3

Page 25 of 228 1. Opening

1.1 Quorum

Quorum achieved; 6 of 7 voting members present.

1.2 Call to Order

Chair Katchur called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

1.3 Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Katchur welcomed members of the Task Force, participating Working Group members, and members of the public joining the meeting via YouTube. Opening remarks included a Treaty 6 land acknowledgement, and recognition of this being the last Task Force meeting. There was a special acknowledgement to the Working Group members for their work, dedication, knowledge, and support to Task Force for finding a more holistic approach to redefining the priorities of the Region.

Mayor Hnatiw joined the meeting at 9:02 a.m.

Mayor Hnatiw left the meeting at 9:10 a.m. and returned at 9:17 a.m.

2. Approval of Agenda

IRTMP21-13 Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force approve the July 23, 2021 meeting agenda. Moved by: Councillor Cartmell Accepted by: Chair Katchur Decision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Minutes

IRTMP21-14 Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force approve the May 20, 2021 meeting minutes. Moved by: Councillor Boutestein Accepted by: Chair Katchur Decision: Carried unanimously

4. Communication from Edmonton Metropolitan Transit Services Commission (EMTSC)

Chair Katchur provided background on the context of the letter that was attached in the agenda package and Ms. Shuya confirmed that administration has had several

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Friday, July 23, 2021 Page 2 of 3

Page 26 of 228 meetings with the EMTSC and will continue to meet with them to ensure that planning is complementary to their delivery model.

5. IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process

Mr. Power introduced the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process, highlighting the purpose, key refinements, and the scoring system.

Overall Task Force members voiced support for the process.

IRTMP21-15 Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval. Moved by: Mayor Stewart Accepted by: Chair Katchur Decision: Carried unanimously

6. 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report

Mr. Power provided an overview of the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report.

There was a suggestion to revise the structure of the priorities to start with advance to planning. All members and Mr. Power were in favour of this change.

IRTMP21-16 Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval. Moved by: Councillor Laurie Accepted by: Chair Katchur Decision: Carried unanimously

7. Adjournment

Chair Katchur declared the meeting adjourned at 10:11 a.m.

Task Force Chair, Gale Katchur

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Friday, July 23, 2021 Page 3 of 3

Page 27 of 228 Audit and Finance Committee Meeting

Thursday, July 8, 2021 1:30 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Mayor Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County (Chair) Councillor Wes Brodhead, Leduc County (Vice Chair) Mayor John Stewart, City of Beaumont Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon Councillor Michael Walters, City of Edmonton

EMRB Staff: Karen Wichuk, CEO Cindie LeBlanc, Director, Corporate and Stakeholder Relations Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning Charlene Chauvette, Office Manager Chelsea Levesque, Administrative Assistant

Audit and Finance Committee Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021

Page 28 of 228 1. Opening

1.1 Quorum

Quorum achieved; five of five voting members present.

1.2 Call to Order

Chair Doblanko called the meeting to order at 1:31 p.m.

1.3 Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Doblanko welcomed everyone and shared the items to be discussed in the meeting today. She acknowledged that the EMRB convenes on the traditional lands of Treaty 6, which is also the home of members of the Métis Nation of Alberta (Zone 4 and Zone 2), Inuit, and non-status Indigenous peoples and that we acknowledge that we are all Treaty People, bound to one another by the spirit and intent of Treaty “as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the river flows.”

Chair Doblanko reminded members that the meeting is convened via YouTube and provided Zoom meeting processes and shared the items to be discussed in the meeting today.

2. Approval of Agenda

AFC2021-13 Motion: Recommended Motion: That the Audit and Finance Committee approve the July 8, 2021 meeting agenda. Moved by: Mayor Stewart Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Minutes

AFC2021-14 Motion: Recommended Motion: That the Audit and Finance Committee approve the May 13, 2021 meeting minutes. Moved by: Mayor Ralph Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

Audit and Finance Committee Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021

Page 29 of 228 4. Finance

4.1 Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget

CEO Wichuk provided background on the revisions to of the 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget. There was an error identified on the first column title, "2020/21 Approved", which should read "2021/22 Approved". CEO Wichuk confirmed this will be updated and a revised version sent out to the Committee.

AFC2021-15 Motion: That the Audit and Finance Committee endorse and recommend the Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval. Moved by: Mayor Ralph Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously

4.2 Q1 Quarterly Financial Report

CEO Wichuk provided an overview of the Q1 Quarterly Financial Report. She noted that Government of Alberta officials confirmed the ACP operating grant had gone forward to the Minister for approval but that it had not yet been received as of July 5. In terms of member municipality contributions, EMRB Administration had received approximately $1.7 million of the expected $1.9 million in. CEO Wichuk confirmed late payments of member contributions is not a systemic issue as EMRB policy requires payment within 60 days.

While the current surplus ensures there will not be any cash flow issues this year, members recommended EMRB Administration undertake a cash flow analysis to have an idea of where the financials would be if there should there be no surplus and delays in receiving member contributions and grant funding at the beginning of the fiscal year. CEO Wichuk confirmed an analysis, including information on mitigation strategies such a establishing a line of credit and increasing the minimum amount of the Board Stabilization Fund, will be brought back to the Committee at the next meeting.

4.3 Auditor Update

CEO Wichuk stated that the three-year contract with the Auditor will end in July 2021. It is the responsibility of the Committee to appoint a new auditor. It was proposed that Administration will bring back an RFP in January or March 2022 for the Committee’s consideration before it is released.

Audit and Finance Committee Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021

Page 30 of 228 5. CEO Update

CEO Wichuk provided an update on work that has been underway since the last Committee meeting.

6. Next Meeting

The next scheduled meeting on September 9, 2021 will be rescheduled to October 7, 2021 so that Administration can bring back the items discussed today and provide a Q2 quarterly financial update.

7. Adjournment

Chair Doblanko adjourned the meeting at 2:22 p.m.

Committee Chair, Tanni Doblanko

Audit and Finance Committee Meeting Minutes: Thursday, July 8, 2021

Page 31 of 228 Item 2.viii

Briefing Note

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: Audit & Finance Committee Subject: Q1 Quarterly Financial Report

Background:

On April 8, 2021, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approved the 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget.

This is the first Quarterly Financial Report of the 2021/22 fiscal year. In an ongoing effort to improve on our reporting the Quarterly Financial Statements include:

• Budget 2021/22, • Actuals as of June 30, 2021, • Estimated spending to the end of the fiscal year, and • Variances (percentage and dollar).

Q1 Highlights

The highlights of note for this quarterly reporting period are:

• The Alberta Community Partnership Grant of $1.5M has to date not been received. • Membership Contributions received to date include $1,748,969 of the $1,898,454. • The work related to the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) is over budget. This is a result of further work required on the modelling and greater response than anticipated to the stakeholder engagement. EMRB Administration is proposing to address this in the revised budget.

The results of this quarterly are on par with what we have seen in previous years at this time.

Attachments: Q1 Financial Report

Page 32 of 228 Q1 Financial Report

Actuals - as of Variances % Estimated 2021/22 Budget June 30, 2021 Expensed / Variances $ to be Spending Revenue Received Expensed / Received 2021/22 GOA Operating Grant$ 1,500,000.00 $ - 0.0%$ (1,500,000) $ 1,500,000.00 GOA Planning Intern Grant$ - $ - 0.0%$ - $ - 13 Member Contribution$ 1,898,454.11 $ 1,748,969.20 92.1% (149,485) $ 1,898,454.11 Committed Deferred Revenue$ 2,272,171.61 $ 2,755,315.00 121.26%$ 483,143.39 $ 2,755,315.00 Deposit Interest$ - $ 2,409.46 100.00%$ 2,409.46 Carry Over$ - $ - Total Revenue$ 5,670,625.72 $ 4,506,693.66 79.5% (1,163,932) $ 6,153,769.11

Expenditures Board & Committees

Honoraria$ 56,000.00 $ 3,000.00 5.4% 53,000 $ 56,000.00 Meetings$ 48,000.00 $ 1,145.50 2.4% 46,855 $ 48,000.00 Travel$ 20,000.00 $ - 0.0% 20,000 $ 20,000.00 Chair Retainer$ 40,000.00 $ 6,000.00 15.0% 34,000 $ 40,000.00 Total $ 164,000.00 $ 10,145.50 6.2% 153,855 $ 164,000.00 Administration Human Resources Salaries & Benefits$ 1,953,386.64 $ 423,233.62 21.7% 1,530,153 $ 1,953,386.64 Planning Intern$ - $ - - - $ - Travel/Professional Development$ 20,000.00 $ 2,177.50 10.9% 17,823 $ 20,000.00 Capital $ - - - $ - Office Lease$ 310,000.00 $ 70,069.38 22.6% 239,931 $ 310,000.00 Office Furniture/Equipment$ 8,500.00 $ - 0.0% 8,500 $ 8,500.00 Supplies and Services $ - - - $ - Meetings - Non Board/Committee$ 20,000.00 $ - 0.0% 20,000 $ 20,000.00 Information Technology$ 25,000.00 $ 5,198.50 20.8% 19,802 $ 25,000.00 Office Communications$ 40,000.00 $ 9,209.70 23.0% 30,790 $ 40,000.00 Office Supplies$ 35,000.00 $ 3,008.40 8.6% 31,992 $ 35,000.00 COVID-19 Office Supplies$ 5,000.00 $ - 0.0% 5,000 $ 5,000.00 Insurance$ 6,500.00 $ - 0.0% 6,500 $ 6,500.00 GIS$ 15,000.00 $ 1,763.13 11.8% 13,237 $ 15,000.00 Bank Charges & Interest$ 2,000.00 $ 469.78 23.5% 1,530 $ 2,000.00 Other Expenses$ 8,000.00 $ - 0.0% 8,000 $ 8,000.00 Total $ 2,448,386.64 $ 515,130.01 18.6% 1,991,881 $ 2,448,386.64 Corporate Services Board Development and Strategic Planning Board Development & Strategic Planning$ 100,000.00 $ 675.00 0.7% 99,325 $ 100,000.00 Board Succession Planning & Orientation$ 50,000.00 $ - 0.0% 50,000 $ 50,000.00 Annual Report/Auditors$ 25,000.00 $ 7,150.00 28.6% 17,850 $ 25,000.00 Policy and Legislative Services $ - - - $ - Professional Fees - Legal/Advisory$ 70,000.00 $ 5,485.75 7.8% 64,514 $ 70,000.00 Information and Risk Management $ - - - $ - Corporate Risk Mgmt & Implementation$ 15,000.00 $ - 0.0% 15,000 $ 15,000.00 Records Management$ 20,000.00 $ - 0.0% 20,000 $ 20,000.00 Dispute Resolution and Appeal Mechanism $ - - - $ - Dispute Resolution& Appeal Mechanism$ 70,000.00 $ - 0.0% 70,000 $ 70,000.00 Stakeholder Engagement & Communications $ - - - Engagement & Communications$ 102,500.00 $ - 0.0% 102,500 $ 102,500.00 Advocacy$ 45,000.00 $ 5,687.50 12.6% 39,313 $ 45,000.00 Regional Symposium$ - $ - - - $ - Board & Committees Collaboration Events$ 20,000.00 $ - 0.0% 20,000 $ 20,000.00 Total $ 517,500.00 $ 18,998.25 3.7% 498,502 $ 517,500.00 Operating Programs - Growth Plan Growth Plan Implementation Growth Plan/ 5- year update$ 350,000.00 $ - 0.0% 350,000 $ 200,000.00 Toolkit/Education/Interpretation$ 5,000.00 $ - 0.0% 5,000 $ 5,000.00 KPI Dashboard$ 15,000.00 $ - 0.0% 15,000 $ 15,000.00 KPI Targets for GP$ 5,000.00 $ - 0.0% 5,000 $ 5,000.00 Monitoring & Reporting$ 10,000.00 $ - 0.0% 10,000 $ 10,000.00 MRSP $ - -- $ - MRSP$ 200,000.00 $ 22,596.34 11.3% 177,404 $ 200,000.00 REF $ - - - $ - REF$ 75,000.00 $ - 0.0% 75,000 $ 75,000.00 RAMP $ - - - $ - RAMP$ 194,659.86 $ 53,060.98 27.3% 141,599 $ 125,000.00 RAMP Implementation$ 120,000.00 $ - 0.0% 120,000 $ 120,000.00 IRTMP $ - - - $ - IRTMP Update$ 95,323.22 $ 117,040.65 122.8% (21,717) $ 185,750.00 IRTMP Implementation$ 80,000.00 $ - 0.0% 80,000 $ 30,000.00 Regional Energy Corridors Advocacy Strategy $ - - - $ - Regional Energy Corridors Advocacy Strategy $ - $ - - - $ - Total $ 1,149,983.08 $ 192,697.97 16.8% 957,285 $ 970,750.00 Strategic Plan Initiatives SISB Shared Investment Shared Benefit$ 188,854.45 $ 40,271.48 21.3% 148,583 $ 45,000.00 SISB Implementation$ 100,000.00 $ - 0.0% 100,000 $ 100,000.00 Broadband$ - $ - - - $ - Unallocated Initiatives$ - $ - - - $ - Total$ 288,854.45 $ 40,271.48 13.9% 248,583 $ 145,000.00 Board Stabilization Fund Board Stabilization Fund$ 100,000.00 $ - 0.0% 100,000 $ 100,000.00 Total $ 100,000.00 $ - 0.0% 100,000 $ 100,000.00 Total Expenditures$ 4,668,724.17 $ 777,243.21 15.4% 3,950,101 $ 4,345,636.64 Unallocated Funds Surplus (Deficit)$ 1,001,901.55 $ 3,729,450.45 Accumulate Surplus Beginning of Year Accumulate Surplus End of Year

Page 33 of 228 Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting

Wednesday, July 14, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Public Viewing via YouTube

Members: Guests: Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon (Chair) Susan Ancel, Director One Water Councillor Dave Anderson, Strathcona County (Vice Planning, EPCOR, member of Stormwater Chair) Collaborative Councillor Tim Cartmell, City of Edmonton Stephen Dafoe, Solid Waste Collaborative (Alternate) Chair Mayor Bob Young, City of Leduc Councillor Kelly Vandenberghe, Leduc County Councillor Ken MacKay, City of St. Albert Councillor Erin Stevenson, City of Spruce Grove Councillor Kristin Toms, Sturgeon County

EMRB Staff: Karen Wichuk, CEO Sharon Shuya, Director, Regional Growth Planning Barb Smith, Senior Communications Advisor Shannon Munday, Project Manager Alex Bonokoski, Project Manager Ron Cook, Manager GIS and Business Intelligence

Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 Page 1 of 6

Page 34 of 228 1. Opening

1.1. Quorum

Quorum achieved; 8 of 8 voting members present.

1.2. Call to Order

Chair Ralph called the meeting to order at 12:59 p.m.

1.3. Chair’s Opening Remarks

Chair Ralph welcomed members of the Standing Committee and guests and provided a brief overview of the agenda.

Chair Ralph expressed his hope for the Standing Committee to provide Administration and the Collaboratives with the guidance and direction needed to continue work over the remainder of the year.

2. Approval of Agenda

Chair Ralph suggested adding Fire/EMS and Emergency Management Collaborative Update as an additional agenda item following item 8.

MRSP21-10 Motion: That the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee approve the July 14, 2021 meeting agenda, as amended. Moved by: Councillor Vandenberghe Accepted by: Chair Ralph Decision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Minutes

MRSP21-11 Motion: That the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee approve the April 1, 2021 meeting minutes. Moved by: Councillor MacKay Accepted by: Chair Ralph Decision: Carried unanimously

Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 Page 2 of 6

Page 35 of 228 4. Presentation

Ms. Ancel provided an overview of Edmonton’s award-winning Stormwater Integrated Resource Plan (SIRP). She shared the goals of SIRP and indicated how the project might inform the Collaborative’s future work.

Ms. Ancel answered questions about risk mitigation and Councillor MacKay indicated the potential for stormwater service harmonization and changes to building codes across the Region.

5. Stormwater Collaborative Update

Mr. Bonokoski indicated that over the last few months, the Stormwater Collaborative has been focused on developing the foundational documents necessary to guide their work, including the Terms of Reference, Stormwater Collaborative Framework and Action Plan. Next steps include prioritization of regional actions, initiating quick wins and proceeding with foundational work.

Councillor Vandenberghe indicated the definition of regional significance and criteria to determine project priorities requires further work. Greater clarity regarding the project approval process was also requested.

5.1. Stormwater Collaborative Action Plan

MRSP21-12 Motion: That the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee endorse and recommend the Stormwater Collaborative Action Plan to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.

Moved by: Councillor Anderson Accepted by: Chair Ralph Decision: Carried. 7 in favor and 1 opposed.

6. Solid Waste Collaborative Update

Mr. Dafoe acknowledged the continued efforts of the Solid Waste Collaborative members. He also provided an update on the accomplishments of the Solid Waste Collaborative since the last meeting of the Standing Committee, including completion of their first regional project to develop a Regional Monitoring and Measurement Program, development of the Solid Waste Action Plan, exploration of a Regional Waste Characterization Study, and drafting of a regional letter of support for Extended Producer Responsibility, which will be submitted to the Government of Alberta on behalf of the EMRB.

Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 Page 3 of 6

Page 36 of 228 6.1. Solid Waste Collaborative Action Plan

Mr. Dafoe reviewed the highlights of the Action Plan. The Standing Committee indicated that the Collaborative represents a win for the Region, acknowledged the important contribution from ERWAC, and commended the efforts of the Collaborative in moving this work forward. Councillor Vandenberghe reiterated the need to provide additional detail regarding regional significance. Councillor Finstad asked for additional information on the plan for managing Household Hazardous Waste.

Ms. Munday shared a request for a minor amendment to terms in Appendix E of the Solid Waste Collaborative Action Plan.

MRSP21-13 Motion: That the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee endorse and recommend the Solid Waste Collaborative Action Plan to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval, as amended.

Moved by: Councillor Anderson Accepted by: Chair Ralph Decision: Carried. 7 in favor and 1 opposed.

6.2. Extended Producer Responsibility Letter of Support

Mr. Dafoe presented the Solid Waste Collaborative’s draft letter of support recommended by the Collaborative members to help convey the importance of including municipalities in development of regulation, requesting that the province maintain funding for Household Hazardous Waste until it can be brought under an Extended Producer Responsibility program, and maintaining momentum for this important work.

The Standing Committee discussed their comfort level in approving the letter of support on behalf of the Board. The Standing Committee amended the motion to better align with their advisory role. The letter will be added to the August 12, 2021 EMRB Board Meeting Consent Agenda.

MRSP21-14 Motion: That the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee endorse the letter of support for Extended Producer Responsibility to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for action. Moved by: Councillor MacKay Accepted by: Chair Ralph Decision: Carried unanimously

Break from 2:53 p.m. - 3:04 p.m.

Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 Page 4 of 6

Page 37 of 228 7. MRSP Standing Committee Terms of Reference

Chair Ralph asked CEO Wichuk to walk the Standing Committee through the proposed amendments to the Terms of Reference. The changes are intended to help the Committee better enable the Collaboratives to make progress on the regional priorities outlined in their Action Plans.

Standing Committee members discussed whether changes would circumvent other mechanisms for project assessment or funding approval or overlap with the responsibilities of the Board. The ability to move work forward efficiently was noted as beneficial.

MRSP21-15 Motion: That the Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee endorse the revised Terms of Reference for consideration and approval by the Governance and Human Resources Committee.

Moved by: Councillor Stevenson Accepted by: Chair Ralph Decision: Carried unanimously

8. Preliminary Discussion: Broadband and Digital Infrastructure

CEO Wichuk indicated the purpose of this agenda item was to provide a space for preliminary discussions on how best to continue to advance the Board’s work related to broadband and digital infrastructure. As broadband has been widely accepted as an essential service, there may be an opportunity to expand the scope of the MRSP to include this work and the Standing Committee could provide guidance, raise the profile, and ensure accountability for this work.

There was consensus within the Standing Committee that broadband is an important and vital service. It was noted that several other stakeholders are pursuing opportunities in this space. The suggestion of a symposium was discussed. EMRB Administration agreed to continue to explore the approach to this service area going forward and to bring it back for discussion at a future meeting.

9. Fire/EMS and Emergency Management Collaborative Update

CEO Wichuk indicated that conversations were initiated with Chair Ralph and the EMRB Chair and Vice Chair to determine what the right next steps in these service areas would be. Next steps for Fire/EMS and Emergency Management were also discussed with the CAO’s in the beginning of May and continued in late June.

Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 Page 5 of 6

Page 38 of 228 CAOs indicated the best next steps on Fire/EMS would be to meet with the regional Fire Chiefs to review opportunities for regional collaboration and to review agreements already in place across the Region.

For Emergency Management, the CAOs recommended that there is an opportunity to share lessons learned and best practices from the global pandemic as the basis to identify opportunities for further collaboration, was discussed.

Chair Ralph raised the possibility of removing the EMS for the servicing area to reduce confusion.

10. Leadership Roundtable

Chair Ralph opened the floor to members for regional updates. Councillor Vandenberghe indicated the need to be cognizant of potential duplication between emergency management and stormwater management. He also reiterated discomfort with the vision of Zero Waste for the Region and suggested that alternatives may resonate better with the public. Councillor Toms offered up thanks for opening up the Standing Committee for additional members and indicated her enthusiasm for working with the other members.

11. Next Steps

No next steps were provided.

12. Next Meeting

Chair Ralph noted that the next MRSP Standing Committee meeting is not scheduled to meet until after municipal elections.

13. Adjournment

Chair Ralph declared the meeting adjourned at 4:06 p.m.

Standing Committee Chair, Ray Ralph

Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan Standing Committee Meeting Minutes: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 Page 6 of 6

Page 39 of 228 Item 2.x

Request for Decision

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: MRSP Standing Committee Subject: Extended Producer Responsibility Letter of Support

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the recommendation to send the attached letter of support on Extended Producer Responsibility to the Government of Alberta.

Background:

• Members of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta voted unanimously October 26, 2020 in favour of a motion to urge the provincial government to examine the feasibility of implementing measures such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). • EPR transfers the cost of recycling from municipalities back onto the producer. • On March 18, 2021, Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) released a discussion paper on advancing EPR within the province. • Stakeholder engagement for a proposed EPR framework was conducted by AEP between March and May of this year. Stakeholders were invited to review the discussion paper and respond to questions through the online portal or by email. • Many of the municipalities in the Region participated in this engagement process. • Regional stakeholders including Edmonton Region Waste Advisory Committee, the Recycling Council of Alberta, and the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association (AUMA) also submitted letters of support for an Alberta EPR framework. • In April 2021, the Solid Waste Collaborative agreed there was value in EMRB submitting a letter of support for ERP within Alberta with a unified regional voice. • Although enabling legislation was expected in the Fall of 2021, there are now indications this may slip into 2022. • At the same time, Alberta Infrastructure recently announced changes to funding for the management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) that will impact all municipalities in the Region. The change was implemented June 1, 2021. • A letter of support was drafted to convey the importance of including municipalities in development of EPR regulation, requesting that the province maintain funding for HHW until it can be brought under an EPR program, and maintaining momentum for this important work. • The Solid Waste Collaborative endorsed the attached draft letter on July 6, 2021. • The MRSP Standing Committee unanimously endorsed the letter of support to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for action on July 14, 2021. Page 1 of 5

Page 40 of 228

Next Steps:

• Chair Choy to send the letter to Minister Nixon on behalf of the EMRB.

Attachments: Extended Producer Responsibility Letter of Support

Page 2 of 5

Page 41 of 228 Honourable Jason Nixon Minister of Environment and Parks, House Leader 323 Legislature Building 10800 – 97 Avenue Edmonton, AB T5K 2B6

(sent via email to: [email protected])

August XX, 2021

RE: Extended Producer Responsibility for Alberta

Dear Minister Nixon,

On behalf of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB), I am writing to express our support for an Alberta Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system and enabling regulation. Individually, our municipalities were pleased to have an opportunity to participate in the EPR engagement process. The EMRB would like to reinforce these contributions with support at the regional level and to highlight the important role we believe that municipalities will need to play in planning, implementing, and continuously improving a successful EPR system within Alberta.

Through our 2021-24 strategic plan, A Region by Design, the EMRB has committed to advocating for priorities and strategies that further the Region’s growth, prosperity, and sustainability. We believe that an EPR system represents an important opportunity to remove unnecessary financial burdens from our ratepayers and to help our economy recover, while also enabling progress towards our waste management and environmental goals.

To best position the Region for the future, the EMRB is advocating for an Alberta EPR system that:

Provides Flexibility – Our municipalities currently offer diverse programming. Any system adopted by the Government of Alberta should allow municipalities to opt into or out of the service, or to participate in a mixed service model based on the community’s needs. The regulation should also enable municipalities to negotiate service levels with the producers.

Improves Service Levels – Service standards should ensure residents receive at least the same type and quality of services as they are getting today, and it should be at least as convenient to recycle materials as it is to dispose of them as garbage. Services should be provided across all types of homes (single-family and multi-family), even where multi-family services are not currently offered by a municipality today. 1/3

www.emrb.ca #1100 Bell Tower, 10104 – 103 Avenue Edmonton AB T5J 0H8 DRAFT Phone: 780.638.6000 | Email: [email protected]

Page 3 of 5

Page 42 of 228 An EPR system must ensure that rural communities receive reasonable levels of service. Where curbside services are not feasible, standards should be set defining maximum travel distances to recycling locations.

Maximizes Harmonization – All Alberta households should be able to recycle the same set of materials. It is essential that the Government of Alberta harmonizes our EPR packaging and paper framework with other jurisdictions. Harmonization will reduce the regulatory and administrative burden on our businesses, while at the same time making it easier for our residents to understand. The EMRB would also encourage the Province to align with BC and other prairie provinces as they expand their EPR programs to include waste from the industrial, commercial and institutional sector. This will enable the Region to pursue economies of scale and to provide greater certainty on feedstock supply for industry.

Engages Municipalities – We invite Alberta Environment and Parks to leverage the expertise within the municipalities as enabling regulation is drafted. We also strongly encourage engaging municipalities as key stakeholders throughout the transition process and to establish a regular consultation process once the EPR system is operational. As the primary interface with residents and businesses today, municipalities can also help play an important role in communication and support before, during, and after implementation.

Encourages Innovation – An EPR system must encourage producers to work with municipalities to find solutions to complicated waste management problems, such as difficult to recycle materials, streetscape programs, agricultural waste, and household hazardous material. A well-crafted regulation will encourage solutions to prevent wastes at the source, improve product and packaging design, and drive investment in new recycling technologies.

Engages Industry – Entrepreneurial spirit within the Region will accelerate the change required to achieve the goals of an EPR system. Early engagement with industry on the materials put under EPR will encourage data gathering, investment, and research into diversion solutions. As outlined within Alberta’s Natural Gas Strategy, we have the opportunity to grow our plastics recycling sector to produce much needed products. The EMR has a unique interest in engaging petrochemical and primary resin producers in developing world class technology. Together, the Province and the Region, can partner with industry to develop a centre of recycling innovation that has the potential to lead globally.

Tracks and Reports Performance – Once implemented, the EPR oversight body must have the mandate and authority to report on all waste, including the stewarded material that continues to be managed under municipal waste systems. This will ensure the Province, and our municipalities, will have the data needed to fully understand system performance and to maximize economic and environmental benefits.

Supports Enforcement – The costs of non-compliance must exceed the costs of compliance to ensure producers have the incentives they need to fully participate and fuel innovation. Effective oversight must be put in place to identify free riders so that good actors are not subsidizing the actions of bad actors. At the same time, audit requirements cannot become overly onerous or stifle the ability for industry to innovate. www.emrb.ca #1100 Bell Tower, 10104 – 103 Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 0H8 DRAFT Phone: 780.638.6000 | Email: [email protected]

Page 4 of 5

Page 43 of 228 2/3

Smooths the Transition – Municipalities will need to make significant changes under a new EPR framework. The EMRB encourages Alberta Environment and Parks to provide a detailed transition plan that provides sufficient time for municipalities to engage residents, consider the proposed options, and to anticipate impacts to service contracts and infrastructure. The Alberta government must consider maintaining existing funding to the current Household Hazardous Waste Program, currently funded by Alberta Environment and Parks, Alberta Infrastructure, and participating municipalities, until an EPR program is in place.

With the public consultation process completed, the EMRB is looking forward to building on this momentum and assisting with the successful planning, design, and rollout of an EPR system within Alberta. An EPR system is an important component of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region’s goal of transitioning to a more circular economy that provides vital opportunities for economic growth and high-value job creation while protecting the environment and benefiting society. We look forward to continuing this important work with you.

Best Regards,

Mayor William Choy, Chair Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board cc: EMRB Board Members Hon. Ric McIver, Minister of Municipal Affairs Hon. Doug Schweitzer, Minister of Jobs, Economy and Innovation Hon. Sonya Savage, Minister of Energy Hon. Prasad Panda, Minister of Infrastructure

www.emrb.ca #1100 Bell Tower, 10104 – 103 Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 0H8 DRAFT Phone: 780.638.6000 | Email: [email protected]

Page 5 of 5

Page 44 of 228 Item 2.x

Briefing Note

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: Administration Subject: CEO Update

Background:

With the municipal election this fall, this Board's term will come to a close. I'd like to take this opportunity to look back over the last four years and acknowledge the important progress that has been made to fulfill our mandate.

Before summarizing these major milestones, I would like to acknowledge the leadership, dedication, and wisdom of the outgoing Board throughout these four years. Each of you have been champions for your respective municipalities, while keeping top of mind the broader interests and long term growth of the Region. This legacy work has not always been smooth or without challenge, but your thoughtful questions, respectful debate, and drive to deliver on results have contributed to solidifying the foundation on which this Region can continue to grow.

The Work Completed

The Board tackled an ambitious work plan and delivered substantial components that are integral to the implementation of our growth plan, the servicing plan and the 2018-2023 Strategic Plan.

• Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan (MRSP) The development and implementation of a regional servicing plan is a requirement under the EMRB Regulation. It aims to enable us to share resources, expertise and capacity to deliver essential services at a better value to citizens. This is a common sense approach that also allows us to more effectively plan ahead for the approximately one million more people and 475,000 more jobs that are anticipated to come to the Region in the next 25 years.

The inaugural MRSP was passed unanimously by the Board in December 2019, and submitted to Alberta Municipal Affairs. The MRSP recommended the creation of four Regional Collaboratives to advance cooperation in priority service areas: solid waste management, stormwater management, fire/EMS, and emergency management. The first two Collaboratives, solid waste and stormwater, have developed their action plans which will provide direction for the implementation of those work plans, pending the approval by the Board in August, with work continuing post election. The initial meeting for the fire/EMS is being planned for late August/early September to explore the opportunities for regional collaboration. Whereas emergency management is being planned for late fall, post election and will initially focus on lessons learned from the global pandemic.

Page 45 of 228

• Shared Investment for Shared Benefit (SISB) Approved in June 2021, the Region now has a new game-changing tool at its disposal to leverage our collective strengths and achieve benefits that would otherwise be out of reach for any single member municipality. This tool outlines how to choose regionally significant projects and initiatives for the good of all of us, and how we share costs, apportion the effort, build together, and how we collectively reap the rewards accordingly. This elevates us from merely thinking about regionalism as a noble theory to purposefully and practically acting on our intentions.

• Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Approved in June 2021, the IRTMP is the first regional transportation plan to employ data- based analysis of our transportation network to understand how we can best affect change to fully implement the bold vision of the Region's growth plan. The EMRB’s efforts to implement an integrated regional transportation network brings value to the Region by reducing duplication in transportation planning, prioritizing investments in critical transportation infrastructure, and allowing municipalities to go further with tax-payer dollars through regional cost-savings and much more. It delivers a truly integrated, forward-looking plan to meet the transportation and mobility needs of all our citizens, while continuing to foster our Region’s economic growth and resiliency - key components of the quality of life we prize. This is truly something that we can be proud of.

One of the core pieces that supports the implementation of the IRTMP, is the project prioritization process and 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report, both of which are coming forward to the Board in August. The EMRB’s prioritization process has grown to be an important input into the Government of Alberta’s capital budget process. This process has been so successful as a long-standing implementation tool, it has enabled the objectives and outcomes of the Region’s two successive growth plans. The intent of an updated process is to make it more dynamic and flexible; the process does not rely on a static, long-term list of projects to achieve the IRTMP. It allows refinements and new projects to be added annually.

• Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP) Pending its approval by the Board in August, the Board will have developed the first regional agriculture plan for the Edmonton Metropolitan Region. The pandemic showed the world the importance of food security, and value-added businesses in agri-food are precisely the sort of economic diversity our province is hungering for. Conserving prime land and creating opportunities for agri-food could boost the Region’s prosperity by an estimated $10 billion in the next 25 years. It will take careful management, conservation of our black gold soils, less fragmentation, and RAMP’s thoughtful planning.

One of the key pieces of RAMP is the development of a Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) tool, a first for the Region, and the first such analysis completed in the Prairies. The analysis has been extremely thorough, evidence based, and directly supported by local agriculture experts from each county in the Region. The results of the LESA model are essential to inform and quantify the Region’s prime agricultural lands for conservation and important to monitor changes to these lands over time.

Page 46 of 228

• Regional Broadband Situational Analysis (BB) Tabled in August 2020, our regional broadband initiative is the first comprehensive regional study of the state of connectivity in the Region. It creates the compelling case to Alberta’s decision-makers to invest in broadband internet service and digital infrastructure here. Underpinning this work is the undeniable economic imperative – consistent highspeed service in the Edmonton Region could boost our GDP by $1 billion every year – and real social benefit. Modern economies don’t exist without it, and neither do healthy and connected families.

• Sturgeon Valley Special Study Area In January 2019, the Government of Alberta amended our growth plan to include the Sturgeon Valley Special Study Area. The Sturgeon Valley Special Study Area borders Edmonton and St. Albert. The area is unique requiring a collaborative approach to planning infrastructure and future residential development to achieve contiguous, compact development with transitions that consider established communities and surrounding agricultural areas and metropolitan boundaries.

• Regional Evaluation Framework (REF) and EMRB Planning Toolkit Significant work was undertaken to amend the REF and update the EMRB Planning Toolkit over the last term. The Board was committed to working with key stakeholders and member municipalities to reduce red tape associated with the REF. EMRB Administration and member municipalities worked together on the EMRB REF Planning Toolkit in an effort to streamline our processes and improve efficiency.

• Board Governance, Strategic Review and Strategic Plan The Board’s work on the new board governance structure included adopting a Board Charter, and a Dispute Resolution and Appeal Mechanism Bylaw, a review of all Board policies which was a significant undertaking and accomplishment by the Board. In addition, the Board completed a strategic review of its work, adopted a New Initiative Assessment Framework and unanimously approved a new Strategic Plan.

The Work Ahead

• Growth Plan 5-Year Interim Review The growth plan includes provisions for regular updates, including a five-year interim review that is intended to be completed by Q4 2023-24. The interim review is not intended to result in a significant update or change to the growth plan structure overall, but rather an opportunity to review and update employment and population projections, consider whether any amendments are needed if results of the key performance indicators show that the outcomes are not being met, and amend the growth plan to integrate the outcomes of work the Board has completed to date. That said, we recognize that the scope could include new context, policy additions/amendments, map updates, glossary additions, and possible refinements to REF, to name a few. On July 8, the Committee of the Whole provided input to Administration, which will inform the scope of work to be captured in the Project Charter.

• Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Opportunities At the last Board meeting, members approved a motion for directing EMRB Administration and CAOs to work together to explore opportunities for coordinating regional standards for

Page 47 of 228 climate resilient communities and the concept of a region-wide carbon budget and climate risk assessment so the Region can align to Canada’s commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. A working group will be established with the intent of reporting back to the Board in the new year. Some of this work may also be incorporated into the growth plan's interim review.

Corporate Update

• Q1 Quarterly Financial Statement Included in the consent agenda is the Q1 Quarterly Financial Statement. The results of this quarterly are on par with what we have seen in previous years at this time. • Auditing Firm Contract The term of our contract with our auditing firm, King and Company is up later this month. The Audit and Finance Committee (AFC) will go to tender and EMRB Administration will be bringing a draft RFP to AFC for further review before it is posted. • Revised 2021-24 Budget Mayor Doblanko will be providing an overview of the revised budget as part of the Audit and Finance Committee update. When the budget was originally approved in April 2021, Administration anticipated that in-year adjustments would be required to reflect the progress being made on a number of initiatives.

Relationship Building, Engagement, and Advocacy

With the lifting of Covid restrictions, this has enabled us to resume in-person meetings, starting with our August Board meeting. I too have resumed in-person meetings with Board members, regional partners and other key leaders. As we incrementally return to business as usual, I wish to reiterate my commitment to increased relationship building, ongoing engagement, and advocacy.

• Government of Alberta Further to the Cabinet Shuffle on July 8, Chair Choy wrote congratulations to Minister McIver and Minister Sawhney on behalf of the Board. As part of these letters, Chair Choy underscored the important work of the Region in areas of interest for the Province and requested individual meetings with each minister to further discuss ongoing support and collaboration in implementing our growth plan.

Letters were also sent to Minister Glubish and Associate Minister Horner following the government’s announcement of a new broadband funding program. The Board’s work on the Broadband Situational Analysis is an invaluable tool that can be used to support this mutual priority.

In addition, in early July I had the pleasure of meeting with the Brandy Cox, the new Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs. This was an opportunity to brief her on the Board's accomplishments during its mandate, and to talk about the work ahead including the priorities identified in the new strategic plan.

• Indigenous Engagement On August 23, Chair Choy, Mayor Shaigec and I are pleased to have a first introductory meeting with the Chiefs of the three federally recognized First Nations located within the EMRB boundaries: Chief George Arcand Jr., Alexander First Nation; Chief Billy Morin, Enoch

Page 48 of 228 Cree Nation; and Chief Arthur Rain, Paul First Nation. This will be an opportunity for us to talk about what is important for each of us and where some synergies may exist for future collaborations, particularly as we initiate an interim review of the growth plan.

Chair Choy and I are also scheduled to meet with Dr. Tracy Friedel, President of the Métis Nation of Alberta, Zone 4 on August 11.

We look forward to building a meaningful relationship with the First Nations and the Métis Nation, with whom we call Treaty 6 home.

• Regional Partners As always, Edmonton Global CEO Malcolm Bruce and I continue to meet regularly to talk about opportunities and issues of mutual interest. I have also had the opportunity to meet on a couple of occasions with Edmonton Metropolitan Transit Services Commission CEO Paul Jankowski to talk about the IRTMP. Looking ahead a meeting has been scheduled with IRTMP Task Force Chair Mayor Katchur and EMTSC Commission Chair Councillor Brodhead to talk about the IRTMP and hear more from the Commission.

Regional Evaluation Framework (REF) Applications Update

• As of July, the EMRB has received a total of six REF applications: one new municipal development plan (MDP); one MDP amendment; and four new area structure plans (ASP)/area redevelopment plans. Of these, one was withdrawn (City of Leduc ASP). See attached detailed overview. • In accordance with Section 5.1.3 of the growth plan, member municipalities are required to update their MDPs within three years of the growth plan coming into effect (October 2020). In light of the global pandemic, the Board secured an extension on this date from the Minister of Municipal Affairs to June 1, 2021. EMRB is happy to report that all 13 municipal development plans have been submitted. This ensures that the growth plan objectives and policies are being implemented at the local level throughout the Region.

Comings and Goings

As I acknowledged during our Audit and Finance Committee meeting, the organization welcomed Barb Smith as the EMRB's Senior Communications Advisor. Barb is a seasoned communications professional, who has worked in a wide variety of industry sectors, from non-profit, and local government to private and corporate industry. Her most recent position was working for Trans Mountain, where she was the Community Liaison for the Greater Edmonton area. Barb also spent over ten years at Sturgeon County, where she created a communications department, spearheaded a re-branding marketing campaign, as well as a comprehensive communications and community engagement strategy. Barb is excited to start to build strong and creative communications initiatives that will champion EMRB’s strategic direction and influence relationships with key partners and stakeholders.

As we look to the fall, and with the lifting of Covid restrictions, we are planning for bringing our EMRB team back to the office. We are committed to a safe and healthy work environment and will continue to ensure that additional protective measure remain in place for the safety and well being of our employees.

Page 49 of 228 In the meantime, I hope our Board members, committee, task force and working group members, as well as our municipal partners and EMRB staff have an opportunity to recharge over the summer.

Attachments: 2021 Q2 REF Update

Page 50 of 228 2021 Quarter 2 REF Report August 12, 2021

2021 Quarter 2 Total REFs 1 1 withdrawn

REF Application Types

1 New Area Structure Plan

Note: Information current as of July 7, 2021

Page 1 of 2

Page 51 of 228 2021 Quarter 2 REF Report August 12, 2021

2021 Year to Date Total REFs

6 5 approved

1 withdrawn

REF Application Types

1 New Municipal Development Plan 1 Municipal Development Plan Amendment 4 New Area Structure Plan/Area Redevelopment Plan

Length of EMRB Review

The average length of an EMRB REF review was 17 working days

(Does not include 28-day appeal period.)

Note: Information current as of July 7, 2021

Page 2 of 2

Page 52 of 228 Item 4.1

Request for Decision

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: Audit & Finance Committee Subject: Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Revised 2021/22 – 2023/24 Budget.

Background:

On April 2021, the Board approved the 2021/22 - 2023/24 Budget. At that time, Administration had informed the Board that it was anticipating less spending than projected and that the resulting surplus of $2,272,171.61 would likely be higher once the annual audit was complete, and that Administration would come back to the Board with a revised budget.

At the June 2021 Board meeting, the Auditor confirmed that as of March 31, 2021, the EMRB's total committed deferred revenue stood at $2,755,315 comprised of an unrestricted accumulated surplus of membership contributions. The Auditor noted the surplus is expected to be fully expended by March 2023.

Proposed Budget Adjustments

All proposed budget adjustments and reallocations are detailed in the budget notes; however a number of items warrant specific mention and the following additional explanation:

Growth Plan/Interim Review

• The line item has been renamed from 'Growth Plan/5 year Update' to 'Growth Plan/Interim Review' to better reflect the limited scope of the review being undertaken. • While there is no change to the overall budget for this line item, the annual allocation amounts were adjusted over the three years to better reflect when the work will be undertaken.

Page 1 of 4

Page 53 of 228

RAMP

• As noted in the April 2021 budget, $140,000 was allocated as a placeholder for a second round of stakeholder consultations. The anticipated costs to complete the RAMP, including the second round of consultations is $125,000, representing an overall reduction of $69,659.86, to be reallocated to surplus.

IRTMP

• This initiative will require additional funding of $90,397, with work to be completed in the second quarter. The additional funding required is a result of the enhanced stakeholder engagement - a larger number of stakeholders were interviewed than first anticipated and increased work required to complete the model. $50,000 of the additional funding is reallocated from the IRTMP Implementation line item.

SISB

• This initiative has been completed under budget and the SISB allocation has been reduced from $188,854.45 to $45,000.

Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG)

• The Board approved this initiative in June 2021. • $100,000 is being allocated to support ESG. The amount is an estimate, which will likely be refined as EMRB Administration clarifies the scope of work, technical and facilitator support needed to assist EMRB/CAO work.

Attachments: Revised 2021-22 – 2023-24 Budget

Page 2 of 4

Page 54 of 228 Proposed EMRB Budget 2021/22 thru 2023/24

2021/22 2021/22 Approved Proposed 2022/23 2023/24 Revenue GOA Operating Grant $ 1,500,000.00 $ 1,500,000.00 $ 1,000,000.00 $ 1,000,000.00 GOA Planning Intern Grant $ - $ - $ - $ - 13 Member Contribution $ 1,898,454.11 $ 1,898,454.11 $ 1,898,454.11 $ 1,898,454.11 1 Committed Deferred Revenue $ 2,272,171.61 $ 2,755,315.00 $ 1,708,132.47 $ 478,899.94 Carry Over $ - $ - $ - $ - Total Revenue $ 5,670,625.72 $ 6,153,769.11 $ 4,606,586.58 $ 3,377,354.05

Expenditures Board & Committees

Honoraria $ 56,000.00 $ 56,000.00 $ 56,000.00 $ 56,000.00 Meetings $ 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00 Travel $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Chair Remuneration $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 Total $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 Administration Human Resources Salaries & Benefits $ 1,953,386.64 $ 1,953,386.64 $ 1,953,386.64 $ 1,953,386.64 Planning Intern $ - $ - $ - $ - Travel/Professional Development $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Capital Office Lease $ 310,000.00 $ 310,000.00 $ 310,000.00 $ 310,000.00 Office Furniture/Equipment $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 Supplies and Services Meetings - Non Board/Committee $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Information Technology $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Office Communications $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 Office Supplies $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 COVID-19 Office Supplies $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ - $ - Insurance $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 6,800.00 $ 6,800.00 GIS $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Bank Charges & Interest $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 Other Expenses $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 Total $ 2,448,386.64 $ 2,448,386.64 $ 2,468,686.64 $ 2,468,686.64 Corporate Services Board Development and Strategic Planning Board Development & Strategic Planning $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Board Succession Planning & Orientation $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ - $ - Annual Report/Auditors $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Policy and Legislative Services Professional Fees - Legal/Advisory $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 Information and Risk Management Corporate Risk Mgmt & Implementation $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ - $ - Records Management $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Dispute Resolution and Appeal Mechanism Dispute Resolution& Appeal Mechanism $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 Stakeholder Engagement & Communications Engagement & Communications $ 102,500.00 $ 102,500.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Advocacy DRAFT$ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 60,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Regional Symposium $ - $ - $ - $ - Board & Committees Collaboration Events $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Total $ 517,500.00 $ 517,500.00 $ 410,000.00 $ 395,000.00 Operating Programs - Growth Plan Growth Plan Implementation 2 Growth Plan/ interim review $ 350,000.00 $ 200,000.00 $ 300,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Toolkit/Education/Interpretation $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 KPI Dashboard $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 KPI Targets for GP $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ - $ - Monitoring & Reporting $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 MRSP MRSP $ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 $ 250,000.00 $ 300,000.00 REF REF $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 RAMP 3 RAMP $ 194,659.86 $ 125,000.00 $ - $ - RAMP Implementation $ 120,000.00 $ 120,000.00 $ - $ - IRTMP 4 IRTMP Update $ 95,323.22 $ 185,750.00 $ - $ - 5 IRTMP Implementation $ 80,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 Regional Energy Corridors Advocacy Strategy Regional Energy Corridors Advocacy Strateg $ - $ - $ - $ - Total $ 1,149,983.08 $ 970,750.00 $ 735,000.00 $ 510,000.00 Strategic Plan Initiatives SISB 6 Shared Investment Shared Benefit $ 188,854.45 $ 45,000.00 $ - $ - SISB Implementation $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 7 Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) $ - $ 100,000.00 $ - $ - Unallocated Initiatives $ - $ - $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 Total $ 288,854.45 $ 245,000.00 $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 Board Stabilization - Contingency Fund Board Stabilization - Contingency Fund $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Total $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Total Expenditures $ 4,668,724.17 $ 4,445,636.64 $ 4,127,686.64 $ 3,887,686.64 Unallocated Funds Surplus (Deficit) $ 1,001,901.55 $ 1,708,132.47 $ 478,899.94 $ (510,332.59) Accumulate Surplus Beginning of Year Accumulate Surplus End of Year

Page 3 of 4

Page 55 of 228 * Office Lease- Term: 10 Years, Expiry Date: January 31, 2024 1- Committed Deferred Revenue - Higher than anticipated after completion of audit. 2- Growth Plan/ interim review - no overall change to budget, change to allocation throught the three years. 3- RAMP- Reduction of $69,659.86 for actual costs, reallocated to surplus. 4- IRTMP- Actual carry over of $45,311.05 project funds, Additional funding of $90,397 required to complete the project, $50,000 from implementation to cover additional amounts project to be completed in Q2. 5- IRTMP Implementation(NEW)- Reduce funds of $50,000 and reallocate to IRTMP for completion in Q2. 6- Shared Investment for Shared Benefit- Reduce as anticipated spending of $45,000 to complete the project. Reallocate $100,000 to ESG, remaining $43,000 to surplus. 7- Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG)(NEW)- Funding of $100,000 reallocated from SISB to identify scope, technical support and facilitator to support CAO work.

Revised July 8, 2021

DRAFT

Page 4 of 4

Page 56 of 228 Item 5.1

Request for Decision

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force Subject: IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process.

Background:

The IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process guides the annual evaluation of regionally significant transportation projects identified by member municipalities and partners, resulting in a collective list of ranked projects approved by the Board.

Development of Evaluation Process

On June 13, 2019, the Board approved the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Project Charter, which includes a review and update of the Regional Transportation Priorities Prioritization Process to implement the growth plan. The Project Charter reflects the Board's desire to develop an evidenced-based process and a resulting list of projects that could be applied to a variety of funding sources. Through regional partnerships, the EMRB has developed a platform within the Regional Travel Model to support the IRTMP and its implementation, including the annual prioritization process.

The Board received a presentation on the preliminary framework for the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process at a Special Board meeting on March 11, 2021. Commentary from Board members at the workshop helped frame development of the methodology, which has been refined along with the evolution of the IRTMP document through the Task Force and Board adoption process.

Key Components of the Proposed Evaluation Framework

The proposed framework includes a three-level evaluation process that applies an increasing level of rigor and evidence-based evaluation as projects move through the various stages of project development:

Page 1 of 28

Page 57 of 228 • Advance to Planning, • Ready for Design, and • Ready for Construction

Each of these three categories has a different set of evaluation criteria, with the level of evaluation detail increasing with project development as it moves through the process over time.

For example, a project that is Ready for Construction will be more rigorously evaluated than one that is ready to Advance to Planning. This reflects the higher level of information and certainty for the more advanced projects, and also the higher level of investment required. At all three levels of project development, a weighted scoring system has been applied, with the weightings and scores having been established through multiple Working Group workshops.

The main difference in the application of the evaluation of each project has been the level of qualitative versus quantitative assessment.

At the Advance to Planning level, most scoring is subjective and qualitative, while at Ready for Construction, the prioritization is based on analysis and model outputs, including reliable cost estimates and monetized benefit calculations.

A separate priorities list has been developed for each of the three categories, noting that funding sources may be quite different at each stage of project development. The final results group projects in each category into Top Priorities, Medium Priorities and Lower Priorities, separated into Roadway, Transit and Active Transportation projects.

Status Update:

A second workshop was held with the Board on June 30, 2021 to demonstrate progress refining the prioritization process. Since the Special Board Meeting workshop on June 30, 2021, additional details have been developed describing the annual regional transportation prioritization process and planned model evergreening.

On July 23, 2021, the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force unanimously endorsed and recommended the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process to the Board.

Once adopted, major amendments to methodology would require Board review and approval to ensure consistency with the IRTMP and growth plan, and for consideration of resource or budget implications.

Next Steps:

Once approved by the Board, the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process will be employed on an annual basis as described within the report. The log used for clarifying evaluations will be made a part of the annual reporting to the Board to ensure transparency in policy interpretation.

Page 2 of 28

Page 58 of 228 Frequency of the regional transportation prioritization process will be reviewed as part of the Five Year Review of the growth plan.

Attachments: IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process Report

Page 3 of 28

Page 59 of 228

IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

August 12, 2021

Page 4 of 28

Page 60 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Contents

1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 2021 Update ...... 1 1.2 Purpose of Prioritization ...... 1 2 Methodology ...... 3 2.1 Process Overview ...... 3 2.1.1 Project Outcomes ...... 3 2.1.2 Process Summary ...... 4 2.2 Regionally Significant Projects ...... 4 2.3 Evaluation Overview ...... 5 2.3.1 Advance to Planning ...... 5 2.3.2 Ready for Design ...... 6 2.3.3 Ready for Construction...... 6 2.4 Scoring and Weighting ...... 7 3 Evaluation Criteria ...... 8 4 Priority Grouping ...... 15 5 Annual Updates ...... 16 5.1 New Projects and Project Refinement ...... 16 5.2 Annual Model Updates ...... 16 5.3 Five-Year Refresh ...... 16 Appendix A: Example Ready for Construction Calculation ...... 18 18 Appendix B: Evaluation Criteria Log ...... 19 Appendix C – Maps to Support Prioritization ...... 22

Figures

Figure 1: Regional Transportation Priorities Process ...... 4

Tables Table 1: Approximate Number of Projects by Priority Group ...... 15

August 12, 2021 Page| i 5 of 28

Page 61 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan This page is intentionally left blank.

ii | August 12, 2021 Page 6 of 28

Page 62 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

1 Introduction

Member municipalities of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board have collaboratively generated annual regional transportation project priority lists since 2013. These lists have been used to help inform Alberta Transportation’s capital planning and support provincial funding for projects within the Edmonton Metropolitan Region. With the adoption of an updated growth plan in 2017, the Board emphasized the need to review and update the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP). The prioritization process has been updated to reflect the new plans.

1.1 2021 Update The IRTMP establishes a policy framework and transportation priorities to plan and seek funding for the Region’s transportation network for the next 25 years. Traditionally, a transportation master plan includes a set of projects to be implemented, often covering 20 years or more of anticipated funding and allocation of transportation dollars. The IRTMP moves away from this static model of planning and moves toward a growing trend of plans that are able to adapt over time and in response to changing circumstances. The prioritization process assesses an individual project’s ability to improve regional transportation mobility. The updated prioritization process for the IRTMP builds upon historic prioritization practices and will be used annually to update the Regional Transportation Priorities report. The annual process allows the Region to be more flexible and dynamic in responding to changing funding and technologies. The IRTMP also introduces a new regional travel model. The model is a valuable tool for the prioritization process as it allows many of the criteria that were previously based solely on judgement to now be supported by data and accurate mapping generated through modelling, and in some cases replacing the judgement-based criteria completely with a data-based criteria approach. In particular, the updated prioritization process includes monetization of travel time and vehicle operating benefits based on system-wide savings generated with the model, as an example. This document outlines the updated prioritization process to support the implementation of the 2021 IRTMP.

1.2 Purpose of Prioritization A prioritization process is a tool to assist decision-makers in identifying those projects that best align with a set of objectives. The EMRB Regional Transportation Prioritization Process groups regionally significant transportation projects based on their alignment with the IRTMP goals and policies. Prioritization is an important input to capital budgeting. A prioritization process is an important decision-support tool, it should inform decisions, not make them. Other factors need to be considered beyond IRTMP goals and policies

August 12, 2021 |Page 1 7 of 28

Page 63 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

that may impact regional transportation projects and budgeting decisions. For example, urgent infrastructure rehabilitation or repair could result in a project being advanced earlier than the prioritization process would suggest. While the prioritization process considers value for money, it does not consider available funding on a year-by-year basis. Available funding may affect the final initiatives for the Region. Historically, the regional transportation priorities have been used primarily to influence Alberta Transportation’s three-year capital plan with EMRB needs and priorities. This remains a primary goal of the prioritization process. However, the IRTMP has highlighted the importance of an integrated and multi-modal transportation system that extends beyond the provincial or provincially-funded roadway network. Research will be required into other sources of funding since the traditional levels of provincial funding are becoming less certain and cover a wider range of programs. The updated prioritization process therefore serves several purposes, including: • communicating the unified priorities of the Region for projects funded and delivered by Alberta Transportation; • supporting other senior government grant and funding applications; • guiding regional advocacy to senior government around infrastructure priorities and regulatory change; • helping to inform local transportation infrastructure planning; and • providing direction on what is important to the Region to allow projects to be developed and/or refined to better align with policies and goals of the 2021 IRTMP.

2 | August 12, 2021 Page 8 of 28

Page 64 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

2 Methodology

The proposed prioritization process uses the previous approach as a basis and includes refinements to align with the updated IRTMP and includes a more rigorous evaluation of projects as a project moves further along the planning process and more information is known and project readiness and value-for-money components can be assessed.

2.1 Process Overview The prioritization process was developed with the input of the IRTMP Working Group, Alberta Transportation, IRTMP Task Force, and EMRB administration. An important change from the previous prioritization process is the application of project phases. In the previous process, the project phases (referred to as project status) were established after the scoring process to further inform the process. In this updated process, the projects are categorized by project phase before the scoring is completed. The project phases are: • Advance to Planning • Ready for Design • Ready for Construction Each of these three categories has a different set of evaluation criteria, with the level of evaluation detail increasing with the level of project development, i.e., a project that is Ready for Construction will be more rigorously evaluated than one that is ready to Advance to Planning. This reflects the higher level of information and certainty for the more advanced projects, and the higher level of investment required. The process is dynamic. The annual update will refine priorities as projects move through the project development phases and as funding and technology changes. This means a project that is categorized as Advance to Planning in one year could move to the Ready for Design category in a subsequent year once planning has occurred, and the project could be redefined based on the outcomes of the planning study.

2.1.1 Project Outcomes The project outcomes are derived from the 2017 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan, which is also the basis for many of the policies and goals of the 2021 IRTMP. The prioritization process groups evaluation criteria into four project outcome categories from the growth plan and reinforced in the IRTMP, plus a fifth category based on value and readiness as follows: • Economic Competitiveness • Sustainable and Resilient Communities • Health and Environment • Serving the Diverse Needs of the Region • Value and Readiness

August 12, 2021 |Page 3 9 of 28

Page 65 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

2.1.2 Process Summary Figure 1 summarizes the process and provide a general outline of the evaluation.

Figure 1: Regional Transportation Priorities Process 2.2 Regionally Significant Projects Only regionally significant projects should be brought forward to the prioritization process. The definition of regionally significant is intentionally vague. Where there is doubt about the regional significance of a project, it should be included in the “Advance to Planning” phase and evaluated as part of that list of projects. If the project does not have strong regional significance, it will not advance beyond this list. A low ranking in the “Advance to Planning” list may suggest a lack of regional significance. Projects that meet some or all of the following criteria may be considered regionally significant: • Project on a Level 1 or 2 provincial highway; • Higher-order transit project; • All age-and-abilities (AAA) intermunicipal active transportation facility; • Roadways that provide access to major employment areas in the Metropolitan Area or the Rural Area; • Any crossing of the North Saskatchewan River; • Roadways that are forecasted to carry more than 2,000 trucks/day; • Road-rail grade separation; • Projects on any arterial roadway where traffic is comprised of more than 25% with an origin or destination outside the municipality the project is located in; or

4 | August 12, 2021 Page 10 of 28

Page 66 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

• Other project that connects major regional destinations.

The project list was established from three primary sources: • the 2019 prioritization list; • the current Alberta Transportation long-range planning list to 2045; and • other projects identified by the Working Group as being regionally significant.

The initial project phase determinations were made based on discussions with Working Group members and Alberta Transportation staff. Some projects that had previous planning or even design completed were moved to an earlier project phase if the planning or design was deemed to be too old to still be relevant. The list and assignment of project phases should be reviewed on an annual basis. As projects move through the various project phases, they may need to be disaggregated or otherwise redefined. For example, a project in the Advance to Planning stage may involve several potential interchanges. Based on the functional planning study, it may be appropriate for the project to be split into several new projects based on project phasing.

2.3 Evaluation Overview The process involves three separate prioritization lists based on the phase of project development. This approach allows for more detailed information to be considered in the prioritization of the larger investments. Therefore, as the project moves from the “Advance to Planning” list to the “Ready for Design” list, then “Ready for Construction”, the prioritization process moves from a primarily subjective evaluation based on judgement to an increasingly data-based evaluation; even for those criteria based on a subjective evaluation.

2.3.1 Advance to Planning These projects have been identified as regionally significant, but no substantive planning has been completed. Initially, all new projects should be subject to this initial prioritization to confirm regional significance.

2.3.1.1 Project Outcomes The evaluation will be judgement-based, using knowledge of the Region and understanding of the effectiveness of similar projects to generate scores.

2.3.1.2 Value and Readiness This step will be of lesser importance to the Advance to Planning list as cost estimates or calculation of benefits will not be available. Therefore, the primary focus for Advance to Planning will be the current programming status, funding availability or other documented support. For example, a project that is in the 2030 capital program will score higher than one in the 2030 to 2045 program.

August 12, 2021Page | 5 11 of 28

Page 67 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

2.3.2 Ready for Design Project design represents a notable investment, often in the order of 10% of the total project cost. Therefore, more rigour is applied in the prioritization process for Ready for Design projects as compared with Advance to Planning and will help direct investment to those projects that are ready for advancement.

2.3.2.1 Project Outcomes Prioritization will be similar to the previous prioritization methodology and will be primarily judgement-based but supported with more data. Results from planning studies may be used to support the evaluation.

2.3.2.2 Value and Readiness Presumably, there will be reliable cost estimates generated from the planning effort, and there may be some indication of the performance benefits of the project. The identified performance benefits and understanding of typical user benefits associated with the specific type of project will help to inform the expected value of the project. However, at this stage, it is unlikely that a common and comparable approach to quantifying user benefits will be feasible, therefore, the value evaluation will be judgement-based, but supported by reliable cost data and more general benefit information. Like the evaluation of projects in the Advance to Planning list, funding and readiness will be evaluated based on programming status, funding availability or other documented support.

2.3.3 Ready for Construction The Ready for Construction prioritization process will have the greatest effect on upcoming capital planning.

2.3.3.1 Project Outcomes With a smaller number of projects considered, a more detailed analysis can be undertaken to support the process, including modelling of various indicators to support the evaluation of specific criteria. The Regional Transportation Model is used to add rigour to the evaluation of these projects and incorporate data-based tools to the project outcomes. The model estimates and provides absolute values to support the decision making while determining scores for respective criterion. For roadway projects, the model is used to help identify project influenced changes in network hours, vehicle kilometers travelled (VKT), person trips, and intermunicipal use of links. This provides additional confidence in determining the scores for the Ready for Construction phase and the overall prioritization process, as quantified effects are generated by the model. For transit projects, the monetized values for network hours and VKT reductions are calculated manually using the project business case for guidance.

2.3.3.2 Value and Readiness Since these projects will have advanced through the design phase, they will be well- developed with detailed cost estimates. It will be possible to estimate user benefits using the regional model so that benefits are comparable between projects. Unlike the Advance to Planning and Ready for Design phases, this phase includes calculation of a

6 | August 12, 2021 Page 12 of 28

Page 68 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

benefit-cost index that takes advantage of the model outputs to generate travel time and vehicle operating cost benefits associated with the project being evaluated. 2.4 Scoring and Weighting A scoring and weighting system allows for various criteria (described in the next section) to be applied to each Project Outcome category plus Value and Readiness. Four points are available within each category. Most criteria can receive a score of 1 or 0, although there is some variation in the Value and Readiness category. Weightings for each category are: Economic Competitiveness 28% Sustainable and Resilient Communities 28% Health and Environment 11% Serving Diverse Needs of the Region 18% Funding and Value 15% The same weightings are applied to all project phases. The scores for each project are determined by multiplying the score out of four in each category by the weighting, then summing the total.

There is an exception for Value and Readiness in the Ready for Construction phase where two of the four points are calculated based on a benefit-cost index described in the next section.

August 12, 2021Page | 7 13 of 28

Page 69 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

3 Evaluation Criteria

Economic Competitiveness: Alignment with economic transportation policies and objectives. Criteria Description Does the project improve a congested goods movement route, defined as arterial, Improves a congested goods movement freeway and expressway roadway links with greater than 200 trucks per hour and route volume to capacity ratio > 0.85 in the 2045 Delayed Investment scenario? Does the project improve a congested commuter route, defined as arterial, freeway Improves a congested commuter route and expressway roadway links with a volume to capacity ratio > 0.85 in the 2045 Delayed Investment scenario? Improves first / last mile connections to major Does the project improve infrastructure within and around major employment employment areas, including industrial areas areas, including industrial areas? Improves connection between modes Does the project improve ease of access for intermodal hubs and Edmonton (Road/Air/Rail) for goods movement International Airport?

Measurement – Advance to Planning Criteria Measure Improves a congested goods movement Judgement-based measure using the "Congested Truck Corridors" map, which route identifies roads with high truck volumes and constrained by congestion.

Judgement-based measure using the "Congested Commuter Routes" map, Improves a congested commuter route which identifies arterials and expressways constrained by congestion.

Judgement-based measure using the EMRGP Schedule 3A: Major Employment Improves first / last mile connections to major Areas, which identifies roadway links that provide access to employment areas, for employment areas, including industrial areas areas outside of the metropolitan core. Judgement-based measure using the "Mobility Hubs and Intermodal Yards" Improves connection between modes map, which identifies locations of intermodal yards / hubs. It improves ease if the (Road/Air/Rail) for goods movement project directly connects to the intermodal yard / hubs. For e.g., a road improvement project next to an intermodal yard.

Measurement - Ready for Design Criteria Measure Judgement-based measure using the "Congested Truck Corridors" map, which Improves a congested goods movement identifies roads with high truck volumes and constrained by congestion, informed route by the regional model. In some cases, additional information like Vehicle Hours Travelled may be provided from the model. Judgement-based measure using the "Congested Commuter Routes" map, which identifies arterials and expressways constrained by congestion, informed by Improves a congested commuter route the regional model. In some cases, additional information like Vehicle Hours Travelled may be provided from the model. Judgement-based measure using the EMRGP Schedule 3A: Major Employment Improves first / last mile connections to major Areas, which identifies roadway links that provide access to employment areas, for employment areas, including industrial areas areas outside of the metropolitan core. Judgement-based measure using the "Mobility Hubs and Intermodal Yards" Improves connection between modes map, which identifies locations of intermodal yards / hubs. It improves ease if the (Road/Air/Rail) for goods movement project directly connects to the intermodal yard / hub.

Measurement - Ready for Design Criteria Measure Data supported measure using the "Congested Truck Corridors" map, which Improves a congested goods movement identifies roads with high truck volumes and constrained by congestion, informed route by the regional model. Vehicle Hours Travelled by trucks confirms the score. Data supported measure using the "Congested Commuter Routes" map, which Improves a congested commuter route identifies arterials and expressways constrained by congestion, informed by the regional model. Vehicle Hours Travelled confirms the score. Judgement-based measure using the EMRGP Schedule 3A: Major Employment Improves first / last mile connections to major Areas, which identifies roadway links that provide access to employment areas, for employment areas, including industrial areas areas outside of the metropolitan core. Judgement-based measure using the "Mobility hubs and Intermodal Yards" Improves connection between modes IRTMP map, which identifies locations of intermodal yards / hubs. It improves ease if (Road/Air/Rail) for goods movement the project directly connects to the intermodal yard / hub.

8 | August 12, 2021 Page 14 of 28

Page 70 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Sustainable and Resilient Communities: Alignment with land use and infrastructure policies. Criteria Description Supports intensification within the Built-Up Does the project support intensification within the Built-Up Urban Area? Urban Area Improves multimodal choice or connections Does the project improve multimodal choice or connections (Road / Rail / Air / (Road/Rail/Air/Transit/Active) for people Transit / Active) for people's movement by providing access to more than one movement mode? Optimizes person carrying capacity or Does the project optimize person carrying capacity or efficiency on an existing efficiency on existing roadway or transit roadway or transit infrastructure? infrastructure Minimizes fragmentation of agricultural land in Does the project avoid fragmentation or a barrier effect or restrict access or the Rural Area by utilizing existing operational capabilities of agricultural land in the Rural Area? facilities/ROW

Measurement - Advance to Planning Criteria Measure Supports intensification within the Built-Up Judgement-based using the EMRGP Schedule 2: Edmonton Metropolitan Urban Area Regional Structure to 2044. The project supports the intensification if it is located within the Built-Up Urban Area as defined in the EMGRP Schedule 2. Improves multimodal choice or connections Judgement-based measure using the "Mobility Hubs and Intermodal Yards" (Road/Rail/Air/Transit/Active) for people map. It improves if then project facilitates the connection between two or more movement modes and enhances the mobility of people. Optimizes person carrying capacity or Judgement-based measure indicating optimization potential. The project efficiency on existing roadway or transit optimizes if it will reduce congestion and/or bottlenecks or add person carrying infrastructure capacity without widening the infrastructure. Minimizes fragmentation of agricultural land in Judgement-based measure. It avoids or minimizes fragmentation if it is a new the Rural Area by utilizing existing link using existing road ROW or improves an existing road in the Rural Area. The facilities/ROW project also scores zero if it is in a Metropolitan Core or Area.

Ready for Design Criteria Measure Supports intensification within the Built-Up Judgement-based using the EMRGP Schedule 2: Edmonton Metropolitan Urban Area Regional Structure to 2044. The project supports the intensification if it is located within the Built-Up Urban Area as defined in the EMGRP Schedule 2. Improves multimodal choice or connections Judgement-based measure using the "Mobility Hubs and Intermodal Yards" (Road/Rail/Air/Transit/Active) for people map. It improves if then project facilitates the connection between two or more movement modes and enhances the mobility of people. Optimizes person carrying capacity or Judgement-based measure indicating optimization potential. The project efficiency on existing roadway or transit optimizes if it will reduce congestion and/or bottlenecks or add person carrying infrastructure (e.g., HOV Lane/Transit Priority, capacity without widening the infrastructure. ITS, etc.) Minimizes fragmentation of agricultural land in Judgement-based measure. It avoids or minimizes fragmentation if it is a new the Rural Area by utilizing existing link using existing road ROW or improves an existing road in the Rural Area. The facilities/ROW project also scores zero if it is in a Metropolitan Core or Area. Ready for Construction Criteria Measure Supports intensification within the Built-Up Judgement-based using the EMRGP Schedule 2: Edmonton Metropolitan Urban Area Regional Structure to 2044. The project supports the intensification if it is located within the Built-Up Urban Area as defined in the EMGRP Schedule 2. Improves multimodal choice or connections Judgement-based measure using the "Mobility Hubs and Intermodal Yards" (Road/Rail/Air/Transit/Active) for people map. It improves if then project facilitates the connection between two or more movement modes and enhances the mobility of people. Optimizes person carrying capacity or Judgement-based measure indicating optimization potential. The project efficiency on existing roadway or transit optimizes if it will reduce congestion and/or bottlenecks or add person carrying infrastructure (e.g. HOV Lane/Transit Priority, capacity without widening the infrastructure. ITS, etc.) Minimizes fragmentation of agricultural land in Judgement-based measure. It avoids or minimizes fragmentation if it is a new the Rural Area by utilizing existing link using existing road ROW or improves an existing road in the Rural Area. The facilities/ROW project also scores zero if it is in a Metropolitan Core or Area.

August 12, 2021Page | 9 15 of 28

Page 71 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Health and Environment: Alignment with environmental and health priorities/policies, air quality and GHG Impacts, and safety impacts. Criteria Description Avoids, minimizes or mitigates the impacts to natural Does the project avoid, minimizes or mitigates the impacts to natural living living system features as identified in EMRGP system features as identified in EMRGP? Improves active transportation for all ages, abilities Does the project improve access and encourage active transportation and purposes modes for all ages, abilities and purposes?

Air and GHG Impacts; reduction in CAC, GHG Does the project reduce CAC and GHG emissions?

Addresses a known safety issue Does the project address a known safety issue?

Measurement - Advance to Planning Criteria Description Avoids, minimizes or mitigates the impacts to natural Judgement-based measure using the EMRGP Schedule 4 Natural Living living system features as identified in EMRGP Systems. It minimizes if there is no interaction with living systems. Improves active transportation for all ages, abilities Judgement-based measure. It improves access and encourages mode and purposes shift if it is an active transportation project or there is an active transportation component involved in the project. Air and GHG Impacts; reduction in CAC, GHG Judgement-based measure for potential to reduce Vehicle Kilometers Travelled, which is approximately proportional to emission reduction. Addresses a known safety issue Judgement-based measure based on identified and documented safety issues.

Measurement - Ready for Design Criteria Measure Avoids, minimizes or mitigates the impacts to natural Judgement-based measure using the EMRGP Schedule 4 Natural Living living system features as identified in EMRGP Systems. It minimizes if there is no interaction with living systems or if mitigation is identified in a planning report. Improves active transportation for all ages, abilities Judgement-based measure. It improves access and encourages mode and purposes shift if it is an active transportation project or there is an active transportation component involved in the project. Air and GHG Impacts; reduction in CAC, GHG Judgement-based measure for potential to reduce Vehicle Kilometers Travelled, which is approximately proportional to emission reduction. Addresses a known safety issue Judgement-based measure based on identified and documented safety issues. Measurement - Ready for Construction Criteria Measure Avoids, minimizes or mitigates the impacts to natural Judgement-based measure using the EMRGP Schedule 4 Natural Living living system features as identified in EMRGP Systems. It minimizes if there is no interaction with living systems or if mitigation is identified in a planning report. Improves active transportation for all ages, abilities Judgement-based measure. It improves access and encourages mode and purposes shift if it is an active transportation project or there is an active transportation component involved in the project. Air and GHG Impacts; reduction in CAC, GHG Data supported measure for potential to reduce Vehicle Kilometers Travelled, which is approximately proportional to emission reduction. Addresses a known safety issue Judgement-based measure based on identified and documented safety issues.

10 | August 12, 2021 Page 16 of 28

Page 72 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Serving Diverse Needs of the Region: Alignment with community support and connection goals, and equity and inclusion goals. Criteria Description Improves transportation access and facilities for the Does the project improve transportation access and facilities for the agricultural sector outside of the Built-up Urban Area agricultural sector outside of the Built-up Urban Area? Supports the development of Multi-use corridors Does the project support development of multiple infrastructure uses? (utilities, pipelines, etc.)

Provides infrastructure connection to multiple Does the project provide or improve infrastructure connection between jurisdictions multiple jurisdictions? Provides service/connection to neighborhoods with a Does the project improve transportation access by providing large share of proportion of low-income household service/connection to neighborhoods with a large share of proportion of (greater than 30% of households with a high low-income households? prevalence of low income as defined by Statistics Canada) Measurement - Advance to Planning Criteria Measure Improves transportation access and facilities for the Judgement-based measure. It improves access if the project improves a agricultural sector outside of the Built-up Urban Area regional road connecting agricultural lands in rural areas. Supports the development of Multi-use corridors Judgement-based measure based on the location. The project supports (utilities, pipelines, etc.) development if other forms of regional linear infrastructure are to be supported within the corridor right-of-way, or the project overlaps with infrastructure/energy corridors in the EMRGP Schedule 8A and 8B. Provides infrastructure connection to multiple Judgement-based measure using the "External Traffic" map. The jurisdictions project provides or improves connection if it is located on a roadway that constitutes more than 25% trips from more than one jurisdiction. Provides service/connection to neighborhoods with a Judgement-based measure based on potential improvements for traffic large share of proportion of low-income household zones, shown in the "Low Income Neighbourhoods" map. Measurement - Ready for Design Criteria Measure Improves transportation access and facilities for the Judgement-based measure. It improves access if the project improves a agricultural sector outside of the Built-up Urban Area regional road connecting agricultural lands in rural areas. Supports the development of Multi-use corridors Judgement-based measure based on the location. The project supports (utilities, pipelines, etc.) development if other forms of regional linear infrastructure are to be supported within the corridor right-of-way, or the project overlaps with infrastructure/energy corridors in the EMRGP Schedule 8A and 8B. Provides infrastructure connection to multiple Judgement-based measure using the "External Traffic" map. The jurisdictions project provides or improves connection if it is located on a roadway that constitutes more than 25% trips from more than one jurisdiction. Provides service/connection to neighborhoods with a Judgement-based measure based on potential improvements for traffic large share of proportion of low-income household zones, shown in the "Low Income Neighbourhoods" map. Measurement - Ready for Construction Criteria Measure Improves transportation access and facilities for the Judgement-based measure. It improves access if the project improves a agricultural sector outside of the Built-up Urban Area regional road connecting agricultural lands in rural areas. Supports the development of Multi-use corridors Data supported measure based on the location. The project supports (utilities, pipelines, etc.) development if other forms of regional linear infrastructure are to be supported within the corridor right-of-way, or the project overlaps with infrastructure/energy corridors in the EMRGP Schedule 8A and 8B. Provides infrastructure connection to multiple Judgement-based measure using the "External Traffic" map. The jurisdictions project provides or improves connection if it is located on a roadway that constitutes more than 25% trips from more than one jurisdiction. Provides service/connection to neighborhoods with a Judgement-based measure based on potential improvements for traffic large share of proportion of low-income household zones, shown in the "Low Income Neighbourhoods" map.

August 12, 2021 Page| 11 17 of 28

Page 73 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Value and Readiness: Consideration of project adaptability, value for money and readiness for implementation. Criteria Description Adaptability - Ability for the project to be adapted over Does the project have the ability to be adapted over time to remain time to remain relevant with emerging technology and relevant with emerging technology and trends to minimize throwaway? trends Project Readiness - Assessment of the current Is the project ready to be advanced to the next project phase? funding and/or programming status of a project reflecting its readiness to be advanced to the next project phase Benefit Cost Index What is the ratio hours vehicle operating benefit relative to cost?

Measurement - Advance to Planning Criteria Measure Adaptability - Ability for the project to be adapted over Judgement-based measure. Typically, a project will be deemed to be time to remain relevant with emerging technology and adaptable if it incorporates the ability to implement managed lanes in the trends future or will include communications infrastructure to support ITS and other technology. Project Readiness - Assessment of the current Judgement-based score out ranging from 0 to 3: funding and/or programming status of a project 0 - Not listed in any current Long term capital plan or past 2030 reflecting its readiness to be advanced to the next 1 - Currently programmed but beyond the year 2030 project phase 2 - Programmed but no identified funding source by the year 2030 or partial funding identified 3- If programmed with funding available prior to 2030 Benefit Cost Index Not applicable

Measurement - Ready for Design Criteria Measure Adaptability - Ability for the project to be adapted over Judgement-based measure. Typically, a project will be deemed to be time to remain relevant with emerging technology and adaptable if it incorporates the ability to implement managed lanes in the trends future or will include communications infrastructure to support ITS and other technology. Project Readiness - Assessment of the current Judgement-based score out ranging from 0 to 3: funding and/or programming status of a project 0 - Not listed in any current Long term capital plan or past 2030 reflecting its readiness to be advanced to the next 1 - Currently programmed but beyond the year 2030 project phase 2 - Programmed but no identified funding source by the year 2030 or partial funding identified 3- If programmed with funding available prior to 2030 Benefit Cost Index Not applicable

Measurement - Ready for Construction Criteria Description Adaptability - Ability for the project to be adapted over Judgement-based measure. Typically, a project will be deemed to be time to remain relevant with emerging technology and adaptable if it incorporates the ability to implement managed lanes in the trends future or will include communications infrastructure to support ITS and other technology. Project Readiness - Assessment of the current funding and/or programming status of a project Project scores 1 if ready to be tendered; 0 otherwise. reflecting its readiness to be advanced to the next project phase Benefit Cost Index Benefits calculated as the present value of network travel time and vehicle operating cost savings over a 25-year benefit period.

Cost are capital cost plus estimated present value of operating / maintenance costs over 25 years

Benefit-Cost index is the ratio of benefits to cost.

Score is calculated as the project benefit-cost index, divided by the highest benefit-cost index, then multiplied by 2 (to make a score out of 2)

12 | August 12, 2021 Page 18 of 28

Page 74 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Benefits and cost calculations are based on Alberta Transportation benefit-cost assessment guidelines prescribed in the Benefit Cost Model and User Guide.1 The methodology determines whether the project benefits exceed the costs (capital, operating and maintaining). All annual benefits and costs (minus capital costs) are calculated as the present value over 25 years with a discount rate of 4%, assuming benefits are accrued in year 1. Revenues (e.g., transit fares) are estimated using high level estimates of annual revenue per kilometer in the Region. Similarly, operating and maintenance costs are also calculated using high level estimates of operating and maintenance costs per kilometer in the Region. These estimates were sourced from the City of Edmonton annual financial statements and Canadian Urban Transit Association research papers. Benefits are estimated using the network hours and vehicle kilometers travelled (VKT) as outputs from the regional travel model. These network hours and VKT values were multiplied with blended average cost rates, shown below, to calculate annual hours savings and vehicle operating savings. The network hours are typically used as the proxy for person trips and the value of time (travel time below) is calculated as the average value of time of all users. Similarly, vehicle operating costs are the average operating costs for all types of vehicles in the province. Since these values are provided by Alberta Transportation, they are representative of the value of time and vehicle operating costs specific to Alberta. • Travel time:

o Passenger Cars: $13/hour o Trucks: $26/hour • Vehicle operating:

o Passenger Cars $0.231/km o Trucks: $0.50/km

For roadway projects, the Regional Travel Model (model) is used by determining the difference in the overall network performance with and without the project being evaluated. This is achieved by either adding or removing the project from the Delayed Investment scenario, then undertaking a reassignment of traffic, but not a full model run. While a full model run would provide new mode split and distribution, it would complicate the calculation by introducing multiple factors that may be affecting changes in results rather than isolating effects of the project. From a practical perspective, full model runs require significant time for execution and interpretation and would not substantially improve the ability to assess the effects of a single project. Because benefits associated with transit projects rely on an assessment of mode split, a full model run would be required to assess travel time and VKT reduction. For the 2021 evaluation, a manual method is used, using ridership estimates from the project’s business case. For new trips to transit resulting from the LRT extension as reported in

1 Benefit cost model and user guide | Alberta.ca

August 12, 2021 Page| 13 19 of 28

Page 75 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

the business case, the estimated average difference in travel time by vehicle and LRT to downtown Edmonton is estimated, as well as the reduced kilometers by vehicle due to the transit trip. For the remaining ridership (those that are already using transit), the average difference in travel time by bus versus LRT is estimated. No VKT reductions are estimated. All values are annualized and monetized in the same way as roadway projects. In future years, a full model run for transit projects should be considered to also account for network travel time savings that may occur due to reduced congestion resulting from the transit project (although, from experience elsewhere, these savings are typically small).

14 | August 12, 2021 Page 20 of 28

Page 76 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

4 Priority Grouping

Within each project phase, the projects are sorted by score and divided into three priority groups, using natural breaks in the scoring (i.e., where the score drops notably from one project to the next), while keeping in mind a reasonable number of projects in each category as discussed below. Within each project phase and priority group, projects are split into Transit, Active Transportation and Roadway projects. Table 1 summarizes the approximate number of projects that would typically be expected in each group. The total number of projects may vary from year to year, but the number of top and medium priorities should remain approximately the same as shown in the table.

Table 1: Approximate Number of Projects by Priority Group

Priority Group Ready for Ready for Design Advance to Construction Planning

Top Priority 3-5 8-12 10-20

Medium Priority 3-5 20-30 20-30

Lower Priority Remainder remainder remainder

The chart below is an example of how projects are grouped.

August 12, 2021 Page| 15 21 of 28

Page 77 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

5 Annual Updates 5.1 New Projects and Project Refinement Each year, the project list will need to be assessed and changes made as necessary to reflect advancements in the previous year and new regionally significant projects that may emerge. As functional or other plans are completed for projects identified as Advance to Planning, the planning report should be reviewed with the lead agency, the project description refined based on the report recommendations and advanced to the next phase for evaluation, or remain in Advance to Planning if there is insufficient information. Similarly, once a project is substantially into detailed design, it should be reviewed and moved to the Ready for Construction list. At a minimum, there should be a design cost estimate available to allow the project to be evaluated. Modeling and other analysis will be required to prepare new Ready for Construction projects to be evaluated. New regionally significant projects may be added each year. A recommendation to include a project in the prioritization process should be made by a Working Group member from the Region. It is recommended that a project be run through the Advance to Planning evaluation to assess regional significance even if planning has been completed. If the evaluation reflects regional significance, the project could immediately be advanced to the appropriate project phase. An updated Regional Transportation Priorities Report should be produced annually. 5.2 Annual Model Updates As noted in the IRTMP, the regional travel model should be updated by EMRB a minimum of once per year to reflect all new infrastructure assumptions. Annual updates keep the model current, relevant and applicable to strategic decision making. Maintaining a current model is important for running the prioritization process and for other project or program evaluation purposes. Land use updating will follow a five-year cycle to implement updates to demographics and land use inputs to the model to reflect growth plan updates. On an annual basis, the model should be reviewed and all projects completed in the previous year should be updated in the model, including updates to the forecast scenarios. Any “top priority” Ready for Construction project that is not already in the Delayed Investment scenario should be added.

5.3 Five-Year Refresh Every five years, or when the growth plan and/or IRTMP are updated, a significant update will be required to the model and prioritization process and at a minimum should include:

16 | August 12, 2021 Page 22 of 28

Page 78 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

• Reset the model horizon year to maintain a 25 year planning horizon • Update the employment and population data at the traffic zone level • Redefine the forecast scenarios in the model based on current capital planning • Update the prioritization methodology to reflect changes in the growth plan and/or IRTMP

August 12, 2021 Page| 17 23 of 28

Page 79 of 228 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Appendix A: Example Ready for Construction Calculation

Page 24 of 28 Page 80 of 228

18 | August 12, 2021 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Appendix B: Evaluation Criteria Log

The annual prioritization process often results in interpretation and clarification of criteria to support project evaluations. In many cases, these evaluation clarifications represent very specific situations, or situations that may occur in future evaluations. The Evaluation Criteria Log is intended to be a “living” table to record criteria clarifications and foster consistency from year to year. The Log will be provided as supporting documentation to the Board with each annual Transportation Priorities Report to ensure transparency in prioritization methodology. (Note: the original is in an Excel format and is sortable and searchable)

Project Outcome Criteria Project Phase(s) Clarification Category Projects that are currently under detailed design have been General General Ready for Construction categorized in the “Ready for Construction” pool, irrespective of actual percentage complete To reduce subjectivity in certain categories, points are awarded/not awarded only if the project is directly connected or passes through the following as identified in the maps Congested Goods Movement, Congested Commuter Routes, Major Employment areas, General General All Intermodal hubs and EIA, Built-up Urban area, Natural living systems, Multiple Infrastructure uses, and Low Income Households. Page 25 of 28 Page 81 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 19 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Project Outcome Criteria Project Phase(s) Clarification Category If the project falls on a corridor with some congestion shown on Economic Improves a congested Advance to Planning, “Congestion maps,” a point is awarded, irrespective of what Competitiveness goods movement route Ready for Design proportion of the corridor shows congestions. If the project falls on a corridor with some congestion shown on Economic Improves a congested Advance to Planning, “Congestion maps,” a point is awarded, irrespective of what Competitiveness commuter route Ready for Design proportion of the corridor shows congestions. Park and Ride (P&R) projects are scored 1 for this category only if they are in close vicinity of TOD Centres as identified in the EMRGP. Built-up Urban Areas and Intensification are defined below: Built-up Urban Areas (EMRGP) - are defined as all lands located within the limits of the developed urban area within plans of subdivision that were registered as of December 31, 2016. Built-up urban areas are shown conceptually on Sustainable and Supports intensification Schedule 2 and will be delineated in detail by member Resilient within the Built-Up All municipalities as part of the implementation of this Plan. Communities Urban area Intensification (EMRGP) – Development at a higher density than currently exists in built-up urban areas, major employment areas and local employment areas through: redevelopment; the development of underutilized lots within previously developed areas; infill development; or the expansion or conversion of existing buildings P&R projects are typically contrary to urban intensification, as defined above, and this is addressed through the scoring methodology discussed above. Sustainable and Improves multimodal Resilient choice or connections All Transit to transit connections are scored 0. Page 26 of 28 Communities for people movement Page 82 of 228

20 | August 12, 2021 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Project Outcome Criteria Project Phase(s) Clarification Category Minimizes fragmentation Points are scored 0 only if the project cuts through agricultural Sustainable and of agricultural land in the lands or creates a significant barrier effect between agricultural Resilient All Rural Area by utilizing lands. Projects in urban areas score 1 by default, even if there is Communities existing facilities/ROW no interaction with agricultural lands. Projects that reduce congestion by enabling freeflow do not Health and Air Quality and GHG Advance to Planning, score a point on this category – e.g., signalized intersection to Environment Impacts Ready for Design freeflow interchange. There needs to be evidence of safety incidences or safety concerns (including substandard design, etc.) that the project Health and Addresses a known All addresses explicitly to score a point, except for railroad grade Environment safety issue separation crossings. Railroad grade separation crossings score a point by default.

Page 27 of 28 Page 83 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 21 IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Process EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Appendix C – Maps to Support Prioritization

Page 28 of Page 84 of 228

22 | August 12, 2021 Item 5.2

Request for Decision

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report.

Background:

The 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report details the Board’s priorities for roadway, transit and active transportation projects.

The 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities report is the inaugural report developed using the updated prioritization process employing new score weighting and project analysis based on the Regional Travel Model, and considers value for money as an additional lens in evaluating transportation projects. The prioritization process has been updated to align with the new IRTMP policy framework to ensure full implementation of the IRTMP and growth plan.

142 projects were identified and have been evaluated and segmented in three lists: Advance to Planning, Detailed Design and Ready for Construction. The final results group projects in each category into Top Priorities, Medium Priorities and Lower Priorities, separated into Roadway, Transit and Active Transportation projects.

Previous annual prioritization reports implemented the 2011 IRTMP, were mainly comprised of roadway projects to improve traffic congestion and foster free-flow conditions. With the updated policy direction in the 2021 IRTMP the types of projects were broadened to include active transportation and a wider variety of transit projects in addition to roadway projects.

The formation of the Edmonton Metropolitan Transit Services Commission (EMTSC) presents an opportunity for the Commission to refine and solidify major regional routes, which will lead to the identification of additional capital projects for inclusion in future prioritization evaluations. As such, an EMTSC Transit Network Plan is included in the Advance to Planning list to allow the EMTSC to complete its detailed planning and confirm regional transit routes prior to ranking and investment in supportive capital projects. Once completed the number of transit projects is expected to increase substantially in future years. Therefore, fewer transit projects have been identified in the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report. Page 1 of 23

Page 85 of 228

Active Transportation projects are being introduced into the prioritization process this year for the first time. Similar to the transit network, additional planning needs be performed to develop a preferred active transportation network for the Region. An Active Transportation Network Plan is therefore being included in the Advance to Planning list, which in turn will inform capital planning once complete.

Status Update:

On July 23, 2021, the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force unanimously endorsed and recommended the Board approve the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report.

Next Steps:

Upon approval by the Board, the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report will be submitted to the Government of Alberta for consideration in their capital planning process.

EMRB continues to look for other funding sources and partnerships to augment Provincial funding.

Attachments: 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities Report

Page 2 of 23

Page 86 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

August 12, 2021

Page 3 of 23

Page 87 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Contents

1 Introduction ...... 1 2 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities ...... 1 2.1 Transit Projects ...... 1 2.2 Roadway Projects ...... 2 2.3 Active Transportation Projects ...... 2 3 2021 Prioritization Results ...... 2 Appendix A - Project Grouping...... 12 Appendix B - Project Maps...... 15

Tables

Table 1 - Advance to Planning Priorities ...... 4 Table 2 - Ready for Design Priorities ...... 7 Table 3 - Ready for Construction Priorities ...... 11

Figures

Figure 1 - Road Projects ...... 16 Figure 2 - Transit Projects ...... 18

August 12, 2021 Page| i 4 of 23

Page 88 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan This page is intentionally left blank.

ii | August 12, 2021 Page 5 of 23

Page 89 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

1 Introduction

The Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board (EMRB) approved the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) in June 2021.The Plan supports the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan through an integrated Policy Framework implementing four strategies: • connecting goods to market; • getting people to jobs and services; • optimizing the use of existing corridors ad infrastructure; and • connecting modes and supporting modal shift. The Project Evaluation Framework used to prioritize 2021 regional transportation projects utilizes the methodology adopted in the updated IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Report (2021), which includes a three-level evaluation process applying an increasing level of rigor and evidence-based evaluation as projects move through the various stages of project development: • Advance to Planning, • Ready for Design, and • Ready for Construction The final phase of project development, Ready for Construction, utilizes the IRTMP platform within the Regional Travel Model to evaluate improvements to the network and demonstrate value for money. Detailed information on the Project Evaluation Framework and detailed methodology can be found in the IRTMP Regional Transportation Prioritization Report.

2 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities

Through a process that considered regionally significant transportation infrastructure projects, 142 projects were identified for evaluation in the 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities process. The list includes transit, roadway, and active transportation projects. These projects have been categorized into three project phases: Ready for Construction, Ready for Design, and Advance to Planning. 2.1 Transit Projects There are only a few transit projects included in the prioritization process, though some are large, high value projects. Historically, the prioritization process has been used to support Alberta Transportation capital planning, and transit projects have only recently been added to the process. Transit has been growing in prominence in recent years and is an important component of achieving the mode shift objectives of

August 12, 2021 |Page 1 6 of 23

Page 90 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

the growth plan and IRTMP, resulting in several new projects now being considered. As a result, there are only a handful of transit projects that have been advanced to the Ready for Design and Ready for Construction phases, but several in the Advance to Planning stage. All transit projects identified in the prioritization process for 2021 involve dedicated transit infrastructure. The Edmonton Metropolitan Transit Services Commission (EMTSC) was established in January 2021 with a mandate to improve regional transit and mobility. While the focus of the EMTSC will be on service planning and operations, the EMTSC has not yet completed work on the regional network or service planning. Therefore, all previously identified projects focused on a transit service (e.g., express bus routes, transit priority corridors, etc.) have been and consolidated into the EMTSC Network Planning Study, in the 2021 prioritization list and included as Advance to Planning. It is anticipated that the EMTSC Network Planning Study will identify a series of new projects that will be added to the 2022 prioritization process. This approach balances the need to include transit in the prioritization process, but also to allow the EMTSC time to undertake their necessary planning so that projects identified form a cohesive network aligned with its service delivery plans for the region. 2.2 Roadway Projects Roadway projects were segmented in Ready for Construction based on actual project status since they are staged as part of a larger study and will be ready to be constructed over time. Ready for Design and Advance to Planning projects are retained as a larger study rather than fragmenting them because they still need to be planned or designed, to support opportunities for staging different stages of the larger project. 2.3 Active Transportation Projects No Active Transportation projects were identified in previous prioritization processes. The IRTMP identified gaps and consistency issues in the existing regional information regarding active transportation that limited the ability to identify specific projects. A “Regional Active Transportation Network Plan” has been included in the Advance to Planning phase. While this network plan is categorized as a medium priority based on the prioritization process, it is recommended that it be included as a top priority so that active transportation projects can be identified and included in future years’ prioritization lists.

3 2021 Prioritization Results

All the project weighted scores were plotted on a bar chart for all three project phases to identify patterns and natural breaks in scores. Based on these natural breaks, projects in each phase are grouped into Top, Medium, and Lower priorities.

August 12, 2021 | 2

Page 7 of 23

Page 91 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

This ensures a reasonable number of projects are identified in the Top Priorities for each phase. The target number of Top Priorities for Ready for Construction is 3-5, Ready for Design is 8-12, and Advance to Planning is 10-20. The chart and breaks are shown in Appendix A. The projects within each group are not ranked and do not suggest any order of preference but have equal priority within the group. This reiterates that there is no number 1 ranked project with the highest regional priority that needs to be built first. Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3 below identify the priorities categorized into Top, Medium, and Low categories, further grouped into Transit and Roadway projects. The Project Maps shown in Appendix B identify Transit (Green), Active (Yellow) and Roadway (including railroad) (Blue) projects, and the “Index#” listed in the table below can be used to identify project locations in the maps.

August 12, 2021 |Page 3 8 of 23

Page 92 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Table 1 - Advance to Planning Priorities Top Priorities Type Index# Project ATP - 30 Bremner Regional Park and Ride ATP - 46 Leduc Regional Park and Ride ATP - 48 North St. Albert Park and Ride (north end of St. Albert Trail) Transit ATP - 53 Airport Rapid Transit (Heritage Valley to EIA) ATP - 55 Stony Plain Regional Park and Ride ATP - 78 EMTSC Network Planning ATP - 80 Campbell Rd Transit Centre to North St. Albert Park n Ride - Rapid Transit Sherwood Park Freeway Argyll Road Anthony Henday Drive upgrade to minimum ATP - 1 6 basic lanes Highway 15 / Manning Drive Anthony Henday Drive Highway 21 (Fort ATP - 3 Saskatchewan) upgrade to 6-lane freeway, includes i/c at Highway 15/37/825 Highway 16 Campsite Road (Spruce Grove) Anthony Henday Drive upgrade to 6- ATP - 5 lane freeway ATP - 6 Highway 16 Highway 21 Rge Rd 222 upgrade to 6-lane freeway Roadway ATP - 9 Highway 21 Baseline Road Township Road 542 upgrade to 6 basic lanes Highway 2 50th Street (Leduc) Anthony Henday Drive update to core-collector ATP - 14 system with minimum 12 basic lanes ATP - 23 Fowler Way - Ray Gibbon Drive to St Albert Trail upgrade to 4-lane arterial Twp Rd 534/Aurum Rd (Anthony Henday Dr. to Highway 21) - Realignment of ATP - 69 Road + New Interchange on Hwy 21 Township Road 510 Terwillegar Drive extension 9 Street new 4-lane expressway, ATP - 71 includes I/c at QE2

August 12, 2021 | 4

Page 9 of 23

Page 93 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Advance to Planning - Medium Priorities Type Index# Project ATP - 31 Beaumont Regional Park and Ride ATP - 37 Ellerslie Regional Park and Ride ATP - 47 NE Edmonton Park and Ride Transit Rapid Transit between Windermere and Downtown Edmonton via U of A (via ATP - 51 Terwillegar Drive) ATP - 56 Sturgeon Valley Regional Park and Ride ATP - 70 Windermere Park and Ride Active ATP - 79 Regional Active Transportation Network 97 Street (Highway 28) 167 Avenue / Castle Downs Road Anthony Henday Drive ATP - 11 upgrade to 6 basic lanes ATP - 12 Highway 28 Anthony Henday Drive Highway 28A upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial ATP - 18 46 Street at 50 Avenue in City of Leduc - Leduc Rail Road Grade Sep (initial study) ATP - 24 50 Street (Edmonton) Whitemud Drive 90 Avenue upgrade to 6-lane arterial ATP - 29 Highway 625 Grade Separation in Nisku 137 Avenue (Edmonton) Anthony Henday Drive 50 Street upgrade to 6-lane ATP - 32 arterial Roadway ATP - 35 75 Street Argyll Road Fort Road upgrade to 6 basic lanes ATP - 39 Flyover on 17 St NE between Hwy 16 and Aurum Rd NE ATP - 40 Flyover on 48 St/Hwy 779 between Hwy 16A and Hwy 628 ATP - 44 Flyover on Sherwood Dr between Hwy 16 and Aurum Rd NE - South crossing ATP - 67 TPC-PS Transit Priority Corridor between Capital Line and UofA via NAIT Highway 21 (Highway 628 to Highway 16) Upgrade to Freeway; build ATP - 75 interchanges 65 Avenue (Leduc) Highway 39 Grant MacEwan Boulevard new 4-lane ATP - 81 expressway

August 12, 2021Page | 5 10 of 23

Page 94 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Advance to Planning - Lower Priorities Type Index# Project ATP - 4 16A intersection improvements at Bevington Road, RR261 and Winterburn Road ATP - 7 Terwillegar Drive extension Highway 2A 41 Avenue South new 4-lane expressway ATP - 8 Highway 21 Highway 14 Highway 625 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial ATP - 10 Range Rd 222 Twp Rd 542 to Twp Rd 550 - Upgrade existing road ATP - 13 Highway 2 south boundary Highway 2A upgrade to 6 basic lanes ATP - 15 Highway 37 Highway 44 Highway 15 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial ATP - 16 Highway 39 Calmar Leduc upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial 50 Avenue (Leduc) / Highway 39 74 Street Bridgeport Crossing / Alton Drive ATP - 17 upgrade to 6-lane arterial ATP - 19 Township Road 542 between Highway 21/NERC and Highway 830 ATP - 20 RGE RD 263 upgrade to 4 lanes between Highway 39 and Glen Park Road Highway 630 / Wye Road Highway 824 Highway 830 upgrade to 4-lane rural ATP - 22 arterial Roadway ATP - 25 Rge Rd 222 Ardrossan Highway 16 upgrade to 4-lane arterial ATP - 26 Highway 825 Highway 37 Highway 643 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial ATP - 27 Highway 830 Highway 630 Highway 15 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial ATP - 33 170 Street (Edmonton) Yellowhead Trail 137 Avenue upgrade to 6-lane arterial ATP - 34 41 Ave/Twp Rd 512 (50 St to Hwy 21) Upgrade existing road ATP - 38 Flyover on 149 St NW between Yellowhead Hwy and 128 Ave NW ATP - 41 Flyover on Campsite Rd between Hwy 16A and Hwy 628 ATP - 42 Flyover on Golden Spike Rd between Hwy 16A and Hwy 628 ATP - 43 Flyover on Range Rd 231 between Hwy 16 and Twnshp Rd 534 ATP - 50 Petroleum Way Closure and 17 Street Grade Separation ATP - 76 Highway 627 (199 St to Highway 60) Twinning ATP - 77 Nisku Spine Road (Highway 623 to Highway 2A/QE2) New Link Northeast River Crossing (NERC) Hwy 21/TwpRd 540 to Hwy 28A - second ATP - 82 crossing of N. Saskatchewan River RoW protection

August 12, 2021 | 6

Page 11 of 23

Page 95 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Table 2 - Ready for Design Priorities Top Priorities Type Index# Project Transit RFD - 53 Metro Line (Blatchford to Campbell Road Transit Centre) - LRT Extension RFD - 10 Highway 16 (Yellowhead Trail) 156 Street 50 Street upgrade to freeway RFD - 13 Highway 16 Anthony Henday Drive Highway 21 upgrade to 8 basic lanes Highway 216 / Anthony Henday Drive Campbell Road Highway 15 (Manning Drive) RFD - 17 upgrade to 6 basic lanes Highway 216 / Anthony Henday Drive 50 Street (south) Ray Gibbon Drive upgrade RFD - 19 Roadway to 8 basic lanes Highway 625 Nisku (9 Street) Beaumont (Range Road) 241 upgrade to 4-lane RFD - 27 expressway (signalized) RFD - 61 Highway 15 84 Street 119 Street upgrade to 6-lane expressway RFD - 62 Highway 16 Hwy 779 Anthony Henday Drive upgrade to 6-lane freeway RFD - 79 St. Albert Trail (North City Limit to Boudreau Rd) Widening/Intersection Upgrades

August 12, 2021Page | 7 12 of 23

Page 96 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Ready for Design - Medium Priorities Type Index# Project Transit RFD - 50 Capital Line (Clareview to NE Edmonton) - LRT Extension RFD - 1 Ray Gibbon Drive Anthony Henday Drive Giroux Road upgrade to 8 basic lanes Ray Gibbon Drive Giroux Road Highway 633 / Villenueve Road upgrade to 6 lanes RFD - 3 expressway RFD - 5 135 Street (Heritage Valley Trail) Anthony Henday Interchange Highway 15 Highway 830 Highway 45 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial, includes i/c RFD - 7 at Hwy 830 RFD - 8 Manning Drive 137 Avenue Anthony Henday Drive Upgrade to 6-lane arterial RFD - 11 Highway 16 (Yellowhead Trail) 50 Street Victoria Trail upgrade to 6 basic lanes RFD - 12 Highway 16 Cloverbar Road Highway 21 upgrade to 6 basic lanes RFD - 14 170 Street Grade Separation Highway 216 / Anthony Henday Drive Highway 14 to 50 Street (south) upgrade to RFD - 18 6 basic lanes RFD - 22 Highway 2 Highway 2A 50th Street (Leduc) upgrade to 8 basic lanes RFD - 26 Highway 60 Highway 19 North Saskatchewan River new re-aligned 4-lane freeway Whitemud Drive (Highway 628) 231 Street (Hillview Road) Lewis Estates Blvd / RFD - 29 Guardian Rd upgrade to 4-lane expressway Roadway RFD - 30 Highway 628 Highway 779 Highway 60 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial Highway 628 / Whitemud Drive Highway 60 Anthony Henday Drive upgrade to 6- RFD - 31 lane freeway 50 Street (Edmonton) 41 Avenue South Anthony Henday Drive upgrade to 6 basic RFD - 35 lanes RFD - 43 41 Ave S Terwillegar Drive extension Allard Way upgrade to 4-lane arterial 70km/h RFD - 44 41 Ave S 91 Street / Nisku Spine Road 17 Street new 4-lane expressway RFD - 45 91 Street (Edmonton) 41 Avenue South Ellerslie Road upgrade to 4 basic lanes RFD - 46 Flyover 50th Street in Edmonton RFD - 59 Vinca Bridge Refurbishment and Upgrade RFD - 60 NSR from Hwy 623 to Airport road (2 basic lanes) RFD - 68 Nisku Spine Road (25 Ave to TR510) Twinning RFD - 71 Whitemud Drive / Highway 628 (231 Street to Highway 60)13 Twinning RFD - 80 Flyover on Range Rd 231 between Hwy 16 and Twnshp Rd 534 RFD - 81 Highway 628 Anthony Henday Drive Highway 21 upgrade to 4-lane expressway

August 12, 2021 | 8

Page 13 of 23

Page 97 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Ready for Design - Lower Priorities Type Index# Project RFD - 4 Ray Gibbon Drive Highway 633 / Villenueve Road Highway 2 new 4-lane freeway RFD - 6 Highway 14 Highway 21 east boundary upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial Highway 16 Highway 43 Jennifer Heil Way (Spruce Grove) upgrade to freeway, RFD - 9 includes i/c at Hwy 43 Terwillegar Drive 41 Avenue South Rabbit Hill Road upgrade to 4-lane arterial RFD - 15 (frontage roads) RFD - 16 Terwillegar Drive Ellerslie Road Whitemud Drive upgrade to 6 basic lanes RFD - 20 Highway 21 south boundary Highway 625 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial Highway 2 Highway 642 (Morinville) north boundary upgrade to 4-lane rural RFD - 23 arterial RFD - 24 Highway 44 Highway 16 Highway 37 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial Highway 625 Beaumont (Range Road) 241 Highway 21 upgrade to 4-lane rural RFD - 28 arterial RFD - 32 Wye Road Clover Bar Road Highway 21 upgrade to 6-lane arterial Highway 643 Highway 28A Highway 38 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial with RFD - 33 realignment near Gibbons RFD - 34 50 Street (Edmonton) 41 Avenue South 22 Avenue upgrade to 4-lane arterial Highway 2A south boundary Highway 2A realignment upgrade to 4-lane arterial RFD - 36 with realignment RFD - 38 Manning Drive Fort Road 66 Street upgrade to 6 basic lanes Highway 28A Township Road 560 Highway 28 upgrade to 4-lane freeway with RFD - 40 Roadway realignment at Gibbons RFD - 42 107 Avenue (Edmonton) 170 Street Groat Road upgrade to 6-lane arterial RFD - 47 Highway 627 (Anthony Henday Dr. to 199 St) - new link RFD - 48 Highway 642 (Highway 2 to East Boundary Road) - intersection improvements RFD - 49 Heritage Valley Trail 41 Avenue South Ellerslie Road new 4-lane urban arterial RFD - 52 Nisku Spine Road Southfork Road Airport Road new 4-lane expressway 127 Street (St. Albert) Anthony Henday Drive Township Road 544 new 4-lane RFD - 55 arterial RFD - 57 Spruce Grove Regional Park and Ride RFD - 65 Highway 16 (Interchange at 830) RFD - 66 QE2 Highway/Ellerslie Rd. Interchange Upgrading RFD - 67 Highway 15 (Manning Dr.) near Meridian Street Interchange RFD - 69 Highway 16 (Highway 824 to Elk Island Park) Access management RFD - 70 Anthony Henday Drive (50 St. Northeast Overpass) Interchange RFD - 72 QE2 Highway/Highway 2A Interchange New Interchange RFD - 73 Anthony Henday Drive (Add 137 Ave Ramps) Interchange RFD - 74 Ray Gibbon Drive (Villeneuve Rd. to Highway 37) Extend-first 2 lanes RFD - 75 Anthony Henday Drive (109/111 Ave Overpass) Interchange RFD - 76 Ray Gibbon Drive (Highway 37 to Highway 2) Extend-first 2 lanes RFD - 77 Highway 623 C. W. Gaetz Road Nisku Spine Road upgrade to 4-lane arterial

August 12, 2021Page | 9 14 of 23

Page 98 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Ready for Design - Lower Priorities Type Index# Project 50 Avenue (Leduc) / Highway 39 74 Street Bridgeport Crossing / Alton Drive RFD - 78 upgrade to 6-lane arterial RFD - 82 Highway 643 (Highway 28A to Agrium) - Signals and Intersection Upgrades Highway 28 Highway 28A north boundary upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial with RFD - 83 realignment at north boundary

August 12, 2021 | 10

Page 15 of 23

Page 99 of 228 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Table 3 - Ready for Construction Priorities Type RFC# Project Top Priorities Highway 19 Range Road 261 Range Road 252A upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial RFC - 1 with realignment around airport third runway Highway 628 Highway 779 215 Street (Winterburn Road) upgrade to 2-lane rural Roadway RFC - 3 arterial 65 Avenue (Leduc) Grant MacEwan Boulevard to Highway 2 new 4-lane RFC - 9 expressway, Includes interchange at QE2 Medium Priorities Transit RFC - 11 SLRT-A Capital Line (Century Park to Ellerslie Road) - LRT Extension RFC - 2 Highway 60 Highway 16A Highway 16 upgrade to 4-lane expressway Ray Gibbon Drive Anthony Henday Drive Highway 633 / Villenueve Road upgrade RFC - 6 Roadway to 4 basic lanes RFC - 10 Nisku Spine Road TR510 to Airport Road 4-lane arterial 70 km/h RFC - 12 Twp Rd 510 (RR244 to 50 Street) - upgrade existing, excludes i/c at QE2 Lower Priorities RFC - 8 Highway 28A Highway 15 Highway 28 upgrade to 4-lane rural arterial Roadway RFC - 13 Highway 2 at Cardiff Rd Interchange

August 12, 2021 Page| 11 16 of 23

Page 100 of 228

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Appendix A – Project Grouping

Advance to Planning – Project listing breaks for grouping into Top, Medium and Lower priorities Advance to Planning 80.00

70.00

60.00

50.00 Top priorities (16 projects) 40.00

30.00 Medium priorities (20 projects) 20.00

10.00 Lower priorities (24 projects)

Page 17 of 23 0.00

Page 101 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 12

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Ready for Design – Project listing breaks for grouping into Top, Medium and Lower priorities Ready for Design 70.00

60.00

50.00 Top priorities (9 projects)

40.00 Medium priorities (26 projects) 30.00

20.00 Lower priorities (36 projects)

10.00

0.00

Page 18 of 23 Page 102 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 13

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Ready for Construction – Project listing breaks for grouping into Top, Medium and Lower priorities Ready for Construction 80.00 Top priorities (3 projects) 70.00 Medium priorities (5 projects)

60.00 Lower priorities (2 projects) 50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00

Page 19 of 23 Page 103 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 14

2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Appendix B – Project Maps

Figure 1 - Road Projects Page 20 of 23 Page 104 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 15

ATP-11 RFD-23

Road Projects RFD-82 RFD-33 Alexander First Nation RFD-48

RFD-40 RFD-83

RFD-7

RFC-8 ATP-26

RFD-76 ATP-15

RFD-4

RFD-61

RFD-3

RFD-74 RFD-55 ATP-82 ATP-12 ATP-3 ATP-19 ATP-10

RFD-24 RFD-79 ATP-23 RFD-18

RFC-6

RFD-1 ATP-27 ATP-11 ATP-32 RFD-8 ATP-69 RFD-11 RFD-10 RFD-13 ATP-9 RFD-69 RFD-9 RFD-62 RFD-38 ATP-6

RFC-2

ATP-33 RFD-42 RFD-12

ATP-4

ATP-75 RFD-77 A 628-ARFD-3RFC-3 ATP-1 RFD-32 ATP-22 Paul First RFD-29 ATP-35 Nation RFD-30 RFD-71 RFD-31 RFD-81628-D Enoch First RFD-17 Nation ATP-24

ATP-76 RFD-47 RFD-16 RFD-19

RFD-49

ATP-8 RFD-6 RFD-35

RFD-43 RFD-34 RFD-44 RFD-15 RFD-45ATP-34

ATP-71 RFC-12 ATP-14 RFD-68

RFD-27 RFD-28

RFD-26 RFC-1 RFC-10

RFD-20 RFD-60

ATP-7 ATP-81 RFD-52

ATP-16 RFC-9 RFD-22 RFD-78 ATP-21

Road Projects Previously Identiﬁed Regional Road Network

ATP-77 Expressway or Freeway ATP-20

New Standalone Intersection Improvements Arterial RFD-36 Road Rail Grade Separation Collector Intersection/Interchange Improvements Local/Street

Metropolitan Structure ATP-13

Page 21 of 23 EMRB Boundary ¯ EMRB Municipalities First Nations Reserves

Page 105 of 228 0 5 10 20 Km 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

Figure 2 - Transit Projects

Page 22 of 23 Page 106 of 228

August 12, 2021 | 17 Transit Projects

Alexander First Nation

St. Albert Sturgeon Valley NE Edmonton

RFD-53

RFD-50 Bremner

Spruce Grove ATP-52 Stony Plain Paul First S Nation Enoch First Nation

ATP-51 Windermere Ellerslie

RFC-11

Beaumont

ATP-53

Leduc

Future Transit Projects Regional Road Network Dedicated Rapid Transit Expressway or Freeway Arterial Park and Ride Collector Local/Street LRT Metropolitan Structure Existing Page 23 of ¯ In Constuction EMRB Boundary EMRB Municipalities First Nations Reserves Page 107 of 228 0 5 10 20 Km Item 6.1

Request for Decision

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Subject: Final Regional Agriculture Master Plan

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the Final Regional Agriculture Master Plan.

Background: • The development of a Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP) is a requirement identified in policy (6.1.1a and b) in the Agriculture policy area of the growth plan and under Implementation Section 5.4 Future Studies and Initiatives. • On February 8, 2018, the EMRB approved the Terms of Reference for RAMP and a Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Tool (LESA) to assess, qualify and quantify prime agricultural lands in order to identify a supply of prime agricultural lands to conserve for agricultural uses. • The development of RAMP is intended to provide further policy direction for the three objectives in the growth plan. o 6.1 Identify and conserve an adequate supply of prime agricultural lands to provide a secure local food source for future generations; o 6.2 Minimize the fragmentation and conversion of prime agricultural lands for non- agricultural uses; and o 6.3 Promote the diversification and value-added agriculture production and plan infrastructure to support the agricultural sector and regional food system. • In July 2018, the EMRB received the RAMP Situation Analysis for information. The Situation Analysis presented a fact based overview of the agriculture and agri-foods sector and the changes that have occurred over the past 15 years in the Region. The report highlighted the challenges, opportunities and future trends facing the sector and provided some preliminary directions to inform RAMP. • In December 2019, the EMRB received a presentation on the Economic Imperative for agriculture and agri-foods. This presentation highlighted the economic potential for agriculture and value-added agri- foods sector and emphasized the need to establish the policy framework to ensure the future growth highlighting - growth in GDP, Jobs and Innovation. • RAMP assumes all lands have value for agriculture and is the first regional plan that gives policy direction for identifying and conserving lands for agricultural use for as long as possible.

Page 1 of 81

Page 108 of 228 • Work throughout 2020 / 2021focused on the development of the RAMP framework and includes the identification of four geographic policy areas, policy definitions, and tailored policies, an implementation plan, and monitoring and reporting. o Policy Area 1: Rural Agriculture o Policy Area 2: Agriculture Co-exists with other Land Uses o Policy Area 3: Agriculture in Future Transition Lands o Policy Area 4: Urban Agriculture • RAMP framework and direction has been informed by feedback received through two rounds of stakeholder engagement. The first round of feedback was summarized in a "what we heard" report published in December 2020 and received by the EMRB for information in February 2021. The second "what we heard" report was received by the Task Force on June 30th, 2021 to inform finalizing RAMP. • On June 30th, 2021, the RAMP Task Force received the final report for the development of the EMR Land Evaluation and Site Assessment tool, which was unanimously approved. The results of LESA would then be incorporated into RAMP and inform the identification of prime agricultural lands in the Region and form the basis of an update to Schedule 11 in the growth plan.

Status Update:

• The final RAMP was unanimously endorsed by the RAMP Task Force on July 15th, 2021 and recommended to the EMRB for approval.

Next Steps:

• The RAMP will be presented to the Board on August 12, 2021 for their approval. Once approved RAMP will be sent to the province to approve as an amendment to the growth plan.

Attachments: Final Regional Agriculture Master Plan

Page 2 of 81

Page 109 of 228 AGRICULTURE Our Legacy & Our Future

Regional Agriculture Master Plan

Page 3 of 81 POLICY FRAMEWORK • POLICY DEFINITIONS • POLICIES Page 110 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 01

AUGUST 2021 “Think broadly about what agriculture is. Especially in Alberta, agriculture is a well-established piece of the province, and we want to continue that, but don’t get too narrowly focused on what agriculture is at the moment. Think about the entire spectrum of agriculture, the really small stuff and the new things that haven’t been considered yet. A broad-spectrum lens that opens us up to new opportunities in the future. Agriculture isn’t just growing things, it’s also the value-added piece. We don’t know what agriculture will look like in 20 years, or even 200 years. It’s nice to think this will last for 200 years, but this document will set up whatever comes next.

RAMP ENGAGEMENT STAKEHOLDER December 2020 Page 4 of 81 Page 111 of 228 ” REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 02 Treaty 6 Acknowledgement Message from Board Chair We respectfully acknowledge that the Edmonton Metropolitan Region is located Agriculture has always been a defining driver for the Edmonton on Treaty 6 territory, as well as the home Metropolitan Region. The fertile soils that growers, producers, and of members of the Métis Nation of ultimately everyone in the Region rely on, continue to support an Alberta (Zone 4 and Zone 2), Inuit, and agriculture industry that was, is, and will always be vital to the growth non-status Indigenous peoples sharing and development of the regional economy. The Regional Agriculture this land. Master Plan (RAMP) is important because it elevates agriculture as a core policy area and fulfills the commitment that the EMRB This land – ᒥᐢᑿᒌᐚᐢᑲᐦᐃᑲᐣ, made in Re-imagine. Plan. Build. – our 30-year vision for regional amiskwacîwâskahikan – is a traditional growth. Agriculture is the most extensive land use in the Region and meeting ground, gathering place, and the agriculture industry is key to the regional economy. Moreover, travelling route of the Nêhiyawak (Cree), because the EMRB’s member municipalities include four diverse Anishinaabe (Saulteaux), Niitsitapi and vibrant counties, in addition to the three towns and six cities, it (Blackfoot), Dene, and Nakota Sioux; is crucial for the character and economic pillars of the Region’s rural whose unique histories, languages, areas to be strongly represented within the EMRB’s overall policy and cultures continue to enrich our framework. Working together, I am confident that RAMP will position shared heritage. our 13 municipalities for a more connected and prosperous future.

We recognize the long history and contributions of Indigenous peoples who have cared for this land from time immemorial to the present. We share in the spirit of truth and reconciliation as we work collaboratively to steward the land WILLIAM CHOY we share as we plan for a future for all citizens, and we acknowledge that we are Mayor of Stony Plain, EMRB Board Chair all Treaty People, bound to one another by the spirit and intent of Treaty “as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the river flows.” Page 5 of 81 Page 112 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 03 As a core policy area in the growth plan, RAMP is the first major policy initiative of decisions on land use in the Region now the EMRB that involved a robust public need to consider impacts on agricultural engagement process. Task Force members land. RAMP provides certainty to producers, realize that RAMP is a stronger document protecting valuable, productive agricultural because of the diverse, thoughtful and lands throughout the Region, and secures constructive feedback received from all these lands to ensure a local food source stakeholders, and in particular, the input for future generations. As an agricultural received from the agricultural producers and region, RAMP is necessary to support the rural landowners. Message from the agriculture industry and to enable it to continue to grow and become an ever-more I would like to thank members of the Task RAMP Chair important part of our regional economy. Force, working group, stakeholders, and EMRB Administration for their collaborative On behalf of the Task Force, I am pleased RAMP also recognizes that the greater goal expertise, vision, and leadership in building to present the Regional Agriculture Master is to take advantage of the Region’s potential a truly regional plan for the future of Plan. Our work on RAMP began in 2018 to become a major producer of food and agriculture in the Region. and is the first agricultural plan of its kind in other agricultural products, and to support the prairie provinces. RAMP is a significant the agri-food sector so that it may reach policy achievement for the Region and its full economic potential. RAMP is about the 13 member municipalities of the creating the conditions for a sustainable EMRB. Through regional collaboration, and prosperous agricultural sector, because we have created a policy framework that agriculture is economic development. identifies prime agricultural land and the By successfully implementing RAMP, we ROD SHAIGEC importance of the value-added sector to the have the potential to increase the Region’s Mayor of Parkland County, RAMP Chair agriculture industry. economic prosperity by an estimated $10 billion, supporting vibrant communities and economies. Page 6 of 81 Page 113 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 04 Contents How to read and interpret this document �� 07

Section 1.0 Background———————————————————————————————————— 09

Section 1.1 Approach————————————————————————————————————— 12

Section 1.2 RAMP Task Force ————————————————————————————————— 14

Section 1.3 Vision and Guiding Principles �� 15

Section 1.4 Characteristics of Agriculture in the Region �� 16

Section 1.5 Economic Potential of Agriculture in the Region �� 18

Section 1.6 Assumptions ——————————————————————————————————— 20

Section 2.0 Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) �� 22

Section 3.0 RAMP Framework————————————————————————————————— 26

Section 3.1 Policy Areas———————————————————————————————————— 27

Section 3.2 Policy Definitions—————————————————————————————————— 30

Section 4.0 RAMP Policies——————————————————————————————————— 35

Section 4.1 Policy Area 1 – Rural Agriculture �� 36

Section 4.2 Policy Area 2 – Agriculture Co-exists with Other Land Uses 40

Section 4.3 Policy Area 3 – Agriculture in Future Transition Lands �� 43

Section 4.4 Policy Area 4 – Urban Agriculture �� 46

Section 5.0 Implementation—————————————————————————————————— 49

Section 6.0 Monitoring and Reporting �� 53

Section 7.0 Advocacy————————————————————————————————————— 54

Section 8.0 Recommendations to the Province �� 55 Page 7 of 81

Page 114 of 228 Section 9.0 Roles and Responsibilities �� 56

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 05 Appendices

Appendix A Urban Agriculture Plan Guidelines �� 58

Appendix B RAMP Monitoring and Reporting – Terms of Reference �� 59

Appendix C Other Considerations �� 61

Appendix D Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Technical Analysis �� 64

Appendix E RAMP Regional Context Statement Template �� 65

Appendix F Contributors———————————————————————————————————— 76

List of Schedules & Tables

Schedule A Prime Agricultural Lands as determined by LESA Model �� 23

Table A Policy Area 1 Prime Agricultural Land Parcel Size Summary �� 24

Table B Percentage of Total Prime Agricultural Land in Policy Area 1 �� 25

Chart A Percentage of Prime Agricultural Lands by Policy Area �� 25

Schedule B RAMP Agriculture Policy Areas———————————————————————————— 28

Table C Land Area by Policy Area—————————————————————————————— 29

Chart B Policy Definition Structure ————————————————————————————— 31

Schedule C Policy Area 1 – Rural Agriculture ——————————————————————————— 37

Schedule D Policy Area 2 – Agriculture Co-exists with Other Land Uses �� 41

Schedule E Policy Area 3 – Agriculture in Future Transition Lands �� 44

Schedule F Policy Area 4 – Urban Agriculture——————————————————————————— 47 Page 8 of 81

Page 115 of 228 Schedule G LESA – Identified Prime Agricultural Lands and RAMP Policy Areas �� 50

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 06 How to Read and Interpret This Document

The contents of this Plan include a number The policies apply to the geographical area The RAMP framework establishes four of components that together represent the within the policy areas as identified. If no discrete geographic policy areas to identify framework of the first Regional Agriculture policy area is specified, the policies apply the agricultural lands in the Region. RAMP Master Plan (RAMP) for the Edmonton in all policy areas. policy areas consider existing land uses Metropolitan Region (EMR). The RAMP in the Region and the three policy tiers framework includes policy area maps, The starting point for RAMP is the Edmonton in the growth plan – metropolitan core, policy definitions, policy area policies, Metropolitan Region Growth Plan metropolitan area and the rural area. implementation and monitoring Re-Imagine. Plan. Build. approved by the and reporting. Province of Alberta in October 2017. RAMP Policy Area 1- Rural Agriculture is generally supports the implementation of the growth defined as the lands within the rural area The policy area maps, policy definitions, and plan and responds to the three objectives policy tier in the growth plan and may include policy area policies must be read together identified in Section 6 (Agriculture) in the some areas within the metropolitan area tier. to ensure context and understanding as an growth plan with more detailed policies to integrated policy framework. address the objectives. This work is the Policy Area 2- Agriculture Co-exists with beginning with further work contemplated Other Land Uses is defined based on The policies in RAMP apply to all lands in the as part of the implementation of RAMP existing land use designations and zoning EMR, except for those lands under provincial and scoping of the other considerations (within existing statutory plans), includes and federal jurisdiction, such as provincial identified in an appendix in this document. country residential areas, major employment parks, airports, military bases and First areas, and resource extraction areas, Nations Reserves. RAMP establishes a policy framework based as examples. on identified criteria, to inform land use Terms or phrases in italics throughout decisions. Where RAMP policies contain Policy Area 3 - Agriculture in Future the document are defined under policy a list of sub-policies, all sub-policies shall Transition Lands is defined based on definitions, or in the glossary of the regional be required to be met in their entirety, approved statutory plans of member growth plan Reimagine. Plan. Build. unless specified otherwise. municipalities as of August 2021 and may include lands designated for future growth The introductions to the policy area policies in the next 25 – 50 years. provide context and background and are intended to assist in understanding the Policy Area 4 - Urban Agriculture is defined intent of the policies and are not policy. as the built-up urban area within member municipalities as of August 2021. Page 9 of 81 Page 116 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 07 HOW TO READ AND INTERPRET THIS DOCUMENT

The applicable areas of policy in All instances of the word “must”, “shall”, RAMP policy areas may include both prime RAMP include. or “will” are elements municipalities must agricultural lands and areas identified as all conform with through their statutory plans other agriculture lands. Section 2 - Land Evaluation and Site to fully implement RAMP. All instances Assessment–Prime Agricultural of “should” or “encourage” are elements Urban municipalities generally include areas Land Map expressing recommendations. Use of inclusive of policy area 3 and policy area 4. the word “support” is not meant to be Section 3 - Policy Definitions The appendices are provided as tools to interpreted as providing financial support assist with implementing RAMP and provide on the part of the EMRB or member Section 4 - Policy Area Policies and Maps context to support further work. municipalities. Section 5 - Implementation The completion of the monitoring and The EMR Land Evaluation and Site reporting framework is recommended as the Section 6 - Monitoring and Reporting Assessment model (LESA) and resulting map first priority upon approval of RAMP identifies the prime agricultural lands in the by the EMRB. RAMP policies are supplemental to the Region and may include specialty agriculture agriculture policies in the growth plan and lands. The LESA map informs where policies Once RAMP is approved by the EMRB are intended to advance and support the regarding prime agriculture lands apply. and Province of Alberta, RAMP will come implementation of the agriculture Lands not identified as prime agricultural into effect and will be integrated into policy area. lands are defined as all other agricultural the growth plan. lands in RAMP. Policies in RAMP set the minimum requirements and member municipalities are RAMP maps are presented at a regional encouraged to exceed those requirements, scale. A more detailed understanding of wherever possible. a specific land area will require a review of municipal statutory plans and/or land use bylaws. Page 10 of 81 Page 117 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 08 SECTION 1.0

Agriculture is one of the six policy areas in the regional growth plan Re-imagine. Plan. Build. approved by the Province of Alberta in October 2017. The EMRB recognized the need to address increasing fragmentation and conversion of prime agricultural lands Why a Plan for Agriculture? Background to non-agricultural uses, which is eroding the economic potential of the sector. RAMP As the Region grows, rural area lands represents one of the most significant face unique challenges, particularly opportunities for growth planning in when it comes to the future growth and the Region. As the Region grows to an sustainability of the agricultural sector and estimated 2.2M citizens by 2044, a plan is rural communities. These growing pains are needed to balance the demands growth shared by many towns, cities and counties will place on land uses. A strong future for and were identified as important issues in agriculture starts with land, and the Region the growth plan. Agriculture is a significant is home to some of the most productive part of this Region’s cultural heritage and lands in the province. economic history and will continue to be important and essential to our future.

“…the EMRB is providing regional As our local and global populations grow, leadership and setting the there will be more demand for food, fibre groundwork for future collaboration. and fuel, which requires a secure supply of productive agricultural land for producers Regional growth includes a healthy and to attract foreign direct investment. and expanding agricultural sector The EMR has some of the richest soils and which depends on conserving a productive agricultural lands in the country. supply of prime agricultural land. Agriculture is the single largest land use in the Region, approximately 1.7 million acres, The sector contributes to economic and represents over 85% of the total land diversification within the Region base in this Region and over a 10- year and is an important component of period from 2002-2012, 38,250 hectares an integrated growth management of farmland in the Region were converted to non-agricultural uses – 60% of this loss strategy”. Reimagine. Plan. Build. being high quality farmland. Page 11 of 81 Page 118 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 09 SECTION 1.0 BACKGROUND

The agricultural sector in this Region has resource that is essential for the future of shown strength and resiliency due to the Region’s agriculture and food system. the dedication of farmers, ranchers, and Beyond agricultural production, agriculture We need to produce in the producers who have committed to making is increasingly recognized as a major “ their livelihood from the land, many for contributor to environmental well-being given several generations, shaping the present and its inherent ability to sequester carbon, protect next 40 years the equivalent future landscape of this Region. The future surface and ground water, protect biodiversity viability and sustainability of the sector also and mitigate the risks of climate change. of all food produced in the depends on access to water and predictable climate, access to global markets and fewer Development of RAMP could not come at last 10,000 years regulatory barriers for agricultural products a more important time in our history as the to meet local and global demand. global population grows and the demand for food increases, this Region is well positioned MURAD AL-KATIB Regional growth includes a healthy and to contribute to feeding the world. President and CEO, AGT Food expanding agricultural sector which depends and Ingredients on conserving prime agricultural land. As The Regional Growth Plan the second largest economic sector in the province after oil and gas, the agricultural Pursuant to Policy 6.1.1a., the growth plan sector is well positioned to contribute to the directs that the EMRB prepare a Regional provincial goals of economic diversification, Agriculture Master Plan to conserve growing GDP, creating jobs, and attracting and maintain a secure supply of prime investment. In fact, agriculture production agricultural lands with the aim to support the ” and food processing together generate over regional food system, diversify the agri-food $4.5 billion in direct annual revenues. production base, contribute to the growth of the value-added sector of the agri- There is an unprecedented opportunity economy and guide agriculture supportive for this Region to expand its focus on the infrastructure investment. opportunities both in urban and rural areas to produce food, fibre and fuel to meet the By 2044, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region needs of future generations and support is estimated to grow by over 1.0 million the growth and diversification of our residents reaching a population of 2.2 million

Page 12 of 81 provincial economy. Land is the foundation and grow by 750,000 jobs for a total of of all these activities - an irreplaceable 1.1 million jobs. Page 119 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 10 SECTION 1.0 BACKGROUND

The growth plan focuses on responsible the growth of agricultural and agri-foods growth and includes policies to direct sector. RAMP is meant to be inclusive and the future growth of municipalities in the requires a commitment from every member Region with an emphasis on compact municipality in the Region because all lands As a potential future net and contiguous growth, opportunities for have value for agriculture. “ infill development and making efficient producer of food, there is a use of infrastructure. The growth plan An outcome of RAMP is to create more also supports the build out of existing certainty for producers and raise the need to ensure that this Region employment areas and country residential awareness and understanding among areas. Implementing the policies in the citizens and decision makers of the value of is preserving and protecting not growth plan is estimated to conserve 250 agriculture and its importance to our global only agriculture but the ability quarter sections of agricultural land over economic competitiveness and prosperity. the long term as a result of growth being Agriculture and agri-foods sectors are to maintain agriculture as an accommodated by building up before out seen as key contributors to the regional and infilling existing lands designed and provincial plans for diversification, and economic driver within the for employment. economic recovery and growth and their value for environmental sustainability and Region. Humanity will always The growth plan also identifies the need for resilience, contributions to our culture and need food. Alberta can responsible growth throughout the Region heritage, social cohesion, and food security and recognizes the interconnectedness and sovereignty. Addressing the growth of produce food. between urban and rural communities. agriculture as the largest land use in the Historically, agriculture has not been Region will inform all other policy areas of the recognized for its economic, social and growth plan - Economic Competitiveness RAMP ENGAGEMENT STAKEHOLDER ecological value and for its contributions and Employment, Natural Living Systems, June 2021 in sustaining rural communities. RAMP Communities & Housing, Transportation provides an unprecedented opportunity to Systems, and the Integration of Land Use plan for agriculture at a regional level, as and Infrastructure. RAMP is the first ever plan opposed to planning around it. for agriculture, and once approved will be integrated into the regional growth plan, and The viability of the agricultural sector is will continue to be an important influence on critically important to the future prosperity ” decisions for how and where to grow.

Page 13 of 81 of the Region and depends on conserving a supply of prime agricultural lands to enable Page 120 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 11 SECTION 1.1

RAMP provides a framework and policies The results of the LESA tool provide a Approach to address the objectives for agriculture consistent framework for identifying those set out in the growth plan. These objectives lands within the Region to be designated as recognize all forms of agriculture are prime agricultural lands and the remaining critically important and focuses on lands as all other agricultural lands. The capitalizing on opportunities for agriculture regional map of these areas is intended and agri-foods. to replace Schedule 11 in the growth plan as directed by Policy 6.1.1.c which Objectives states “use Schedule 11 to identify prime 6.1 Identify and conserve an adequate agricultural lands until the land evaluation supply of prime agricultural lands to and site assessment tool is completed”. provide a secure local food source for This initial work on RAMP will provide future generations. further policy direction on the issue of 6.2 Minimize the fragmentation and fragmentation and conversion of prime conversion of prime agricultural lands for agricultural lands for non-agricultural uses non-agricultural uses. and will provide the foundation to advance the understanding of the agricultural 6.3 Promote diversification and value-added system in the Region, provide direction agriculture production and plan for infrastructure priorities and identify infrastructure to support the agricultural strategies to promote the diversification sector and regional food system. and value-added agricultural sector and regional food system. Pursuant to Policy 6.1.1, Prime agricultural lands shall be assessed to identify and conserve a supply of prime agricultural lands and will be pursued through the following measures. Policy 6.1.1.b. develop a Land Evaluation and Site Assessment tool (LESA) to assess land quality and contextual factors and

Page 14 of 81 identify and quantify a supply of prime agricultural lands. Page 121 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 12 SECTION 1.1 APPROACH

In developing the first ever RAMP, the EMRB Canada, and not well understood by decision Policies with teeth to protect has made it a significant priority to seek input makers and the public given its importance “ and advice from regional stakeholders on the to the future of the agricultural sector.1 farmland must be put in place framework and policies of RAMP through two while there’s still time. While rounds of stakeholder engagement including There are three First Nations in the EMR – several validation sessions. The intent was Alexander, Enoch and Paul as well as Metis there’s a “pause,” there’s a chance to hear from those who could be most Nation of Alberta and an Inuit community. All impacted by RAMP and included farmers, Indigenous Communities in the Region are to re-think what is expendable ranchers, producers, landowners and others important stakeholders with a long history and what is actually needed for working in the agriculture and agri-food with the land. Outreach to the Indigenous sector. Both rounds of engagement resulted Communities was initiated during the growth. There’s still an opportunity in further insights into the challenges, first round of stakeholder engagement opportunities and priorities for RAMP. and efforts are ongoing to build a long to protect what can never be standing relationship. Indigenous peoples Overall stakeholders expressed strong have valuable worldviews regarding the replaced. We should be long support for the objectives and geographic importance of protecting the natural past the time when rural areas approach for RAMP. Stakeholders also environment- land, water, air and all other supported conserving prime agricultural land natural resources for future generations, are simply seen as land banks for agricultural use. Several stakeholders and their views will be important to include noted in addition to conserving large in future work on RAMP and in the regional for nearby urban centers and contiguous lands in prime agricultural areas, growth plan. it was important to protect specialty and developers who like wide-open intensive crop areas, pastureland, and open Finally, agriculture plans and strategies farmland. spaces for wildlife. Many highlighted the completed by member municipalities, significance of the rich soils in this Region, particularly the City of Edmonton and the making it unique from anywhere else in counties of Leduc, Parkland, Strathcona and RAMP ENGAGEMENT Sturgeon were considered. STAKEHOLDER, December 2020

1 See What We Heard Report 1, December 2020 and What We Heard Report 2, June 2021, Page 15 of 81 for further insights from RAMP Stakeholder Page 122 of 228 Engagement. ” REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 13 SECTION 1.2

Work to develop RAMP began in February of Mayor Rod Shaigec RAMP Task 2018 when the EMRB approved the Project Parkland County, Chair Charter and appointed a seven-member Task Force to oversee its completion. Councillor Michael Walters Force Over time non-voting members were added City of Edmonton, Vice Chair to ensure appropriate ties to agriculture Mayor Tanni Doblanko priorities at the federal and provincial level as Leduc County well as regional economic development and investment attraction being led by Mayor Alanna Hnatiw Edmonton Global. Sturgeon County

Mayor Barry Turner Town of Morinville

Councillor Kathy Barnhart City of Beaumont

Councillor Paul Smith Strathcona County

Malcolm Bruce CEO, Edmonton Global (non-voting)

Karen Sundquist Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry, Government of Alberta (non-voting)

Candice Vanin Land Use Specialist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (non-voting) Page 16 of 81 Page 123 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 14 SECTION 1.3

Guiding Principles to support the Vision for RAMP:

1. Agriculture is a vital sector. It contributes to the economic, Agriculture is our legacy and our future. environmental and social wellbeing Vision and RAMP is a land use plan specifically for of the Region. Its long-term future agriculture and specific to the Edmonton requires a set of environmentally Metropolitan Region. RAMP is a future- sustainable land use, economic Guiding forward plan that recognizes the complexity development, infrastructure and of the sector and is intended to be a implementation policies and requires responsive and adaptable to the changes a holistic approach to stewardship Principles facing the agriculture and and governance. agri-foods sectors. 2. Agricultural land is a permanent The vision and the supporting guiding feature of the Region’s landscape and principles for RAMP recognize the important is a scarce and irreplaceable resource role agriculture and agri-foods plays in that must be protected. growing the economy, protecting the 3. A thriving agricultural economy environment and Region’s natural capital, requires strategic investment in sustaining rural communities and supporting both hard and soft infrastructure food sovereignty. RAMP is a plan that to develop entrepreneurship and builds on our strengths – rooted in heritage, provide leadership to foster a dynamic resilience, and innovation to enable future agricultural business culture. opportunities for a thriving agriculture and agri-food sector for the next 50-100 years. 4. Broad regional public support is critical. Agriculture will be embraced Vision for RAMP by the community through the understanding of the relationships A thriving, globally recognized with food, the economy, agriculture economy embraced and the environment. by the community and 5. Success requires a collaborative approach including all orders of characterized by: government, public and private → A secure agricultural land base agencies, and Non-Government Organizations (NGOs). EMRB should

Page 17 of 81 → Leadership in innovation be seen as a leader but cannot achieve

Page 124 of 228 → Environmental stewardship the vision alone.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 15 SECTION 1.4

Characteristics Productive soils The Edmonton Metropolitan Region is, in fact, the most productive of Agriculture agricultural region in Alberta. in the Region2

→ It is home to high quality black soils – 35% Conserving and of the top producing soils in Alberta are stewarding our found in the Region. → 69% of the Region is comprised of ‘prime’ prime agricultural agricultural soils (LSRS 2, 3)3. areas is critically → The Region boasts a favourable climate – some areas in the Region have not important experienced a crop failure in 100 years4. RAMP ENGAGEMENT 35% STAKEHOLDER December 2020

2 RAMP Situation Analysis July 2018 3 Land Suitability Rating System (LSRS) Classes 2, 3 and 4 is highly correlated to Canada Land Inventory (CLI) 1, 2 and 3. These land classes, often referred to as prime, provide farmers the greatest flexibility with respect to the choices of crop to be grown and resilience with respect to variable weather

Page 18 of 81 conditions. 4 RAMP Situation Analysis, July 2018, Comments received from individual Page 125 of 228 farmers during the consultation process.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 16 SECTION 1.4 Experienced, innovative and World leading research CHARACTERISTICS OF skilled workforce We are home to several world leading AGRICULTURE IN THE REGION The Region has a great number of institutions and special-purpose farmers who are rapidly expanding facilities established to support the their operations; food processors agriculture and food industry. These include: Strong agricultural sector who have developed successful businesses supplying customers → University of Alberta and the The Region is home to 4,655 farm both nationally and internationally; Edmonton Research Farm operations. These farms: and an emerging class of entrepreneurs who are developing → St. Albert Research Farm → generate 40% more revenue new food businesses and events. per acre than their counterparts → University of Alberta Botanical Garden in the rest of the province Vibrant food ($499 vs. $352 per acre), → Agri-Food Discovery Place processing sector → are smaller in size compared → Alberta Agriculture & Forestry with An estimated 25% of the province’s to the provincial average the Food Processing Development food and beverage processing (523 acres vs. 1,237 acres), Centre in Leduc industry is located in the Region. The → have rates of invested capital sector includes two major poultry → Crop Development Centre in per acre that are almost twice $499 $352 processors, several dairy processing northeast Edmonton the Alberta average ($5,581 vs. plants, a large oil seed crusher, a feed → NAIT and the Culinary Program $2,863 per acre). milling sector as well as numerous → Pioneer DuPont Seed Research specialty food and beverage Farm in Strathcona County REGION REST OF THE processing businesses which have PROVINCE grown to become major national and international players. This sector Existing critical infrastructure 5 generates an estimated $3.76 billion In addition, the Region has high in annual revenues and employs over quality supporting infrastructure Agriculture, food and bioeconomy can 6,000 people. equipped with the necessary facilities “ and logistics to ship fresh or frozen be a long term regional economic driver- food products to destinations agricultural land and processing facilities both nationally and internationally including superior roadways, should be prioritized. rail-lines, and the Edmonton International Airport. RAMP ENGAGEMENT STAKEHOLDER, December 2020

5 The economic multiplier (Alberta Treasury Board and Finance) for food and beverages Page 19 of 81 – direct, indirect and induced is 2.308. Thus, this revenue multiplies to $8.5 billion in Page 126 of 228 ” total economic impact. REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 17 SECTION 1.5

The characteristics of agriculture in the Total direct economic output from the Economic region illustrate the importance of agriculture agricultural sector in the Region has the and the agri-food sector to the regional potential to more than double in terms of economy. The EMRB has determined that GDP from a combined farm gate sales and Potential of the potential exists to grow the agri-food food and beverage of $11.42 billion in 2021 sector and increase its contribution to the to an estimated $27 billion by 2046.7 Agriculture regional economy.6 The EMRB Economic Imperative report 2021 in the Region identified the opportunity for the Region to $11.42B achieve significant growth in value-added production of agricultural products growing the size of the agri-food sector and the regional economy. The ratio of farm gate 2046 sales to value-added agricultural product $27B sales in the Region has historically been on a 1:1 basis. With a focus on investing in value-added production, the potential exists to increase the ratio of value-added production to 2:1 and even 3:1 for agricultural products.

6 Page 20 of 81 The EMR Economic Imperative for Agriculture, 2019 7

Page 127 of 228 The EMR Economic Imperative for Agriculture, 2019

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 18 SECTION 1.5 ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF AGRICULTURE IN THE REGION

The importance of agriculture in the Region, and the potential for growth, has been The global COVID-19 pandemic has also recognized by the province as being important sector to contribute to the economic highlighted the importance of food security recovery for the Region and the province. Minister Devin Dreeshen, and food sovereignty and the need to Alberta Agriculture & Forestry, affirms its importance. protect the local food supply chains. There is an opportunity for the Region to increase its internal food security and lessen its dependence on external supply chains through the work on RAMP. Agriculture’s potential is recognized as part of the Alberta Recovery Plan8 which includes increased “value-added processing capacity” in the Agriculture in Alberta will lead our economic recovery agriculture sector as a focus for economic in Alberta. Alberta’s farmers, ranchers and processors diversification and growth. There is also a growing recognition that are global leaders in innovation - making Alberta the this sector can be a major contributor to the environmental well-being of the Region best place in the world to invest. with its inherent ability to sequester carbon, contribute to the local water table through water filtration and flood protection and MINISTER DEVIN DREESHEN, foster biodiversity. Alberta Agriculture & Forestry The agricultural sector has always been an important part of the Alberta economy. Humanity will always need food. Alberta can produce food. As an important productive agricultural region in the province, the Region has an opportunity to make an existing regional economic strength even stronger. RAMP is a key step towards this promising future. Page 21 of 81 8

Page 128 of 228 Government of Alberta, 2020

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 19 SECTION 1.6

In preparing RAMP, a range of assumptions 6. A secure agricultural land base enables Assumptions were identified to guide and inform the agricultural producers to make long-term development of the policy framework. investment decisions related to their operations. 1. Agricultural land is a finite and irreplaceable resource. 7. A secure agricultural land base is one of three pillars in the agricultural system 2. Prime agricultural land is a key in the Region, the others being the component of the agricultural land agricultural producers and the products base and must be conserved for they produce, and the agri-food and future generations. value-added processing sectors that 3. All other agricultural lands in the process and distribute the products. Region are part of the agricultural 8. The agricultural system approach land base, have value for agriculture, will support a thriving agriculture and and must be managed responsibly to agri-food sector, based on all types and maintain their agricultural capacity. sizes of agriculture, and on agri-related 4. Where possible, agriculture development in appropriate locations must be given priority as a across the Region. predominant land use. 9. Agriculture changes constantly and will 5. Agricultural land is not uniform in continue to evolve over time. Therefore, quality. Any given quarter section the agricultural system is dynamic, and may have pockets of lower capability consideration must be given to both soil, as well as seasonal or permanent the current and future needs of the water bodies, wooded areas, or steep agriculture sector. slopes; land that may be of limited or no utility for agricultural purposes. (The land in question will likely have value from an ecological goods and services perspective). Page 22 of 81 Page 129 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 20 SECTION 1.6 ASSUMPTIONS

10. Land use policies in support of 12. RAMP is a land use policy document for 13. Agriculture is integrated within other agriculture must be outcome oriented, agricultural lands within the Edmonton EMRB Strategic Initiatives which setting the minimum requirements to be Metropolitan Region and acknowledges recognize the needs of agriculture and attained. (Municipalities are encouraged the role, authority and relationship agri-food sectors identifying essential to exceed the minimum requirements). of existing policy frameworks and infrastructure as part of planning for Land use policies must also be legislation. Examples include but are the Region. For example, the need for sufficiently flexible to reflect agriculture in not limited to: digital infrastructure in the rural area to all its diverse forms across the Region, as support the sector has been identified well as the specific context in each rural → Alberta Land Stewardship Act through a Regional Broadband Situation and urban municipality. and related Land Use Framework Analysis completed in 2020. The need Regional Plans 11. Development and subdivision for transportation connectivity - road, rail opportunities that support agriculture, → Agricultural Operation Practices and air to support day to day operations, agricultural producers and agri-food Act (AOPA), growth and diversification have been identified in the Integrated Regional producers in rural areas also support → Various environmental legislation such Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) and strengthen the rural way of life and as the Soil Conservation Act, Water approved by the EMRB in June 2021. The rural communities. Act, Environmental Protection and IRTMP also includes policies to further Enhancement Act, Wilderness Areas, limit fragmentation of agricultural lands Ecological Reserves, Natural Areas from infrastructure planning to minimizing and Heritage Rangelands Act, the the impact on agricultural operations. The Provincial Parks Act and Weed Act. importance of minimizing fragmentation on agricultural lands has also been taken into consideration as part of the transportation prioritization process. Page 23 of 81 Page 130 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 21 SECTION 2

Pursuant to Policy 6.1.1.b. the Edmonton There are two main components to a Land Metropolitan Region Growth Plan specifies LESA evaluation: the requirement to develop a land evaluation and site assessment tool (LESA) to assess 1. Land Evaluation (LE) measures the land quality and contextual factors, and land’s biophysical considerations Evaluation including soil, climate, and topography identify and quantify a supply of prime agricultural lands for conservation in the in relation to agricultural use. Region. The results of the LESA evaluation 2. Site Assessment (SA) measures other and Site will provide an essential foundational important geographic, economic and component of RAMP, in the identification social factors. of prime agricultural lands and support Assessment the growth plan guiding principle: LE and SA components are combined to Ensure the wise management of prime provide an overall LESA score for each agricultural resources. landscape unit evaluated. For a detailed (LESA) explanation of the LESA model development The development of the EMR LESA tool please see Appendix D. involved a rigorous, scientific process with Prime agricultural lands identified in Schedule input from local, regional, national and 11 of the growth plan is based solely on the international agricultural experts . The LESA provincial Land Suitability Rating System tool provides a consistent methodology to (LSRS) and included 1,949,110 acres identify prime agricultural lands and included identified as prime agricultural lands. The site specific validation of the final results. LESA model and evaluation provides a more precise delineation of prime agricultural lands and identifies a total of 359,506.54 hectares (888,360 acres) of land, 45% of the area identified in the growth plan.

Page 24 of 81 Page 131 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 22 Schedule A Prime Agricultural Lands as Determined by LESA Model

↑ N

0 10 20km

Legend

PRIME AGRICULTURAL LANDS ROADS Data Sources: Prime Agricultural Areas as identified by the LESA ● model under the parameters specified in the June 2021 LESA EMRB-MEMBER BOUNDARY — PRIMARY HIGHWAY Model Technical Report. Non-Study Area includes identified federal ● lands, non-EMRB member municipalities, and RAMP Policy Area

Page 25 of 81 WATERBODIES — SECONDARY HIGHWAY ● 4. Waterbodies are as identified by AGRASID 4.1 as a W3 large NON-STUDY AREA waterbody and are also excluded from the Study Area. Page 132 of 228 ●

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 23 SECTION 2 LAND EVALUATION AND SITE ASSESSMENT (LESA)

Schedule A identifies the prime agricultural The LESA validation process included a The summary and distribution of parcel size lands identified by the LESA evaluation review of identified priority agricultural within the prime agricultural areas identified that meets or exceed the threshold score areas in existing MDPs for each of the by the LESA model is an important element of 87.9 (or 58th percentile of LESA scores). counties, compared to the results of the of the agricultural land base. The following Lands with a score below the threshold are prime agricultural lands identified by LESA. tables provide further context of the parcel considered all other agricultural lands in Overall, there is a strong correlation with sizes in Policy Area 1 for each of the four RAMP. Prime agricultural lands identified by only a couple of minor exceptions. The counties in the Region. LESA may include specialty agriculture lands results of LESA are considered the minimum and areas of lower capability lands. thresholds for prime agriculture lands and municipalities may designate additional areas for conservation.

Table A Policy Area 1 Prime Parcel Size Sturgeon Leduc Parkland Strathcona Total 141,831 196,767 40,272 37,156 416,027 Agricultural Land Parcel 150+ Size Summary (57,397 ha) (79,629 ha) (16,298 ha) (15,037 ha) (168,360 ha) 42,407 59,733 18,394 15,488 136,021 80-150 (17,162 ha) (24,173 ha) (7,444 ha) (6,268 ha) (55,046 ha)

62,107 60,409 9,339 8,382 140,237 40-80 (25, 134 ha) (24, 447 ha) (3,779 ha) (3,392 ha) (56,752 ha)

8,655 12,034 3,631 4,293 28,613 0-40 (3,503 ha) (4,870 ha) (1,469 ha) (1,737 ha) (11,579 ha)

255,001 328,943 71,636 65,319 720,898 Total (103,195 ha) (133,119 ha) (28,990 ha) (26,434 ha) (291.737 ha) Page 26 of 81

*Note: Rounding may impact accuracy Page 133 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 24 SECTION 2 LAND EVALUATION AND SITE ASSESSMENT (LESA)

Table B Percentage of Total Prime Agricultural Land in Policy Area 1

Parcel Size Sturgeon Leduc Parkland Strathcona

150+ 48% 53% 43% 42%

80-150 14% 16% 20% 18%

40-80 21% 16% 10% 9%

0-40 3% 3% 4% 5% 6.5%

10% Chart A Percentage of Prime Agricultural Lands by Policy Area

Legend ● POLICY AREA 1 ● POLICY AREA 2 ● POLICY AREA 3 Page 27 of 81 83.5% Page 134 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 25 SECTION 3

The Policy Area Maps are not intended to create an agricultural boundary, but instead establishes unique agricultural areas that allow for tailored policies to support the growth and continuation of all forms of agriculture. In general, the policy area map RAMP recognizes agriculture as a significant approach is consistent with the policy area RAMP contributor to the Region’s past, present and approach in the regional growth plan. The future and its contribution to the economic, policy area map is conceptual and includes social, environmental, cultural and historical some geographic features and not all Framework fabric of the Region. RAMP acknowledges topographical features that currently exists the unique forms of agriculture that can on the ground. occur in all parts of the Region, because all lands have value for agriculture. The policy area approach is intended to be adaptable and responsive to the The RAMP policy framework is adaptable demands of future growth for both rural and responsive to future growth and is not and urban municipalities. The policy area intended to limit or interfere with existing map identifies specific lands in the Region, approval processes. It gives direction for based generally on existing and designated future growth to allow agricultural operations future land uses. The policy area maps are to exist and even co-exist within other land at a regional scale, and for a more detailed uses for as long as possible. The intent understanding of a specific land area will is to provide certainty for producers and require a review of municipal land use bylaws investors for the next 25-50 years. or a view of the lands using the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Geographic Information The RAMP Framework consists of three Services (EMRGIS). The RAMP policy areas interrelated components that need to be in Schedule A show the prime agricultural read together and form the basis of the lands and all other agricultural lands policy framework of RAMP. identified by the LESA evaluation.

→ Policy Area Maps The Policy Definitions are intended to provide consistency in the application → Policy Definitions and support the interpretation of the → RAMP Policies policy statements.

The RAMP Policies are tailored to specific policy areas and support the specific outcomes for each. Policy statements may Page 28 of 81 include policy definitions. Page 135 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 26 SECTION 3.1

The RAMP policy area map is the starting Policy Areas point for RAMP. Each policy area map delineates the area in which specific policies apply. The policies in RAMP apply to all lands in the EMR, except for those lands under provincial and federal jurisdiction, such as provincial parks, airports, military bases and First Nations Reserves. The policy area maps are presented at a regional scale and include some contextual land base features and may require further analysis using the EMRGIS or a review of municipal land use bylaws. Page 29 of 81 Page 136 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 27 Schedule B RAMP Agriculture Policy Areas

Legend Protected areas ● AREA 1 RURAL AGRICULTURE ● PROVINCIAL PARK ● AREA 2 AGRICULTURE NATURAL PARK CO-EXISTS WITH OTHER ● PROVINCIAL RECREATION AREA LAND USES ● ACTIVE COAL EXTRACTION AREA AREA 3 AGRICULTURE IN ● FUTURE TRANSITION LANDS SAND AND/OR GRAVEL DEPOSITS ● AREA 4 URBAN AGRICULTURE ● EMRB MEMBER Policy Tiers EMRB NON-MEMBER METROPOLITAN AREA ● URBAN SERVICE AREA ● ● METROPOLITAN CORE

0 5 10 20 30 40km ↑ N NOTE: This map is for illustration purposes only. Page 30 of 81 Page 137 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 28 SECTION 3.1 POLICY AREAS

Table C area includes a range of land uses including country residential, lakeshore residential, Land Area by Policy Area industrial sites and employment areas, and resource-based extraction areas for coal, The land area of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region is approximately 946,091 hectares or over sand and gravel. Land areas within this policy 2.3 million acres. The approximate size of each policy area is shown below: area may contain unique climate and soil conditions well suited for specialty crops. Percentage Policy Area 2 contains 10% of the prime Hectares Acres of Land Base agricultural lands in the Region. Policy Area 3 includes agricultural lands Policy Area 1 Rural Agriculture 605,152.76 1,495,362.73 64% generally within the metropolitan area Agriculture – Coexisting policy area of the growth plan and includes Policy Area 2 206,778.59 510,960.23 22% with Other Land Uses agricultural lands identified for future growth. These lands may be planned and are Agriculture in Future Policy Area 3 57,507.42 142,103.70 6% recognized within RAMP as lands approved Transition Lands within a statutory plan for future growth for the next 25- 50 years. Lands within this Policy Area 4 Urban Agriculture 76,751.92 189,410.73 8% policy area may contain unique climate and soil conditions and well suited for specialty Total 946,090.69 2,337,837.39 crops. Policy Area 3 contains 6.5% of the prime agricultural lands in the Region.

Policy Area 4 supports the emerging urban Policy Area 1 represents the largest policy conditions suited for specialty crops, a range agriculture sector and its potential for area and is closely aligned to the rural policy of intensive livestock operations and grazing, growth in the built-up urban areas within area tier in the growth plan and includes recreation areas and environmentally urban centers in the Region. This policy area some lands within the metropolitan tier. sensitive areas. Policy Area 1 contains 83.5% is included in all three tiers of the growth This land area is the priority focus area for of the prime agricultural lands in the Region. plan and may include cities, towns, growth RAMP based on existing land uses primarily hamlets and hamlets. for agriculture. This area generally contains Policy Area 2 is the second largest policy both large continuous tracts of land and area and includes lands which have specific Page 31 of 81 areas containing unique climate and soil land use designations and operate under

Page 138 of 228 existing planning approvals. This policy

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 29 SECTION 3.2

The policy definition structure is presented A primary focus of RAMP is on the Policy in this form to illustrate the mutually agricultural land base. RAMP includes beneficial relationship between agriculture, conceptual elements, like the policy areas, and value-added agriculture as part of the and specific elements, such as the policy Definitions agricultural system. definitions, to prescribe the types of agricultural uses in relation to the different The agriculture system is integrated types of agricultural land. and includes the agricultural land base, producers and the agriculture products they Prime agricultural lands have been identified produce, as well as the agri-food sector that across the Region and are required by processes, manufactures and distributes Objective 6.1 of the growth plan. All other agricultural products made up of physical agricultural areas are a designation under assets, services and infrastructure. RAMP to recognize the balance of the agricultural land base. Policy definitions are a core component of The chart on the next page shows the relationship of the the RAMP framework and are embedded definitions to the two different land segments and the relationship in policy statements in RAMP to support to each policy area. the consistent interpretation and application of policies. Page 32 of 81 Page 139 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 30 SECTION 3.2 POLICY DEFINITIONS

Chart B Policy Definition Structure

Agricultural System

AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURE VALUE ADDED Land Base Resources Assets

Infrastructure POLICY AREA 1 POLICY AREA 2 POLICY AREA 3 POLICY AREA 4 Rural Agriculture Transition Urban Services Agriculture coexists within Lands Agriculture other Land Uses

PRIME ALL OTHER AG AREA AG AREA

AG USES AG RELATED NON AG USES AG USES AG RELATED NON AG USES USES USES

ON FARM ON FARM DIVERSIFIED DIVERSIFIED Page 33 of 81 Page 140 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 31 SECTION 3.2 POLICY DEFINITIONS

The following policy definitions are Agriculture Land Evaluation listed to align with the policy definition The growing, raising, managing and/or sale of and Site Assessment tool (LESA) structure shown on the previous page. livestock, crops, horticulture and agriculture The policy definitions are ordered An analytical tool to evaluate land related products or services including food, to begin with the most general and capability land and inform the identification feed, fibre, energy and other complementary foundational terms and progress to more of lands for conservation. LESA includes value-added activities. specific uses or terms. two components: The visuals accompanying the policy definitions are included Agri-food 1. Land Evaluation (LE) measures the for illustrative purposes only and intended to provide visual land’s biophysical considerations; and assistance in showcasing the differences between the All aspects related to the production, different types of activities that may be associated with sale, and distribution of agricultural food 2. Site Assessment (SA) measures other the uses defined. including a system of producers, businesses, important geographic, economic and suppliers, transporters, retailers, social factors. and consumers. Agricultural System Prime Agricultural Areas Agricultural Land A group of inter-connected elements An area where prime agricultural lands that collectively create a viable and vital Land that is or can be used for agriculture. predominate and may include lands agricultural sector. The system has three considered as all other agricultural components; a) an agricultural land base Prime Agricultural Land lands if they are contiguous to prime comprised of prime agricultural areas and Agricultural lands identified through the agricultural lands. Prime agricultural areas all other agricultural areas that together EMR Land Evaluation Site Assessment tool will be delineated in detail by member constitute a continuous functional and (LESA) that meet or exceed the municipalities in municipal productive land base for agriculture, b) identified threshold. development plans. agricultural operations and practices producing food, feed, fibre, and energy Specialty Agriculture Land products, and c) an agriculture and Provides optimum conditions for agricultural agri-food network that includes production due to unique factors including Infrastructure, services, and assets but not limited to soils, water supply, and important to the viability of agriculture climatic conditions. Specialty agriculture and the agri-food sector. land may be located in prime agricultural

Page 34 of 81 areas and in all other agricultural areas. Page 141 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 32 SECTION 3.2 POLICY DEFINITIONS

All Other Agricultural Areas Non-agricultural Uses Agricultural lands outside of Land uses other than agricultural uses, prime agricultural areas. agriculture-related uses or on-farm diversified uses. Agricultural Uses Land uses directly associated with Agri-Tourism Uses agriculture and includes buildings and Farm related tourism uses, including limited structures accessory to and supportive accommodation, direct-to-consumer of the activities. sales, agricultural education, recreation and activities that involve observation and participation in the farming operations. Agriculture-related Uses Are uses directly related to agriculture, primarily support agriculture, benefit from Value Added Agriculture being in close proximity to agriculture The addition of a process or service to an and provide direct products and/or agricultural raw material being produced by services to agriculture. the (farmer) producer. This may include some form of processing (such as milling, drying, cleaning, sorting, slaughtering, distilling, On-farm Diversified Uses refining, or direct marketing through farm Are secondary uses and limited in area to the gate sales, farmers’ markets or principal agricultural use and are compatible direct distribution). with the principal agricultural use and agricultural uses in the adjacent area. On-farm diversified uses may include but are not limited to home occupations, agri-tourism uses, and uses that produce value-added agricultural products. Page 35 of 81 Page 142 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 33 SECTION 3.2 POLICY DEFINITIONS

Cluster Site Generally Accepted Agricultural Practice An area or node identified in the growth plan for growth such as a A practice that is conducted in a manner consistent with appropriate major, planned or local employment area, a rural or urban centre, and accepted customs and standards as established and followed growth hamlet or hamlet. A cluster site may also include a local by similar agricultural operations under similar circumstances, and agricultural services area designated under an area structure plan, or without restricting the generality of the foregoing includes the use of other existing areas with appropriate designation and/or districting. innovative technology used with advanced management practices.

Development Infrastructure Means the same as Section 616 (b) of the Municipal Government Act Infrastructure provides services related to, and including but not RSA 2000 M-26, as amended. limited to, sewage, water, irrigation, storm water management, waste management, electricity (generation, transmission, and distribution), Ecological Goods and Services communications/telecommunications, broadband, transit and Ecological goods and services (EG&S) are the environmental benefits transportation modes (including road, rail, air, and airports), oil and resulting from physical, chemical and biological functions of healthy gas pipelines and associated facilities. ecosystems and include market goods produced from ecosystems (such as food, fibre, fuel, fresh water, genetic resources, etc.), the Natural Capital benefits from ecosystem processes, (ex: nutrient cycling, climate The land and water resources that anchor our quality of life and regulation, water purification, waste treatment, pollination, etc.) and support economic activity including agriculture, forestry, recreation, non-material benefits (ex: aesthetic values, recreation, etc.). tourism, and energy generation. It also includes resources – minerals, timber, oil and gas as well as the ecosystems – grasslands, wetlands, Farmstead rivers and forests – that produce valuable ecological Existing development, including a habitable dwelling, accessory goods and services. buildings, and structures located in a rural area. Urban Agriculture Is the growing, processing, and distribution of food and other products through intensive plant cultivation and animal husbandry in and around cities.9 9 Bailkey and Nasr. 2000. From Brownfields to Greenfields: Producing Food Page 36 of 81 in North American Cities. Community Food Security News. Fall 1999/Winter

Page 143 of 228 2000:6

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 34 SECTION 4.0

The work of RAMP has elevated the An example of this is the subdivision RAMP important role of agriculture in enabling policy criteria in Policy Area 1. In RAMP, resilience, sustainability, mitigating the subdivision policy is expressed by a number effects of climate change, economic of criteria designed to meet the outcomes Policies competitiveness, food security and of Policy Area 1. sovereignty, and quality of life for all residents of the Region and should have This is in contrast to subdivision policy at greater visibility and recognition in the the municipal level that is often expressed growth plan. in numeric terms, i.e., the number of subdivisions allowed per quarter section. Policy statements are identified for each This approach was considered more policy area and provide direction to EMRB appropriate for RAMP as it would enable member municipalities consistent with the regional consistency for considering outcomes for each policy area specific planning approvals across the four to agriculture. The policy statements are counties while allowing for some flexibility criteria-based and can include terms in implementation. Most importantly, included in the policy definitions and a criteria-based approach is also seen as correspond to the specific geographic an effective approach to limit the cumulative areas on the policy area map. impacts of subdivisions and minimize the impacts on existing agricultural operations in prime agricultural areas. Page 37 of 81 Page 144 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 35 SECTION 4.1

Policy Area 1 Introduction Policy Area 1 is key to the The first policy in this section establishes success of RAMP. agriculture as the priority land use in Policy Rural Area 1. This means that Policy Area 1 Policy Area 1 is the largest of the four policy enables agriculture and that the remaining areas, accounting for approximately 63% of policies are supportive of and “in service” Agriculture the regional land base. Policy Area 1 includes to agriculture and agricultural land uses much of the best agricultural land in the throughout the policy area. Conversely, the Region, other agricultural lands of varying extent to which agricultural lands may be capabilities, and the majority of the intact used for non-agricultural land uses is to contiguous tracts of agricultural land that be minimized. are essential for the future of agriculture in the Region. In addition to the recognizing prime agricultural lands in the growth plan, Policy Area 1 also includes a wide range RAMP also recognizes those agricultural of diverse and innovative agricultural lands remaining in Policy Area 1 as all operations of varying sizes and types. The other agricultural areas. This effectively three objectives of Section 6 of the growth establishes two distinct areas of plan, as well as the RAMP vision and guiding agricultural land throughout Policy Area 1 principles, can be most fully realized within as foundational to the criteria-based policy Policy Area 1. approach in RAMP. Page 38 of 81 Page 145 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 36 Schedule C Policy Area 1 – Rural Agriculture

Legend Protected areas ● AREA 1 RURAL AGRICULTURE ● PROVINCIAL PARK ● EMRB MEMBER ● NATURAL PARK ● EMRB NON-MEMBER ● PROVINCIAL RECREATION AREA URBAN SERVICE AREA ACTIVE COAL EXTRACTION AREA SAND AND/OR GRAVEL DEPOSITS Policy Tiers ● METROPOLITAN AREA ● METROPOLITAN CORE

↑ N 0 5 10 20 30 40km

NOTE: This map is for illustration purposes only. Page 39 of 81 Page 146 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 37 SECTION 4.1 POLICY AREA 1 – RURAL AGRICULTURE

Goal 3. Agricultural uses that follow generally 9. Notwithstanding Policy 8, agriculture- accepted agricultural practices must related uses and value-added agriculture A wide range of agricultural enterprises be able to operate in suitable locations uses must not hinder agricultural and types of agricultural production are without being unduly encumbered operations in the surrounding area. the central component in an agricultural or hindered by non-agricultural system that includes a secure land based, 10. Agriculture-related uses and value-added development, or by adjacent land uses in and a network of infrastructure, services and agriculture uses should be directed to neighbouring Policy Areas. communities that support agriculture and lower capability agricultural lands when agri-food sector. possible. Designation of Agricultural Areas 11. Development of agriculture-related uses Objectives 4. Prime agricultural lands will be conserved and value-added agriculture uses should in prime agricultural areas to provide a → That agriculture is the priority land use minimize the amount of agricultural land secure, long-term local food source for and regional and municipal policies taken out of production. future generations. support agriculture and the related 12. Consideration should be given to agricultural system. 5. Prime agricultural areas and all other directing agriculture-related, and agriculture areas will be informed by the → Prime agricultural lands are to be value-added agricultural uses to cluster outcomes of the Land Evaluation and Site conserved by limiting their fragmentation sites. Assessment (LESA) tool and designated and conversion through subdivision in statutory plans. to non-agricultural uses. Direct similar Non-Agricultural Land Uses agriculture uses to cluster sites. 6. Specialty agricultural land may be 13. Non-agricultural uses are discouraged in identified in either prime agricultural → A full range of agricultural uses takes place prime agricultural areas. areas or in all other agricultural areas. at present and in the future by planning 14. Non-agricultural uses may be considered through an agricultural system approach. 7. Two or more municipalities that share a in all other agricultural areas and should prime agricultural area(s) must coordinate be minimized to maintain agriculture as Policies the designation of the area to recognize the priority land use pursuant to Policy 1. the geographic continuity. 1. Agriculture is the priority land use in 15. Consideration should be given to Policy Area 1. Agricultural Land Uses directing non-agricultural uses to lower 2. Policies must be included in statutory capability land, where possible or to 8. Agricultural uses, agriculture-related plans to enable the continuation, cluster sites. uses, value-added agriculture uses, and development, and expansion of all Page 40 of 81 on-farm diversified uses are supported types, sizes and intensities of agriculture

Page 147 of 228 throughout Policy Area 1. throughout Policy Area 1.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 38 SECTION 4.1 POLICY AREA 1 RURAL AGRICULTURE

16. In prime agricultural areas, development of Policy 18 below, refers to the types of h. Subdivision for non-agricultural in-situ, resource-based economic assets subdivisions that can be considered in prime uses may be considered subject such as coal, sand and/or gravel, marl, and agricultural and all other agricultural areas. Policy to Policy 15. peat may be considered. Reclamation of 18 does not prescribe or imply density of parcels Depending on the type of subdivision, lands after resource-based activities must per quarter section. the following criteria apply: be to a soil rating equivalent to or higher 18. Subdivision Policy Criteria: than its original state. 19. Subdivision of agricultural land 17. In prime agricultural areas, other non- Prime agricultural areas should result in parcels sized agricultural uses may only be considered, a. Subdivision of a residential parcel for an appropriately for the type of preferably on lower capability land if it can existing farmstead should be considered. agriculture use(s) common in be demonstrated that other locations in all the area and sufficiently large to other agricultural areas or at cluster sites b. Subdivision of land for agriculture, maintain flexibility for future are not feasible. An Agricultural Impact agriculture-related, and value-added changes in the type or size of Assessment is required to confirm the agriculture uses may be considered. agricultural operations. proposed use will not hinder the agricultural c. Subdivision for a new residential parcel from 20. Subdivision for any purpose should operations in the surrounding area. a quarter section with no existing residential minimize the amount of agricultural use may be considered subject to Policy 15. Subdivision of Agricultural Land land taken out of production and d. Subdivision for non-agricultural uses is must not hinder the operation of Objective 6.2 of the growth plan – minimize discouraged and may only be considered surrounding agricultural land uses. the fragmentation and conversion of prime subject to Policies 15 and 17. agricultural land for non-agricultural uses 21. Consideration must be given to directing subdivision for agriculture- – is key to policies related to subdivision of All other agricultural areas agricultural land. related, value-added and non- e. Subdivision of a residential parcel for an agricultural land uses to cluster Policies in this section do not apply to country existing farmstead should be considered. sites and wherever possible to lower residential subdivision as defined in the f. Subdivision of land for agriculture, capability land. growth plan. Country residential policies are agriculture-related, and value-added addressed in section 4.4.4 of the growth plan. 22. Subdivision policies for prime agriculture uses may be considered. agricultural areas apply to specialty Policies for subdivision of agricultural land g. Subdivision for a new residential parcel agriculture land. are based on two distinctions: from a quarter section with no existing

Page 41 of 81 → Prime agricultural land, and all other residential use may be considered subject agricultural areas to Policy 15. Page 148 of 228 → Agricultural vs non-agricultural land uses

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 39 SECTION 4.2

Policy Area 2 Introduction A basic principle of RAMP is that agricultural lands have value for agriculture. RAMP also Agriculture Co-exists recognizes not all agricultural lands in the Region can be conserved for agriculture, and some agricultural lands may need to with Other Land Uses be fragmented and converted to other land uses. While agriculture remains an important land use for Policy Area 2, this policy area includes a range of designated land uses from country residential, lakeshore residential uses, industrial, to resource- based extraction uses such as coal, sand and gravel.

Lands in Policy Area 2 comprise 22% of the regional land base, with a significant portion designated as agriculture use. These lands are recognized in statutory plans, Land Use Bylaws and districting.

Although this policy area recognizes various planned land uses, this does not mean that all of the land designated is currently in use for the designated land use and that agricultural uses can exist in the interim. Page 42 of 81 Page 149 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 40 Schedule D Policy Area 2 – Agriculture Co-Exists with Other Land Uses

Legend Protected areas

AREA 2 AGRICULTURE PROVINCIAL PARK ● CO-EXISTS WITH OTHER ● NATURAL PARK LAND USES ● ● PROVINCIAL RECREATION AREA ● EMRB MEMBER ACTIVE COAL EXTRACTION AREA EMRB NON-MEMBER SAND AND/OR GRAVEL DEPOSITS ● URBAN SERVICE AREA Policy Tiers ● METROPOLITAN AREA ● METROPOLITAN CORE

↑ 0 5 10 20 30 40km N

NOTE: This map is for illustration purposes only. Page 43 of 81 Page 150 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 41 SECTION 4.2 POLICY AREA 2 AGRICULTURE CO-EXISTS WITH OTHER LAND USES

Goal Policies Cultivation of productive agricultural areas 1. Agricultural lands co-exist with existing designated land uses and shall remain in over the long-term on lands that co-exist agricultural use until required for conversion. with lands with other designated uses. 2. Reclaimed lands should be rehabilitated for agriculture uses. Where it may be more appropriate, reclaimed lands may be rehabilitated for environmental or ecological Objectives purposes, or for commercial, industrial, institutional or recreational uses that can → Acknowledge agriculture can coexist leverage existing infrastructure. with other designated land uses and will 3. When applications are made to re-designate and/or re-district non-agricultural lands, not constrain or restrict the designated consideration must be given to re-designating and/or re-districting the lands for priority use. agricultural uses. → Maximize the opportunities for the 4. Agriculture related and value-added agriculture uses may be considered but must continued presence of agriculture and not hinder the operation of agricultural uses in the surrounding area, nor hinder the related activities and, where possible, development of a designated non-agricultural use. encourage re-designation of lands back 5. Existing agricultural uses shall be given consideration to be kept as an existing land use to agriculture if they are not needed for within statutory plans. the priority land use. 6. Encourage public education about the daily and seasonal operational needs of → Ensure agricultural lands and associated agriculture and agricultural operators, fostering awareness, understanding and reducing landscapes are managed through potential land use conflicts. the application of best management practices specific to soil, water and the environment. Page 44 of 81 Page 151 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 42 SECTION 4.3

Policy Area 3 Introduction Lands in Policy Area 3 have been identified Most of the lands outside of the built-up for future growth throughout the Region with areas within urban centers in this policy area Agriculture much of this growth expected to come within are currently in agricultural use. Responsible the metropolitan area tier. growth, a core principle in the growth plan strongly encourage prime agricultural in Future The future growth recognized in Policy areas to be kept in production until they are Area 3 is based primarily on work by the required for growth and that new growth be cities, towns and specialized municipalities built to a higher density. RAMP is intended to determine their future municipal land to provide greater certainty for agricultural Transition requirements. When these lands will be producers in terms of knowing when their required depends on the rate of growth agricultural lands will be needed for growth. in the Region which, in turn, is dependent Lands on the growth of the regional, provincial and national economies. Growth in the Region will also be influenced by the policies of the growth plan. For example, the growth directions in the growth plan state “promote the diversification and growth of the agricultural sector including urban agriculture in an urban context”. Future growth is not expected to be consistent in all directions in the Region, nor is it expected that all of the lands identified in this policy area will be needed for growth by 2044. The growth plan directs more intensive and compact and contiguous urban growth to reduce the rate at which agricultural land is lost to development. Page 45 of 81 Page 152 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 43 Schedule E Policy Area 3 – Agriculture in Future Transition Lands

Legend Protected areas ● AREA 3 AGRICULTURE IN ● PROVINCIAL PARK FUTURE TRANSITION LANDS ● NATURAL PARK ● EMRB MEMBER ● PROVINCIAL RECREATION AREA ● EMRB NON-MEMBER ACTIVE COAL EXTRACTION AREA URBAN SERVICE AREA SAND AND/OR GRAVEL DEPOSITS Policy Tiers ● METROPOLITAN AREA ● METROPOLITAN CORE

↑ N 0 5 10 20 30 40km

NOTE: This map is for illustration purposes only. Page 46 of 81 Page 153 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 44 SECTION 4.3 POLICY AREA 3 AGRICULTURE IN FUTURE TRANSITION LANDS

Goal Policies 4. Consideration must be given to public education about the daily and seasonal Agricultural lands in the vicinity of the built- 1. Agricultural lands in Policy Area 3 operational needs of agriculture and up urban area are kept in production and will remain in agriculture use until the agricultural operators, to increase managed under principles of good land and lands are needed for population and/or awareness and understanding and environmental stewardship until required for employment growth. reduce conflict. future growth. 2. Subdivision and development should be 5. Existing agricultural uses shall be limited to maintain large parcel sizes to given consideration to be kept as an Objectives support ongoing agricultural uses until existing land use supported by an urban the lands are needed for population and/ → Retain agriculture as a complementary agriculture plan. use and minimize fragmentation so as not or employment growth. to constrain or restrict the designated 3. Until the lands are needed for population priority use. and/or growth, agricultural producers → Maximize the opportunities for the must have access to their agricultural continued presence of agriculture lands to farm their lands. This includes and related agriculture activities as a but is not limited to maintaining field complementary use for the long term. approaches and local roads sufficient to accommodate agricultural machinery. → Ensure that agricultural lands and associated landscapes are managed through the application of best management practices specific to soil, water and environment. Page 47 of 81 Page 154 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 45 SECTION 4.4

PRODUCTION

Introduction RESOURCE PROCESSING Policy Area 4 & WASTE RECOVERY Urban areas have not historically been seen as conducive to agricultural production, Urban however, when considering the regional food system, it’s clear, urban areas and

their businesses and residents play a vital CONSUMPTION DISTRIBUTION Agriculture role. This is further emphasized with the advent of community and rooftop gardens, ACCESS introduction of edible landscapes in parks, and improvements in hydroponic and other Figure 1:EMRB Regional Food System technologies, the possibilities in urban agriculture continues to grow. agricultural production. Agricultural The potential of urban agriculture has processing uses that generate negative been recognized in the Region. Fresh – externalities can be directed to fully serviced Edmonton’s Food and Urban Agriculture commercial and industrial areas. Institutions Strategy – was approved by City Council in such as the provincial government’s Food 2012. Implementation of Fresh, including the Processing Centre in Leduc, can support formation of the Edmonton Food Council, development of the agriculture industry. has been underway since then. Strathcona Post-secondary institutions (e.g., University County completed an Agriculture Master of Alberta, NAIT) can support agricultural Plan in 2015 that proposed, among other research and education. The University of things, the development of “a strategy Alberta has extensive landholdings in the and policies to foster urban agriculture” Region to support agriculture research. with relevance to the urban service area of Sherwood Park. Similar agriculture Urban residents often have limited master plans have been developed or are opportunities to learn where their food in development in Leduc, Parkland and comes from and, as a consequence, may Sturgeon Counties. have little understanding of agriculture. Establishing urban agriculture in urban Urban centres in the Region have important municipalities across the Region will reverse assets to support both rural and urban this trend. Increased interactions between agriculture. Urban utilities, including all producers and consumers of food, rural

Page 48 of 81 water and sewer services, can support and urban, will build support for the regional

Page 155 of 228 food processing plants and value-added agricultural economy.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 46 Schedule F Policy Area 4 – Urban Agriculture

Legend Protected areas ● AREA 4 URBAN AGRICULTURE ● PROVINCIAL PARK ● EMRB MEMBER ● NATURAL PARK ● EMRB NON-MEMBER ● PROVINCIAL RECREATION AREA URBAN SERVICE AREA ACTIVE COAL EXTRACTION AREA SAND AND/OR GRAVEL DEPOSITS Policy Tiers ● METROPOLITAN AREA ● METROPOLITAN CORE

↑ 0 5 10 20 30 40km N

NOTE: This map is for illustration purposes only. Page 49 of 81 Page 156 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 47 SECTION 4.4 POLICY AREA 4 URBAN AGRICULTURE

Goals Objectives Policies Urban agriculture is established and thriving → Urban agriculture connects people to the 1. Urban agriculture plans will and reflects the individual characteristics food they eat, is accessible and visible be prepared for each member of each municipality. Urban agriculture in member municipalities, and increases municipality with an urban or rural is fostered by engaged communities awareness and understanding of the center and is encouraged for Hamlets that support a wide range of agricultural importance of agriculture to the Region. with a minimum population of 500. activities, public and private, and involve → Urban agriculture contributes to the role (See Appendix A – Urban Agriculture residents, businesses, communities, agriculture plays in growing the Plan Guidelines). and organizations. regional economy. 2. Existing agricultural uses shall be given → The ecological and social benefits urban consideration to be kept as an existing agriculture provides to communities land use and supported by an urban include quality local food, increased food agriculture plan. security, active and productive use of 3. Policies must be included in statutory green space in urban areas, enhanced plans to enable urban agriculture in natural living systems and mitigating the suitable locations throughout effects of climate change. Policy Area 4. 4. Value-added agriculture uses will be considered in this policy area. Page 50 of 81 Page 157 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 48 SECTION 5

The implementation of RAMP will require 5.1 Agricultural Land and Soils Implementation ongoing collaboration among the EMRB RAMP establishes the importance of member municipalities, the Government of agricultural land in the Region. Maintaining Alberta, other regional stakeholders and the health and productivity of the soil is EMRB. This section includes additional essential to maintaining the quality of the policies and direction to support the agricultural land. ongoing work of implementation. 1. Soil should be recognized as a limited non-renewable resource and managed accordingly. 2. Soil management, including its reuse and recycling, should be considered as part of an area structure plan for greenfield areas. 3. Soils should be managed in the municipality in which they originate. Where soils are exported to another municipality, the municipality in which the soils originated is encouraged to engage with the municipality receiving the soil to ensure effective soil management. Page 51 of 81 Page 158 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 49 SECTION 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION

5.2 Land Use Schedule G Through the Land LESA-Identified Prime Evaluation and Site Assessment evaluation, Agricultural Lands and prime agricultural lands RAMP Policy Areas have been identified in the Region. The LESA Map will inform the direction of future growth while continuing to create certainty ↑ for the future for N agricultural producers in the EMR.

Legend

PRIME AGRICULTURAL LANDS ● POLICY AREA 1 ● POLICY AREA 2 ● POLICY AREA 3 ● NON-STUDY AREA/POLICY AREA 4 ● WATERBODIES ● EMRB-MEMBER BOUNDARY Data Sources: Prime Agricultural Areas as identified by the LESA model under the parameters specified in the June 2021 LESA Model Technical Report. Non-Study Area includes identified federal lands, non-EMRB member municipalities, and RAMP Policy Area Page 52 of 81 4. Waterbodies are as identified by AGRASID 4.1 as a W3 large 0 10 20km waterbody and are also excluded from the Study Area. Page 159 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 50 SECTION 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION

1. The policies and outcomes of RAMP c. The regional growth study should 5. Member municipalities shall be and all other policies in the growth inform the direction of future growth responsible to ensure compatibility and plan to achieve responsible growth, in the Region, in all policy areas, connectivity to natural areas. Particularly will be considered, as part of the EMRB to protect prime agricultural lands in areas where agricultural uses and 5-year interim review of the growth plan, identified through the EMR LESA non-agricultural uses interface. Consider specifically to: analysis, for as long as possible, and the ecological integration of biodiversity, in accordance with the objectives for wildlife corridors and conservation of a. Complete a regional growth study to each policy area. ecological areas. Mitigation measures update and inform the rate of land may include buffers / setbacks between consumption. The results of the 2. Update RAMP Objective 6.1 to broaden agriculture and natural areas including regional growth study will consider the scope to include the global water features (rivers, streams, and lakes) the alignment of the metropolitan area opportunity to supply food, fiber and fuel. to protect water quality and mitigate the policy line in conjunction with RAMP 3. Member municipalities will be responsible effects of climate change. policy area 3. The resulting analysis to ensure compatible land uses are 5.3 Agricultural System should strive for a no net increase in achieved, particularly in areas where land within the metropolitan area policy agricultural uses and non-agricultural 1. Member municipalities are encouraged tier of the regional growth uses interface. Mitigation measures shall to implement strategies to support and plan to 2044; be incorporated within the area being enhance the agricultural system when b. The regional growth study should developed to reduce conflicts. undertaking integrated planning for inform the identification of thresholds 4. Member municipalities shall strive for growth management, including goods for % build out of area structure reclaimed lands to benefit the agricultural movement and transportation planning plans and infill development before system as a priority in all policy areas and identify priority infrastructure new lands (unplanned /greenfield) with appropriate consideration for the to enable growth in agri-foods and are considered for development to environment, land, water resources and value-added agriculture. Ensuring any conserve agricultural lands for as long surrounding agricultural operations. adverse impacts to the agricultural as possible and ensure responsible system are avoided, or if avoidance is not growth. (Includes both residential and possible, efforts are applied to minimize non-residential); and and mitigate impacts. Page 53 of 81 Page 160 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 51 SECTION 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION

2. Member municipalities are encouraged d. Member municipalities are encouraged d. Engage with producers and to support the growth and development to adopt policies fostering “buy local” agri-food experts, forming advisory of agricultural and agri-food sectors by: first approach, including procurement committees; and of food and landscaping products; a. Considering the impacts on the e. Providing outreach and education agricultural system when municipal e. Recognize urban agriculture as a land opportunities to promote the sector decisions are made on investments, use contributing to municipal resiliency and local food connection. growth, infrastructure, programs, and sustainability helping to mitigating the effects of climate change; and 4. Member municipalities are encouraged to policies, bylaws and services; adopt policies, incentives and to identify b. Review and align economic f. Recognize and celebrate the diverse partnerships to leverage agriculture as development and tourism strategies populations that contribute to the a source of renewable energy, bio-mass with opportunities to promote heritage and culture of the Region. energy, and /or carbon sequestration. agriculture and elevate the agri-food 3. Member municipalities are encouraged 5. Member municipalities are encouraged sector and a vibrant food culture in to support the long-term economic to develop a regional approach to the Region contributing to a sense prosperity and viability of agriculture and addressing the disposal of agricultural of community connection and the agri-food sector, for example through: waste and municipal waste management placemaking. (e.g. Open Farm Days, services to increase composting, lower Support Local Food hubs, Farm to a. Integrate agricultural economic costs, and divert organics from landfills. Fork connections, cultural diversity development, infrastructure, goods and heritage); movement and freight considerations c. Adopt an agricultural lens as with land use planning; part of urban planning: to ensure b. Encourage clustering diversified and water conservation/ reclamation/ value-added agriculture to create recharge and encourage a range of efficiencies, synergies and economies approaches to support various forms of scale in support of the growth of agriculture; of the sector; c. Support new forms of agriculture enabled through technology and innovation; Page 54 of 81 Page 161 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 52 SECTION 6

To ensure that RAMP policies are having The RAMP monitoring and reporting Monitoring their desired effect and that the objectives framework is a critical first step to establish of RAMP are being achieved, a RAMP a consistent methodology and approach monitoring and reporting framework is to data collection, establishing consistent and Reporting required as a foundation to track RAMP measures across the Region, identifying outcomes. Regional monitoring and the frequency of reporting, defining reporting of agricultural related data and recommended geographies, and identifying information is an incredibly complex and potential data sources. Refer to Appendix B: unique challenge. Currently in the Region, Monitoring and Reporting Framework: Terms each municipality is at a different starting of Reference for more detailed guidance point for the datasets that are collected on the approach and scope required in and each deploy a different approach to developing the framework. collection, recording, and reporting. This results in an inconsistent approach to → Work on the RAMP monitoring and monitoring and reporting throughout the reporting framework will be initiated Region. directly following Board approval of RAMP with the goal of having the framework completed and approved by the Board within a year. Once this foundation is established, RAMP monitoring and reporting is enabled through implementation of the framework. Page 55 of 81 Page 162 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 53 SECTION 7

Recognizing the value and economic potential of the agriculture and agri-foods sector in the Region, the EMRB is in a unique position to provide coordinated leadership in building a unified advocacy strategy. One of the challenges facing the sector that has long been recognized is that it is not only resilient and adaptable, it is also diversified, provincial plans for diversifying the Advocacy complex, and ever changing in response economy and creating jobs. to technology, innovation and economic 5. Advocate and take action to ensure opportunities. A prevailing trend is fewer greater collaboration and coordination but larger farms resulting in fewer voices to among member municipalities to represent the interests of agriculture, and create the conditions for a favorable in a lack of a unified voice. An advocacy investment climate, inclusive of a strategy based on the learnings from RAMP transparent, predictable and timely stakeholders should consider the following: regulatory framework to attract 1. Promote the economic importance of investment to grow the sector. agriculture and the agri-foods sector 6. Advocate for an increase in and a by encouraging the establishment sustainable level of investment funding of programs by other orders of in post-secondary institutions for both government to stimulate investment research and development and skills in technologies to enhance the training to keep pace with new and performance of the sector. emerging technological advances in 2. Highlight the need to address gaps in the agriculture sector and to attract essential infrastructure such as rural more youth into the sector. broadband, irrigation systems and 7. Advocate for keeping export channels small and medium sized processing open for agricultural commodities and facilities and increased investment in value added agri-foods. agriculture focused research to enable 8. Advocate for the creation of innovation across the sector. incentive programs that recognize 3. Advocate for provincial leadership the contributions of the agricultural in areas that will contribute to sector as an important sector to transformational change in the sector sequester carbon through sustainable through artificial intelligence, and practices and stewards of the rural robotics, as examples. lands and to recognize the value of 4. Promote prioritizing the investment the sector in mitigating the impacts

Page 56 of 81 in agriculture and value-added food of climate change.

Page 163 of 228 processing as part of local and

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 54 SECTION 8

While the work in developing RAMP was Recommendations led by the EMRB, the implementation of RAMP requires approval by the Government of Alberta. The EMRB has shown true to the Province leadership in developing the first of its kind plan for agriculture and recognizes the important contribution of the province in completing this work. Much has been learned throughout this process, and the EMR sees this work as part of a longer journey. Agriculture is recognized as our legacy and our future, and at the same time a significant part of the economic potential for this Region.

1. Approval of RAMP to be included as an amendment to the regional growth plan in accordance with Policy 5.2.4.3. 2. That consideration be given to the policy directions and outcomes of the growth plan as part of annexation applications. Page 57 of 81 Page 164 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 55 SECTION 9

Government of Alberta → Consider the RAMP vision, guiding Roles and principles, policy framework and policies To implement the Regional Agriculture when planning future investments in Master Plan directed in the agriculture infrastructure, programs and enabling policy area in the growth plan the EMRB is Responsibilities legislation for the growth of agriculture looking for support from the Government and value added agri-foods sector; of Alberta to: → Consider the broader adoption of a Land → Approve RAMP; Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) analysis in other areas of the Province, in → Support the completion of Regional support of the growth of the Context Statements by member agriculture sector. municipalities to be submitted to the EMRB for information within one year of RAMP being approved by the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Government of Alberta; Board will need to: → Support the request to have the growth → Maintain the momentum of RAMP and plan be considered in annexation prioritize resources to complete further decisions; work identified to define the monitoring → Collaborate with the EMRB in the and reporting framework for RAMP and implementation of the vision, guiding work to define the agricultural system principles, policy framework, and policies in the Region, identify the areas of in RAMP; comparative and competitive advantage → Collaborate with the EMRB on regional in value added agri-foods and develop advocacy identified in RAMP; strategies to enable the growth across the agriculture sector. → Support the further work identified for RAMP as part of future reviews of the → Receive and review RAMP Regional regional growth plan; Context Statements, as information. → Provide comments on Agriculture Master Plans, as specified in the growth plan. Page 58 of 81 Page 165 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 56 SECTION 9 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

→ Receive and review amendments to → Lead further work to: EMRB member municipalities statutory plans, for approval, through { Identify the criteria and governance will need to: Regional Evaluation Framework (REF). process to move lands between → Collaborate with regional stakeholders agricultural policy areas. → Complete a RAMP Regional Context { Statement within one year of RAMP in the implementation of an advocacy Review and refine the Terms of strategy for agriculture. approval by the Government of Alberta Reference for Agricultural Impact and submit it to EMRB for information. → Oversee the integration of RAMP into the Assessment in the growth plan to align regional growth plan, as part of the 5-year with the RAMP Policies. → Update their Municipal Development Plan { (MDP) to include RAMP within two years interim review. Inform further work on regional policies of approval by the Government of Alberta, within the growth plan as a result of → Oversee the development and or as part of any updates required by the the EMR agricultural system work to implementation of the monitoring and 5-year interim review of the growth plan, support the growth in value-added reporting on the RAMP key performance whichever occurs first. indicators and provide ongoing agri-foods sector. { → If required by RAMP, prepare an Urban assessment of the effectiveness of the Advance the understanding of the RAMP Policies. issues and opportunities for RAMP Agriculture Plan within 2 years of approval identified in Appendix C, other by the Government of Alberta and submit → Facilitate future EMRB work based on an it to the EMRB for review and comment. evidence-based approach to include and considerations for Infrastructure, Digital not limited to: Infrastructure, Education, Awareness → Implement the RAMP guiding principles, { & Communication, Stewardship and objectives, policy definitions, and policies Consider the policies and outcomes of Ecological Goods and Services, and of RAMP through statutory plans, and RAMP in the 5-year interim review of the Climate Change. non-statutory plans including agriculture regional growth plan and REF. { master plans. { Incorporate the worldviews of the

Complete a regional growth study First Nation and Metis cultures in the → Enable and support the implementation to inform future land requirement Region with respect to protecting and of RAMP. for urban growth and to inform the conserving land and natural resources → Support RAMP advocacy strategy efforts. direction of growth considering the in further work on RAMP. economic value and contributions of { → If required, participate in the development Future updates to RAMP will be prime agricultural lands in proximity of the monitoring and reporting completed in conjunction with updates to urban areas. Further, to support framework for RAMP. Thereafter, submit to the growth plan, starting with the work to delineate the metropolitan data and information required to the 5-year interim review of the growth plan. area policy tier in conjunction with { EMRB on established key performance the RAMP policy area 3. Coordinate future updates to LESA, indicators to support the monitoring as required. and reporting of the effectiveness of Page 59 of 81 { Support to member municipalities in the RAMP policies. Page 166 of 228 implementation of RAMP.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 57 Appendix A

Urban Agriculture Plan Guidelines

Urban Agriculture Plan Context Recommended Plan Content Policy 1 in Policy Area 4 (Urban Agriculture) Each municipality may consider providing the following in their UAP: of the RAMP requires urban municipalities to prepare an Urban Agriculture Plan (UAP). → Land use policies in support of agriculture. The UAP should support the → Land use policies in support of growth in the value-added sector. following outcomes: → Policy direction to identify and coordinate infrastructure and services that are needed to support urban agriculture and the → Create awareness and public support for value-added sector. urban agriculture, → Policy direction to create a public engagement process for public → Identify opportunities and constraints education about urban agriculture and to minimize conflict over for urban agriculture specific to land uses associated with urban agriculture. each municipality, → A description of the potential range of urban agricultural uses that → Identify how urban agriculture will be could be considered in the municipality and uses that may not be supported in the municipality, with suitable in the municipality. particular attention to the needs of → Policy direction to ensure that appropriate forms of urban public and private forms of urban agriculture become an accepted part of complete communities to agriculture, and integrate urban agriculture into the social fabric of the municipality. → Ensure that urban agriculture is a vital → Where appropriate, policy direction to embed urban agriculture as component of complete communities a land use in the municipal planning system of statutory plans and and is integrated into the social fabric of Land Use Bylaws. the municipality. → As noted in Policy Area 4 – Urban Agriculture, municipalities are encouraged to prepare Urban Agriculture Plans that reflect the unique attributes and specific characteristics of the municipality. Page 60 of 81 Page 167 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 58 Appendix B

RAMP Monitoring & Reporting – Terms of Reference

Background Existing KPIs in growth plan (for Policy Area 6: Agriculture), are the starting point Pursuant to Part B. Regional Policies, Policy 6.1.1a of the Edmonton for RAMP Monitoring and Reporting. With Metropolitan Region Growth Plan, a Regional Agriculture Master the approval and adoption of RAMP it is Plan (RAMP is required to support implementation of the growth plan recognized that the KPIs within the growth guiding principle: Ensure the wise management of prime agricultural plan require further work to refine and ensure resources. Further, following approval of RAMP, Section 6: Monitoring alignment with RAMP. and Reporting, details the critical need for municipalities to monitor and report on land use decisions and changes at the local level to 1. Total Prime agricultural land consumed ensure that RAMP is being implemented throughout the Region. 2. Distribution of subdivision acres Monitoring and reporting will give EMRB and member municipalities by land class evidence and data to understand if RAMP policies are having their desired effect and achieving its objectives. This work should also 3. Value of farm receipts include understanding the extent to which RAMP contributes to the metrics identified as part of the economic imperative – increase Regional monitoring and reporting is an in GDP, and jobs in the Region. incredibly complex and unique challenge. Currently in the Region, each municipality is 6.1 Identify and conserve an adequate supply of prime agricultural at a different starting point for the datasets lands to provide a secure local food source for future generations. that are collected, and deploy different approaches to collect, record, and store 6.2 Minimize the fragmentation and conversion of prime agricultural data, resulting in an inconsistent approach to lands for non-agricultural uses. monitoring and reporting.

6.3 Promote diversification and value-added agriculture production The RAMP Task Force has defined the intent and plan infrastructure to support the agricultural sector and of RAMP monitoring and reporting (the ‘why’) regional food system. and identified the baseline and consistent data that is desired to be monitored (the ‘what’). Further work is required and outlined below, in defining the framework to enable a clear and consistent regional approach and process for the data to be collected (the ‘how’) and reported. Page 61 of 81 Page 168 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 59 APPENDIX B In developing the framework (and defining the ‘how’), the following is an outline of the proposed scope of work.

Proposed Scope and Approach of 6.2 Minimize the fragmentation and 1. Use existing EMRB monitoring and the RAMP Monitoring and Reporting conversion of prime agricultural lands for reporting, data collection process and Framework non-agricultural uses. platform. 2. Utilize and draw upon the expertise of The Board will determine the governance → Subdivision of agricultural land (including EMRB’s existing regional network of structure through the development and size and reason) land use, agricultural, GIS experts, and approval of a Project Charter and Workplan. → Change in land use on agricultural land provincial representation. It is recommended that this work be (agricultural use to non-agricultural use) completed utilizing the EMRB’s existing 3. For each of the outcomes identified network of regional land use planners → Policy Area 1 above, the Framework needs to clearly and GIS experts. The Project Charter → Policy Area 2 define a consistent methodology and approach to collection, monitoring, and must consider and enable the successful → Policy Area 3 completion of the identified items below. reporting as follows: → Reclamation of land back to agriculture The monitoring and reporting outcomes a. Define and establish baseline data and year; have been determined by the RAMP Task 6.3 Promote diversification and value-added Force, and require further work to define the agriculture production and plan b. Define consistent data items to be specific measure (or measures) to achieve infrastructure to support the agricultural collected for each item (particular data each outcome. The work, in defining the sector and regional food system. piece, format, methodology); specific measures, will be critical for the c. Establish a recommended geography Board to understand if RAMP policies are → Urban agriculture master (statutory plan, municipal, sub- having the effect and if RAMP is achieving its plans completed. regional, regional, etc.); objectives. → Agriculture farm gate sales d. Establish a consistent unit of 6.1 Identify and conserve an adequate → Value-added agriculture sales measurement for each measure; supply of prime agricultural lands to → Agriculture-related uses (agribusiness) e. Establish frequency of reporting provide a secure local food source for (annual, bi-annual., five years, etc.); and future generations. → Infrastructure investment beneficial to the agricultural sector (transportation, f. Determine the potential source(s) of → Total area of all agricultural land available irrigation, broadband, etc.) data including municipalities, provincial (baseline) → Number of jobs and federal governments, and external → Total area of prime agricultural areas organizations. (baseline) Note: the bullets above do not represent a specific measure (or measures), but the rather the intent or outcome that the measure 4. Recommend a final RAMP Monitoring and should achieve. Further work is required to define the specific Reporting Framework for Board approval measure (or measures) required to achieve the above outcomes, Page 62 of 81 outlined below (including methodology, collection, frequency, unit of for implementation within one year. measure, etc.) Page 169 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 60 Appendix C

Other Considerations

In its work on RAMP, the Task Force Value Added Agriculture recognized a range of considerations that Although RAMP identifies value-added agriculture as a type of land are closely connected to agriculture. The use, the true importance of value-added agriculture is in its role as a considerations in question are complex, and type of economic activity in the Region. they speak to the complexity of agriculture. The EMR Economic Imperative for Agriculture report highlights the These considerations could not be importance of the value-added agriculture sector and the potential it addressed in a meaningful way in the has to grow the regional economy. That report is the starting preparation of the inaugural RAMP. They are point for further work to enable the economic potential of described in this Appendix for consideration value-added agriculture. in future iterations of RAMP. The work must be led by individuals with expertise in the fields of agricultural production, agricultural economics, economic development and market development. This work could include (but We are“ ideally situated for value-added is not limited to): production. We have the best farmland in → Developing a regional view of the value-added agriculture sector; western Canada, have access to road, rail, → Developing a regional view of the agricultural system in the EMR; and air, and are close enough to an urban → Identifying the Region’s existing strengths in the value-added agriculture sector; environment that we could create jobs. → Identifying area(s) with the greatest potential for growth, and what We are the perfect candidate for supports may be required; and → Identifying areas for legislative or regulatory changes to create a value-added industries. more flexible and adaptive business environment for investment.

RAMP ENGAGEMENT STAKEHOLDER Further work on value-added agriculture should also recommend the most appropriate role for the EMRB in supporting future growth in December 2020 value-added agriculture. Page 63 of 81 Page 170 of 228 ” REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 61 APPENDIX C

Infrastructure Digital Infrastructure Infrastructure that serves agriculture in the Region includes (but is Agriculture relies on digital infrastructure. Big data, robotics, not limited to) road, rail, air services, irrigation, and a host of utilities artificial intelligence, virtual and augmented reality, the Internet including broadband. of Things, Blockchain, and adaptive systems are emerging as the fourth industrial revolution that is having a major impact on A combination of RAMP and the Integrated Regional Transportation agriculture and the agri-food sector. Master Plan (IRTMP) will help to identify the future actions and measures related to infrastructure that need to support the Rural access to reliable broadband is increasingly important for agriculture and agri-food sector in the Region. RAMP and the IRTMP the sustainability and growth of the agriculture sector. Agricultural will inform each other in making significant contributions to the producers are focused on achieving efficiencies and increasing forthcoming growth plan 5-year interim review (s.5.2.5.2). yields and profitability through the adoption of new and innovative technologies. Broadband is key to their ability to do this. Other EMRB projects related to infrastructure (e.g., Metropolitan Regional Servicing Plan [MRSP], Broadband Situational Analysis) Work completed by the EMRB on the state of broadband in the will inform the infrastructure needed to support the growth and Region confirmed that rural areas are at a disadvantage in their sustainability of the agriculture sector in the Region. Referral of ability to access reliable broadband. Following the adoption of non-statutory agricultural and transportation master plans to the RAMP, and as future iterations of RAMP are developed, the EMRB EMRB per s.5.2.3 of the growth plan will also support the industry. will need to develop partnerships with other orders of government, educational institutions, agricultural organizations, and economic At a grassroots level, the EMRB is aware of the importance of local development organizations, among others, to advocate for road networks for agricultural producers. This was identified in improved broadband services in rural areas of the Region to better the first RAMP engagement process in November and December serve agricultural producers and rural communities. 2020. Agricultural producers spoke frequently about the lack of understanding in the general public about the critical importance of local roads for day-to-day operations, including but not limited to the movement of agricultural equipment. Page 64 of 81 Page 171 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 62 APPENDIX C

Education, Awareness Stewardship, and Ecological Goods & Communication and Services During the first RAMP engagement process RAMP creates a policy framework for Board will need to develop partnerships with in November and December 2020, many conserving prime agricultural lands, and for other orders of government, educational stakeholders spoke to the general public’s maintaining all other agricultural areas in the institutions, agricultural organizations, and lack of knowledge about agriculture, and Region for agriculture uses. RAMP builds on economic development organizations, where food comes from. the stewardship carried out by agricultural among others, to increase knowledge and producers who protect their land to maintain understanding of ecological goods and Following the adoption of RAMP, and as its agricultural viability. services in the Region. future iterations of RAMP are developed, the Board will need to develop partnerships with When RAMP is integrated into the growth Climate Change other orders of government, educational plan, it will complement Policy Area 2 – Climate change is already effecting institutions, agricultural organizations, and Natural Systems - and the policies that agriculture in the Region and will continue economic development organizations, address air, water quality and quantity, land to do so. among others, to increase public awareness and watershed management. Combining and understanding of the importance of these measures with a secure agricultural The challenge for the EMRB will be to acquire agriculture to the Region: land base will allow producers to make greater knowledge and understanding long-term investment decisions for their of how climate change currently impacts → As a secure local food source. agricultural operations, and to continue to agriculture and the regional agricultural → As a major economic activity that creates use their lands sustainably. system, in order to identify specific actions, primary commodities and value-added initiatives and policies that can be taken This framework can be enhanced with agricultural products for export regionally, at a regional level to mitigate the impacts greater knowledge and understanding of the nationally, and globally. of climate change on agriculture and ecological goods and services (EG&S) that agricultural producers. → As a major economic activity that creates are provided by natural living systems in the employment and contributes to the Region. Ecological goods and services such Following the adoption of RAMP, and as economic growth of the Region. as water filtration, flood protection, wildlife future iterations of RAMP are developed, the → A contributor to mitigating the impacts of habitat, climate regulation, carbon capture, Board will need to develop partnerships with climate change. and pollination are economically and socially other orders of government, educational valuable. Ecological goods and services institutions, agricultural organizations, and Increased public awareness will provide provide important benefits to agriculture and economic development organizations, the social license that agriculture and the to the Region. among others, to identify the specific agricultural sector will need to be able to regional actions, initiatives and policies that Following the adoption of RAMP, and as

Page 65 of 81 operate with public support, and for will mitigate the impacts of climate change. RAMP to succeed. future iterations of RAMP are developed, the Page 172 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 63 Appendix D

Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Technical Analysis

To review the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Technical Report in its entirety, please visit www.emrb.ca/agriculture.

VIEW THE REPORT Page 66 of 81 Page 173 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 64 Appendix E RAMP Regional Context Statement Template

Following approval of RAMP, regional context In Part 1: RAMP Framework, Policy Areas and statements will be a critical component to Agricultural Areas, members are required to support implementation by identifying how indicate the relevant RAMP policy areas and the objectives and policies within the RAMP identification of prime agricultural areas that will impact municipal plans. apply to their municipality as per Schedule B and Schedule G. Additionally, municipalities This template is intended to provide member are to review MDPs to ensure consistency municipalities with a basic structure for with the RAMP framework, including the completion of a RAMP regional context policy definitions and policies that have statement in accordance with RAMP Section been developed. 9: Roles and Responsibilities. EMRB member municipalities will need to, Complete a RAMP In Part 2: RAMP Policies, under ‘Consistency Regional Context Statement within one Requirements’ members are required to year of RAMP approval by the Government identify the policies that are applicable based of Alberta, and Update their Municipal on the relevant policy area and identification Development Plan (MDP) within two years of prime agricultural areas. of approval by the Province of Alberta, or as part of any updates required by the 5 Year Interim Review of the growth plan, whichever occurs first.

Members are required to demonstrate how their existing municipal development plans (MDPs) conform with or diverge from the new policies and objectives within RAMP, and indicate how they plan to bring their MDPs into compliance. This template represents the minimum information required to be submitted, members may choose to provide a more detailed regional context statement. In some cases, municipalities may consider

Page 67 of 81 changes to their land use bylaws, as a way to implement RAMP policies. Page 174 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 65 APPENDIX E

Part 1 RAMP Framework, Policy Areas and Agricultural Areas

Consistency RAMP Framework Requirement MDP Response Action Required

Policy Definitions

Identify relevant RAMP Policy Areas

Identify relevant Prime Agricultural Areas

Identify relevant All Other Agricultural Areas

Identify relevant Specialty Agriculture Lands Page 68 of 81 Page 175 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 66 APPENDIX E Part 2 RAMP Policies

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

Policy Area 1: 1. Agriculture is the priority land use in Rural Policy Area 1. Agriculture 2. Policies must be included in statutory plans to enable the continuation, development, and expansion of all types, sizes and intensities of agriculture throughout Policy Area 1.

3. Agricultural uses that follow generally accepted agricultural practices must be able to operate in suitable locations without being unduly encumbered or hindered by non-agricultural development, or by adjacent land uses in neighbouring Policy Areas.

4. Prime agricultural lands will be conserved in prime agricultural areas to provide a secure, long-term local food source for future generations.

5. Prime agricultural areas and all other Designation agriculture areas will be informed by of Prime the outcomes of the Land Evaluation Agricultural and Site Assessment (LESA) tool and Areas designated in statutory plans.

6. Specialty agricultural land may be

Page 69 of 81 identified in either prime agricultural areas or in all other agricultural areas. Page 176 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 67 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

7. Two or more municipalities that share a prime agricultural area(s) Identification of must coordinate the designation relevant areas of the area to recognize the geographic continuity.

8. Agricultural uses, agriculture- related uses, value-added agriculture uses, and on-farm diversified uses are supported throughout Policy Area 1.

9. Notwithstanding Policy 8, agriculture-related uses and value- added agriculture uses must not hinder agricultural operations in the surrounding area.

10. Agriculture-related uses and value- added agriculture uses should be directed to lower capability agricultural lands when possible.

11. Development of agriculture-related uses and value-added agriculture uses should minimize the amount of agricultural land taken out of production.

12. Consideration should be given to directing agriculture-related, and Identification of value-added agricultural uses to cluster sites cluster sites.

13. Non-agricultural uses are Page 70 of 81 discouraged in prime

Page 177 of 228 agricultural areas.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 68 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

14. Non-agricultural uses may be considered in all other agricultural areas and should be minimized to maintain agriculture as the priority land use pursuant to Policy 1. Designation of All Other Agricultural Areas

15. Consideration should be given to directing non-agricultural uses to lower capability land, where possible or to cluster sites

16. In prime agricultural areas, development of in-situ, resource-based economic assets such as coal, sand and/or gravel, marl, and peat may be considered.

17. In prime agricultural areas, other non-agricultural uses may only be considered, preferably on lower capability land if it can be demonstrated that other locations in all other agricultural areas or at cluster sites are not feasible. An Agricultural Impact Assessment is required to confirm the proposed use will not hinder the agricultural operations in the surrounding area. Page 71 of 81 Page 178 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 69 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

15. Consideration should be given to directing non-agricultural uses to lower capability land, where possible or to cluster sites

16. In prime agricultural areas, development of in-situ, resource-based economic assets such as coal, sand and/or gravel, marl, and peat may be considered.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 70 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

18. Subdivision Policy Criteria: Identify MDP Prime agricultural areas subdivision a. Subdivision of a residential policy and parcel for an existing Farmstead how RAMP should be considered. subdivision b. Subdivision of land for criteria will be agriculture, agriculture-related, implemented and value-added agriculture uses may be considered. c. Subdivision for a new residential parcel from a quarter section with no existing residential use may be considered subject to Policy 15. d. Subdivision for non-agricultural uses is discouraged and may only be considered subject to Policies 15 and 17. All other agricultural area e. Subdivision of a residential parcel for an existing Farmstead should be considered. f. Subdivision of land for agriculture, agriculture-related, and value-added agriculture uses may be considered. g. Subdivision for a new residential parcel from a quarter section with no existing residential use may be considered subject to Policy 15. h. Subdivision for non-agricultural

Page 73 of 81 uses may be considered

Page 180 of 228 subject to Policy 15.

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 71 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

19. Subdivision of agricultural land should result in parcels sized appropriately for the type of agriculture use(s) common in the area and sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operations.

20. Subdivision for any purpose should minimize the amount of agricultural land taken out of production and must not hinder the operation of surrounding agricultural land uses.

21. Consideration must be given to directing subdivision for agriculture-related, value-added and non-agricultural land uses to cluster sites and wherever possible to lower capability land.

22. Subdivision policies for prime agricultural areas apply to specialty agriculture land. Page 74 of 81 Page 181 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 72 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

Policy Area 2: 1. Agricultural lands co-exist with Agriculture existing designated land uses and Co-exists with shall remain in agricultural use until Other Land required for conversion. Uses 2. Reclaimed lands should be rehabilitated for agriculture uses. Where it may be more appropriate, reclaimed lands may be rehabilitated for environmental or ecological purposes, or for commercial, industrial, institutional or recreational uses that can leverage existing infrastructure.

3. When applications are made to re-designate and/or re-district non-agricultural lands, consideration must be given to re-designating and/or re-districting the lands for agricultural uses.

4. Agriculture related and value-added agriculture uses may be considered but must not hinder the operation of agricultural operations in the surrounding area, nor hinder the development of a designated non-agricultural use.

5. Existing agricultural operations shall be given consideration to be

Page 75 of 81 kept as an existing land use within statutory plans. Page 182 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 73 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

Policy Area 3: 1. Agricultural lands in Policy Area 3 Agriculture will remain in agriculture use until the in Future lands are needed for population and/ Transition or employment growth. Lands 2. Subdivision and development should be limited to maintain large parcel sizes to support ongoing agricultural operations until the lands are needed for population and/or employment growth.

3. Until the lands are needed for population and/or growth, agricultural producers must have access to their agricultural lands to farm their lands. This includes but is not limited to maintaining field approaches and local roads sufficient to accommodate agricultural machinery.

4. Consideration must be given to public education about the daily and seasonal operational needs of agriculture and agricultural operators, in order to increase awareness and understanding and reduce conflict.

5. Existing agricultural operations shall be given consideration to be kept as an existing land use supported by an

Page 76 of 81 urban agriculture plan. Page 183 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 74 APPENDIX E PART 2: RAMP POLICIES CONTINUED

Consistency Action Policy Area RAMP Policy Requirement MDP Response Required

Policy Area 4: 1. Urban agriculture plans will Urban be prepared for each member Identify the Agriculture municipality with an urban or rural requirement center and is encouraged for for an Urban Hamlets with a minimum population Agriculture Plan of 500. (See Appendix 1 – Urban Agriculture Plan Guidelines).

2. Existing agricultural operations shall Identify be given consideration to be kept as potential an existing land use and supported operations for by an urban agriculture plan. consideration

3. Policies must be included in statutory plans to enable urban agriculture in suitable locations throughout Policy Area 4.

4. Value-added agriculture uses will be considered in this policy area.

Implementation 5.1 Agricultural Land and Soils

5.2 Land Use

5.3 Agricultural System Page 77 of 81 Page 184 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 75 Appendix F

Contributors

The development of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Regional Agriculture Master Plan was made possible through the contributions of many. On behalf of the RAMP Task Force, we wish to thank everyone for their contributions in completing this work.

Task Force Mayor Rod Shaigec Councillor Kathy Barnhart Parkland County, Chair City of Beaumont, Alternate: Councillor Darrell Holland Alternate: Mayor John Stewart

Councillor Michael Walters Councillor Paul Smith City of Edmonton, Vice Chair, Strathcona County, Alternate: Mayor Don Iveson Alternate: Councillor Robert Parks

Mayor Tanni Doblanko Malcolm Bruce Leduc County, CEO, Alternate: Councillor Larry Wanchuk Edmonton Global (non-voting)

Mayor Alanna Hnatiw Karen Sundquist Sturgeon County, Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry, Alternate Councillor Neal Comeau Government of Alberta (non-voting)

Mayor Barry Turner Candice Vanin Town of Morinville, Land Use Specialist, Alternate: Councillor Nicole Boutestein Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (non-voting) Page 78 of 81 Page 185 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 76 APPENDIX F

Consultants EMRB Administration Jerry Bouma Karen Wichuk Toma and Bouma Management Consultants CEO

John Steil Cindie LeBlanc Stantec Director, Corporate and Stakeholder Relations Tom Daniels University of Pennsylvania Barb Smith Senior Communications Advisor Andy Haden Haden Consulting Sharon Shuya Director, Regional Growth Planning Bob Burden Serecon Inc. Taylor Varro Project Manager Darren Haarsma Serecon Inc. Ron Cook Manager GIS and Business Intelligence Soles & Company Stephanie Chai Crown Strategic Consulting Inc. Project Manager

Torque Communications Debra Irving Senior Project Manager Karen Gilcrest and Associates Carol Moreno YStation Project Coordinator Mike Lundy, Design & Art Direction Page 79 of 81 Page 186 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 77 APPENDIX F

Municipal Administrations RAMP Working Group / RAMP Working Group Sub Committee*

Laurie Johnson* Gilbert Davis* Susan Armstrong Leduc County City of Edmonton City of Spruce Grove (retired)

Garett Broadbent Hani Quan Jordan Brown Leduc County City of Edmonton City of Leduc

Michael Klassen* Kathryn Lennon Sylvain Losier Sturgeon County City of Edmonton City of Leduc

Angela Veenstra Greg Hofmann Trina Lamanes Sturgeon County City of Edmonton (retired) Town of Morinville

John Knapp* Matthew Gratton Brad White Parkland County City of Beaumont Town of Morinville

Martin Frigo Teaka Broughm Miles Dibble Parkland County City of Beaumont Town of Stony Plain

Ryan Hall* Lyndsay Francis Marilyn McMartin Strathcona County City of St. Albert Town of Devon

Joel Gould Kristina Peter Jason Cathcart Strathcona County City of St. Albert Province of Alberta

Diana Wahlstrom Shree Shinde Karen Sundquist Strathcona County City of Fort Saskatchewan Province of Alberta

Janna Widmer Carol Bergum Lindsay Sutton Strathcona County City of Spruce Grove Province of Alberta Page 80 of 81 Page 187 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 78 APPENDIX F

Special thanks to those numerous Land Evaluation and Site The EMRB wishes to thank the administration individuals within each member municipality Assessment Advisory Group of the Government of Ontario Ministry of that provided Communications, Government Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs [OMAFRA]) Relations and Stakeholder Engagement Lead by Serecon Inc. for their contributions and guidance in support for the two rounds of RAMP the development of RAMP and the Land Barb Shackel-Hardman Stakeholder Engagement conducted. Evaluation and Site Assessment tool. Parkland County

Angela Veenstra Sturgeon County References and Contributions Mike Hittinger Photos throughout this document were Sturgeon County retrieved from the following referenced organizations: Aaron Van Beers Leduc County → Burningham Trucking, retrieved online, 2021 Diana Wahlstrom → Edmonton Corn Maze, Strathcona County retrieved online, 2021 Matthew Gratton → Stony Plain Seed Cleaning Association, City of Beaumont retrieved online, 2021 → Unsplash, Gilbert Davis retrieved online, 2021 City of Edmonton EMRB would like to thank the following Trina Lamanes member municipalities for contributing Town of Morinville photos for use in this document: Javed Iqbal → City of Beaumont Province of Alberta → City of Edmonton David Spiess → Strathcona County Province of Alberta Page 81 of → Sturgeon County Page 188 of 228

REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN 79 Item 7.2

Request for Decision

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: MRSP Standing Committee Subject: MRSP Solid Waste and Stormwater Collaborative Action Plans

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board approve the MRSP Solid Waste and Stormwater Collaborative Action Plans.

Background:

• 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 growth plan. • To help achieve enhanced municipal collaboration and service coordination, the MRSP recommended the initiation of Collaboratives in regionally significant municipal service areas, including stormwater and solid waste. • Collaboratives are the enabling structure required to concentrate and focus regional efforts and expertise, provide a supportive forum to foster research, to share regionally relevant intelligence, and to provide the data necessary for evidenced-based decisions. • Each Collaborative is responsible for defining its goals and objectives within an Action Plan to be approved by the EMRB.

Status Update:

• The draft Action Plans outline the purpose, current landscape, regional vision, and the goals for each Collaborative. • Additionally, the assessment criteria used to prioritize work and the proposed actions each Collaborative will pursue are outlined. • While proposed actions are outlined, each project will be brought forward individually to the MRSP Standing Committee through a repeatable approval process, which includes a prioritization assessment and business case. • The Action Plans will be reviewed regularly to ensure they remain current. • The MRSP Standing Committee endorsed and recommended the Solid Waste and Stormwater Action Plans to the EMRB for approval on July 14, 2021.

Next Steps: Page 1 of 39

Page 189 of 228

• Initiate actions and approved projects. • Regularly review and update the Action Plans, as required. • Measure performance and progress over time.

Attachments: Solid Waste Collaborative Action Plan Stormwater Collaborative Action Plan

Page 2 of 39

Page 190 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative

DRAFT Action Plan

July 2021

Page 3 of 39

Page 191 of 228 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. Accessed June 21, 2021

July 2021 Page 2 of 21

Page 4 of 39

Page 192 of 228 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 2021 Page 3 of 21

Page 5 of 39

Page 193 of 228 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. 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:

July 2021 Page 4 of 21

Page 6 of 39

Page 194 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

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. · 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

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

July 2021 Page 5 of 21

Page 7 of 39

Page 195 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action 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.

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

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

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

July 2021 Page 6 of 21

Page 8 of 39

Page 196 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

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?

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.

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 2021 Page 7 of 21

Page 9 of 39

Page 197 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

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

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 opportunities for more efficient recycling/composting solutions,

July 2021 Page 8 of 21

Page 10 of 39

Page 198 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

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

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.

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.

July 2021 Page 9 of 21

Page 11 of 39

Page 199 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

· 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

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, 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

July 2021 Page 10 of 21

Page 12 of 39

Page 200 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan 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 2021 Page 11 of 21

Page 13 of 39

Page 201 of 228 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 Page 14 of 39 Page 202 of 228 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 Review Regional Complete Submit for Develop a Update the Solid Opportunity Prioritization Business Case Decision Project Charter Waste 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.

Page 15 of 39

Page 203 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

· Estimated timelines

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.

The KPI’s for solid waste are:

July 2021 Page 14 of 21

Page 16 of 39

Page 204 of 228 Solid Waste Collaborative – DRAFT Action Plan

· 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 Growth Plan 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 2021 Page 15 of 21

Page 17 of 39

Page 205 of 228 Appendix A – Growth Plan: 50 Year Vision

Source: Edmonton Metropolitan Growth Plan

Page 18 of 39

Page 206 of 228 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 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.

12 Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board. 2019. Metropolitan Region Servicing Plan. Accessed June 21, 2021.

Page 19 of 39

Page 207 of 228 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.

Page 20 of 39

Page 208 of 228 Appendix D – Regional Map: Waste Facilities Page 21 of 39 Page 209 of 228 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.

Page 22 of 39

Page 210 of 228 Appendix F – Solid Waste Alignment to Growth Plan

The following table outlines alignment of the Solid Waste actions to Growth Plan 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 Page 23 of 39 Page 211 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative

DRAFT Action Plan

July 2021

Page 24 of 39

Page 212 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 2 of 16

Page 25 of 39

Page 213 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 3 of 16

Page 26 of 39

Page 214 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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).

July 2021 Page 4 of 16

Page 27 of 39

Page 215 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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

July 2021 Page 5 of 16

Page 28 of 39

Page 216 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 6 of 16

Page 29 of 39

Page 217 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 7 of 16

Page 30 of 39

Page 218 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 8 of 16

Page 31 of 39

Page 219 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 9 of 16

Page 32 of 39

Page 220 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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

July 2021 Page 10 of 16

Page 33 of 39

Page 221 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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

July 2021 Page 11 of 16

Page 34 of 39

Page 222 of 228 Stormwater Collaborative – DRAFT 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.

July 2021 Page 12 of 16

Page 35 of 39

Page 223 of 228 Appendix A – Growth Plan: 50 Year Vision

Page 36 of 39

Page 224 of 228 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.

Page 37 of 39

Page 225 of 228 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 Page 38 of 39 Page 226 of 228 Page 39 of 39

Page 227 of 228 Item 8

Request for Decision

Meeting: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board - August 12, 2021 To: Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board From: Administration Subject: Standing Down Task Forces

Recommended Motion:

That the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board stand down Task Forces that work has been completed: • Shared Investment for Shared Benefit (SISB) • Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) • Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP)

Background:

Pursuant to the EMRB's Policy G012 - Committee and Task Force Terms of Reference, Task Forces carry out specific, time limited or non-recurring tasks. What this means is that Task Forces are to be stood down once their specific mandates have been fulfilled.

At least one EMRB Task Force will need to be stood down at the end of the Board meeting, with an additional two other Task Forces pending the outcome of motions associated with their respective deliverables: • On June 10, 2021, the Board approved the Final Report from the Shared Investment for Shared Benefit (SISB) Task Force. This final deliverable means the SISB Task Force can be stood down. • Pending the approval of the Board of the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan's (IRTMP) Prioritization Process and 2021 Regional Transportation Priorities, the IRTMP Task Force will also have fulfilled its mandate and may be stood down. • Pending the approval of the Board of the Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP), the RAMP Task Force will also have fulfilled its mandate and may be stood down.

Should the Board not approve the remaining deliverables for IRTMP and/or RAMP, this would mean the Board would need to provide further direction on how it wishes to proceed, which may require further work from these Task Forces.

Page 1 of 1

Page 228 of 228