DOCSLIB.ORG

Brazeau County Request for Council Decision

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brazeau County Request for Council Decision BRAZEAU COUNTY REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DECISION SUBJECT: Assessment Services Contract Extension DATE TO COUNCIL: September 15, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Colin Swap, General Manager of Finance ENDORSED BY: REVIEWED BY CAO: J. Whaley, CAO FILE NO: RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: That Council approve the contract extension with Accurate Assessment Group for the provision of assessment services for the 2021 through 2023 assessment years. 1. TOPIC DEFINED Executive Summary The current contract Brazeau County has with Accurate Assessment Group for assessment services expires on December 31. Provisions in the contract allow for an extension for a further three years for the 2021-2023 assessment years. Accurate Assessment Group has a longstanding relationship with Brazeau County for the provision of assessment services and is familiar with the County and its assessment process. Administration works closely with the assessors throughout the year to coordinate and oversee assessment and re-assessment activities and throughout the tax season to address questions and concerns from property owners. Assessors also work directly with Brazeau County property owners to address individual questions related to property assessment. Accurate Assessment Group is also familiar with the County’s current contract with the Province of Alberta for the hybrid delivery of Designated Industrial Property (DIP) assessment. Brazeau County’s contract with the Province expires in 2021. Should Council not wish to extend the contract with Accurate Assessment Group for the full three-year term presented, Administration would recommend extending the contract for at least 2021 until the contract with the Province concludes. Relevant Policy: FIN-2 Purchasing Policy Strategic Relevance: N/A Brazeau County - Request for Council Decision – Assessment Services Contract Extension Page 1 of 2 104 2. ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED ACTION That Council approve the contract extension with Accurate Assessment Group for the provision of assessment services until for the 2021 through 2023 assessment years. Advantages Disadvantages - Accurate Assessment Group is familiar - A three-year extension of the contract restricts the with Brazeau County and the opportunity of other assessment companies from assessment requirements of the bidding on providing services to Brazeau County. County. - Accurate Assessment Group has been contracted by the Provincial Government to provide Designated Industrial Property assessment services in conjunction with the hybrid contract between Brazeau County and the Government of Alberta. 3. IMPLICATIONS OF RECOMMENDATION Operational: If Council approves the contract extension Administration will enter into the contract with Accurate Assessment Group for assessment years 2021 to 2023. Financial: Assessment services are budgeted each year based on the rate agreed to in the contract. Accurate Assessment is proposing a rate increase of $0.50 per parcel each year for the duration of the contract extension for residential, non-residential and farmland parcels starting at $21.00 in 2021. This is in keeping with rate increases per year in the current contract. Attachments: N/A Brazeau County - Request for Council Decision – Assessment Services Contract Extension Page 2 of 2 105 BRAZEAU COUNTY REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DECISION SUBJECT: Recreation and Culture Cost-Sharing between the Town of Drayton Valley and Brazeau County DATE TO COUNCIL: September 15, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Lee Chambers - Director of Community Services ENDORSED BY: REVIEWED BY CAO: Jocelyn Whaley, CAO FILE NO: Report/Document Attached ___x___ Available _______ Nil _______ RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: That Council authorize Administration to renew the recreation and culture cost-sharing agreement between the Town of Drayton Valley and Brazeau County on a per capita rate. Rate to be based on Brazeau County per capita rate of $58.49 phased in over three years; 2020 - $108.38, 2021 - $83.43, 2022 - $58.49. 1. TOPIC DEFINED Executive Summary/Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined: Council discussed per capita funding during the September 1, 2020, regular meeting of Council and made the following motion: 0677/20-09-01 Moved by D. Wiltse to direct Administration to include in the previous motioned letter to let Drayton Valley know that Brazeau County will be decreasing the recreation cost sharing dollars to match the police funding increase cost starting in 2021 on an ongoing basis and further to include any more downloading or loss of income to the County may result in further cost sharing decreases. 0678/20-09-01 Moved by S. Wheale to table Motion 0677/20-09-01 until September 15, 2020. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY At the September 3, 2020, Recreation Board the following motion was made: 106 Moved by Councillor Ballas that the Recreation Board recommend the recreation cost sharing agreement for 2020 based on the attached financial statement showing $1,046,141 to both Councils for approval and further that the Joint Recreation Board shall investigate how increased efficiencies and increased revenues will occur. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY This amount is based on the attached breakdown and has been adjusted as per Recreation Board meetings. The adjustments include corrections to reallocations of some capital projects to operating as per the directive of the Town auditors and other corrections due to discrepancies. As a result, the Town has issued a refund on a portion of the 2019 capital contribution, $44,770.87, ensuring that the County is not paying for the projects both as a capital and an operating expense. The current recreation and culture cost sharing agreement with the Town of Drayton Valley expired in December of 2019. This agreement established funding of $1,036,000 ($133.32 per capita). An advisory recreation board was established earlier this year to review the agreement and all it entails. As 2020 is nearing a close, it is important to establish a cost-sharing framework to allow for proper financial planning for 2021 and establish a rate for 2020. In support of the Recreation Board, Administration conducted a comparison of cost-sharing levels that the neighbouring counties contribute to the urban centres within their boundaries, see attached document showing an average of $58.49 per capita. Something that was also found in the 2016 Municipal Inspection Report by Russell Farmer and Associates Consulting Ltd., see the excerpt below: A further survey was also undertaken comparing operating costs for communities with similar pools and arenas. Both surveys are attached for Council’s information. The results of the surveys indicate higher than average operational costs for the Drayton Valley arena. For example, in 2019, the Drayton Valley wage expenses totaled $851,088.03 and the average of four communities was $456,456.50. Based on the information found in these surveys, Administration is recommending a cost sharing structure based on per capita more in line with neighbouring communities. Given the changes to the RCMP funding, which takes effect in 2021 and the uncertain framework to come with the provincial changes to the linear assessment Administration has developed options for Council to consider below which are proposed to be phased in over a three-year period including 2020: 107 Option 1: Reducing recreation cost sharing in line with the increase in RCMP costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Confirmed RCMP $0.00 $105,163.00 $239,029.00 $370,326.00 $636,059.00 Funding Model Recreation Cost- $1,036,000.00 $930,837.00 $796,971.00 $665,674.00 $399,941.00 Sharing Amount Per capita $133.32 $119.78 $102.56 $85.66 $51.47 Amount Option 2: Based on recreation cost sharing survey 2019 2020 2021 2022 Per Capita $133.32 $108.38 $83.43 $58.49 Total $1,036,000 $842,220.98 $648,334.53 $454,525.79 Relevant Policy: None Strategic Relevance: Council goals #3, #5, and #6. 2. ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED ACTION That Council authorize Administration to renew the recreation and culture cost-sharing agreement between the Town of Drayton Valley and Brazeau County on a per capita rate. Rate to be based on Brazeau County per capita rate of $58.49 phased in over three years; 2020 - $108.38, 2021 - $83.43, 2022 - $58.49. Advantages Disadvantages • This may affect recreational service • All options allow for reducing the operating costs of the County levels in the region • This may be premature not knowing the • Recognizes the value of recreation facilities and sharing the costs with municipal full impact of linear assessment changes partners while not undermining the financial on the County viability of the County • Ensures continued collaboration with the Town • Recreation Board efficiency, less meetings negotiating 108 3. IMPLICATIONS OF RECOMMENDATION Operational: Minimal Financial: Reduces the recreation and culture cost sharing amount to the Town of Drayton Valley for operational costs Attachments: • Proposed 2020 Cost Sharing Breakdown (from Town of Drayton Valley) • Recreation Cost Sharing Survey • Arena and Pool Survey 109 110 2020 Recreation Cost Sharing (Operating) As of: September 1, 2020 Recreation operational contributions per county Recreation operational contributions received County Total Population $ per Capita Urban Municipality Total Population $ per capita County of Wetaskiwin $ 337,578.95 11,181 $ 30.19 City of Wetaskiwin $ 250,778.00 12,655 $ 19.82 2020 numbers and subject to change based on the ICF negotiations and Town of Millet $ 86,800.95 1,945 $ 44.63 subsequent new recreation agreement. Both amount to Millet and Total $ 337,578.95 14,600 $ 64.44 Wetaskiwin have CPI adjustments annually. Average $ 168,789.48 7,300 $ 32.22 Sturgeon County $ 709,224.00 20,495 $ 34.60 Bon Accord $ 76,331.00 1,529 $ 49.92 2020 numbers and subject to change. In the months to come the Councils in Gibbons $ 128,385.00 3,159 $ 40.64 this area are engaged in a discussion as to how to approach ICFs together, Legal $ 104,458.00 1,345 $ 77.66 considering current economic and other conditions, and the department Morinville* $ 266,621.00 9,893 $ 26.95 heads will work together to identify appropriate methodologies for all sub- Redwater $ 133,429.00 2,053 $ 64.99 agreements into the future.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transportation Network in the Alberta Hub Region
    TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN THE ALBERTA HUB REGION The Alberta HUB region has a highly- developed roadway network, rail system and air service connecting the region nationally, internationally and south to the U.S. and Mexican markets – ensuring safe, efficient and cost-effective logistics. The Alberta HUB region is part of an important North American transportation route linking the Prairies and major Midwest U.S. cities to the Texas Gulf Coast. The two designated north/south routes, Highway 36 and 41, move oversized/ overweight loads in and through the Alberta HUB region to the oil sands projects in the Alberta HUB region and northern Alberta. The Alberta HUB region is a perfect location for manufacturing as all industrial districts in the Alberta HUB region are connected to these major highways. 1 - LAC LA BICHE AIRPORT 5 - ELK POINT AIRPORT 9 - VERMILION AIRPORT 2- VEGREVILLE AIRPORT 6 - BONNYVILLE AIRPORT 10 – LLOYDMINSTER AIRPORT 3 - TWO HILLS AIRPORT 7 - COLD LAKE AIRPORT 4 - ST. PAUL AIRPORT 8 - CFB COLD LAKE THE ALBERTA HUB REGION: HIGHLY CONNECTED Highway System Alberta HUB region provides excellent highway transportation access for product shippers and recreational travelers alike, tapping into 29 highways (10 primary/1,827 km; 19 secondary/2,036 km) that cover approximately 4,000 km of road access. Major East-West Corridors • Highways 16 and 28 run through the region from the Saskatchewan border to Edmonton. Highway 16 is part of the Yellowhead branch of the Trans- Canada Highway system that connects Western Canada to the strategic ports of Prince Rupert and Vancouver in British Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • THORHILD LANDFILL 61308 Hwy 63 Newbrook, AB T0A 2P0 800.963.4776
    WASTE MANAGEMENT THORHILD LANDFILL 61308 Hwy 63 Newbrook, AB T0A 2P0 800.963.4776 BUSINESS HOURS Monday - Friday: 7:00am – 5:00pm Saturday: 8:00am – 2:00pm Holidays: 8:00am - 4:00pm Thorhild Landfill Waste Management’s disposal facilities employ the latest advances in landfill technology. Thorhild YEAR OPENED Landfill provides safe and convenient disposal services for communities, businesses and industries 2015 serving central and northern Alberta. This regional facility is engineered with environmental protection systems designed to meet or exceed rigorous government requirements. PROJECTED LIFE REMAINING 70+ years Thorhild Landfill uses a three-legged stool for groundwater and environmental protection. First, the site is situated optimally on top of low permeability clay. Second, it leverages advanced landfill FACILITY ACREAGE engineering designs and operations. Lastly, system performance is verified through a series of 454 Hectares checks and balances, including environmental monitoring systems for surface and groundwater, to provide proof of environmental protection. PERMITTED FOOTPRINT 85 Hectares Liner System REMAINING PERMITTED CAPACITY The landfill cells at the Facility are lined in accordance with AESRD approvals. These systems meet 23 million cubic meters or exceed regulations for Class II landfills. The liner system for each cell consists of the following layers (top to bottom): TONS PROCESSED ANNUALLY 1. 2.0m Protective Material (select waste), 200,000 – 400,000 +/- 2. 0.3m Granular Leachate Collection Layer, 3. Geotextile cushion, OWNERSHIP Waste Management of Canada 4. Geomembrane Liner (60-mil HDPE), Corporation (WMCC) 5. Geocomposite, 6. Geomembrane Liner (60-mil HDPE), PERMIT TYPE & PERMIT # 7. 0.6m Compacted Clay, and Province of Alberta EPEA 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Communities Within Specialized and Rural Municipalities (May 2019)
    Communities Within Specialized and Rural Municipalities Updated May 24, 2019 Municipal Services Branch 17th Floor Commerce Place 10155 - 102 Street Edmonton, Alberta T5J 4L4 Phone: 780-427-2225 Fax: 780-420-1016 E-mail: [email protected] COMMUNITIES WITHIN SPECIALIZED AND RURAL MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES COMMUNITY STATUS MUNICIPALITY Abee Hamlet Thorhild County Acadia Valley Hamlet Municipal District of Acadia No. 34 ACME Village Kneehill County Aetna Hamlet Cardston County ALBERTA BEACH Village Lac Ste. Anne County Alcomdale Hamlet Sturgeon County Alder Flats Hamlet County of Wetaskiwin No. 10 Aldersyde Hamlet Foothills County Alhambra Hamlet Clearwater County ALIX Village Lacombe County ALLIANCE Village Flagstaff County Altario Hamlet Special Areas Board AMISK Village Municipal District of Provost No. 52 ANDREW Village Lamont County Antler Lake Hamlet Strathcona County Anzac Hamlet Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo Ardley Hamlet Red Deer County Ardmore Hamlet Municipal District of Bonnyville No. 87 Ardrossan Hamlet Strathcona County ARGENTIA BEACH Summer Village County of Wetaskiwin No. 10 Armena Hamlet Camrose County ARROWWOOD Village Vulcan County Ashmont Hamlet County of St. Paul No. 19 ATHABASCA Town Athabasca County Atmore Hamlet Athabasca County Balzac Hamlet Rocky View County BANFF Town Improvement District No. 09 (Banff) BARNWELL Village Municipal District of Taber BARONS Village Lethbridge County BARRHEAD Town County of Barrhead No. 11 BASHAW Town Camrose County BASSANO Town County of Newell BAWLF Village Camrose County Beauvallon Hamlet County of Two Hills No. 21 Beaver Crossing Hamlet Municipal District of Bonnyville No. 87 Beaver Lake Hamlet Lac La Biche County Beaver Mines Hamlet Municipal District of Pincher Creek No. 9 Beaverdam Hamlet Municipal District of Bonnyville No.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Aeso Pip
    APPENDIX C AESO PIP PIP Summary Abee 993S Substation Upgrade 1. Introduction The AESO’s Participant Involvement Program (PIP) is designed to notify the parties notified in the transmission facility owner’s (TFO’s) PIP and any other parties that the AESO determines may have an interest in the needs identification document, including, but not limited to: i. occupants, landowners or residents; ii. local authorities, agencies and government which have responsibilities related to electric transmission line development; iii. First Nations and Métis; and iv. market participants (collectively, Stakeholders). The AESO’s PIP has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.2.1, NID19 and Appendix A2 of the current Alberta Utilities Commission (Commission) Rule 007 (AUC Rule 007), effective August 1, 2019. From May 2019 to September 2019, the AESO conducted a PIP to assist in preparing its Abee 993S Substation Upgrade Needs Identification Document (NID). The AESO directed the TFO, in this case AltaLink Management Ltd., in its capacity as general partner of AltaLink, L.P., to assist the AESO in providing notification as part of the AESO’s PIP. 2. Stakeholder Notification The AESO developed a one-page AESO Need Overview document with the purpose of notifying Stakeholders of the following items: • a description of the need for development; • a description of the AESO’s preferred option to respond to the system access service request; • identification of the general area where facilities could be installed to implement the AESO’s preferred option to respond to the system access service request; • the AESO’s contact information, including telephone, email and website, for further information; and • the AESO’s next steps, including the AESO’s intention to apply to the Commission for approval of the need.
    [Show full text]
  • Contact Information
    COUNTY INFO 2013 Contact Information Agricultural Service Departments Lamont County (780) 895-2585 Water drainage can be a contentious issue tHat can Beaver County (780)663-3730 affect all landowners in Alberta at one point or another. Many problems arise between landowners wHen natural creeks or streams flow through one landowners Smoky Lake County (780) 656-3730 land onto another. THese streams or creeks can be seasonal or permanent. WHen tHe spring melt begins, so does tHe increased call volume counties receive. Counties begin to focus on clearing plugged culverts or County of Two Hills (780) 657-3358 bridges, so that the natural flow of water is not blocked. Depending on the year sloughs and streams may develop where tHey Have not normally developed County of Minburn (780) 632-4033 before. The provincial Water Act requires tHat landowners maintain naturally occurring wetland, sloughs and temporary water bodies tHat exist and may Thorhild County (780) 398-3741 occur from time to time on their properties subsequent Camrose County (780) 672-4765 to rainfall or snowmelt runoff events. COUNTY INFO 2013 Farmland Drainage Changes to drainage patterns on farmland that results in additional water flowing off of an owners land onto the lands of their neigHbors or into the County road borrow pit is not permitted without the approval of Alberta Environment and consultation with the County. Landowners wHo Have obtained approval to undertake drainage improvements will be responsible for all cost associated with grading borrow pits to facilitate drainage, or installing properly sized culverts. ! Did You Know Counties can have 7,000-10,000 or more culverts to look after and this is not including bridges.
    [Show full text]
  • August 10, 2000
    MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF BRAZEAU NO. 77 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING August 10, 2000 f p MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF BRAZEAU NO. 77 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA DATE: 2000 08 10 TIME: 9:00 AM PLACE: M.D. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNCIL CHAMBERS Page Nos. Call to Order Present 1. Additionto and Adoption of the Agenda 2. Adoption of the Minutes - Regular Council meeting of July 26, 2000 3. Business arising from Council meeting. 4. Emergent Items 5. Delegations/Appointments 11:00 am Ratepayer Concerns 6. Planning and Development Matters a) Application for Amendment to Land Use Bylaw368-99 Proposed Bylaw 384-2000 Pt. NW 1/4 36-47-04-W5M Containing 5.75 HA (14.19 AC) more or less Hamlet of Buck Creek Appl/Owners: Edward & Kathleen Burton From Hamlet Residential (HR) to Agricultural B (AG B) 1-16 - report and recommendation attached 7. General Matters a) Acting Mayor for Breton 17 - correspondence from the Village of Breton attached b) Request for Support 18-20 jp - correspondence from the DVChamber of Commerce attached c) Chamber of Commerce Business Directory m 21-24 - correspondence from the DV Chamber of Commerce attached l^| COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA -2- 2000 0810 8. Correspondence/Items for Information a) Correspondence from the Wood Buffalo Environmental Association regarding the Annual Report. (Report available from Administration) 25 b) Copy of correspondence from the Villageof Breton to the Town of Drayton Valley. 26 1 c) Media Release from Schoolworks! Inc. 27 d) National Composting Conference Information r 28-31 e) Seniors Services Workshop 2000 Information 32 f) Call for Nominations for the Lieutenant Governor's r Award 1 33-34 «i g) Chamber Chatter Newsletter 35-36 *_ h) Correspondence from the FCM regarding Infrastructure Canada Program - Update 37-38 i i) Correspondence from the FCM regarding Green Municipal Funds 39-40 j) Correspondence from the AAMD&C regarding the R.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta Municipalities Classified by Region*
    Alberta Municipalities Classified by Region* South Region* Central Region* North East Region* Legal Name AMC Reference Legal Name AMC Reference Legal Name AMC Reference Cardston County ------- M.D. No. 6 Acadia No. 34 MD 34 M.D. No. 34 Beaver County ------- County No. 9 Cypress County ------- M.D. No. 1 Bighorn No. 8 MD 8 M.D. No. 8 Bonnyville No. 87 MD 87 M.D. No. 87 Foothills No. 31 MD 31 M.D. No. 31 Calgary ------- Calgary Camrose County No. 22 CO 22 County No. 22 Forty Mile County No. 8 CO 8 County No.8 Clearwater County ------- M.D. No. 99 Flagstaff County ------- County No. 29 Lethbridge County ------- County No. 26 Kneehill County ------- M.D. No. 48 Lakeland County ------- M.D. No. 87 Newell County No. 4 CO 4 County No. 4 Lacombe County ------- County No. 14 Lamont County ------- County No. 30 Pincher Creek No. 9 MD 9 M.D. No. 9 Mountain View County ------- County No. 17 Minburn County No. 27 CO 27 County No. 27 Ranchland No. 66 MD 66 M.D. No. 66 Paintearth County No. 18 CO 18 County No. 18 Opportunity No. 17 MD 17 M.D. No. 17 Taber MD M.D. No. 14 Ponoka County ------- County No. 3 Provost No. 52 MD 52 M.D. No. 52 Vulcan County ------- County No. 2 Red Deer County ------- County No. 23 Smoky Lake County ------- County No. 13 Warner County No. 5 CO 5 County No. 5 Rocky View No. 44 MD 44 M.D. No. 44 St. Paul County No. 19 CO 19 County No.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Planning Committee
    Community planning Hours: committee Mondays 1 p.m.—5 p.m. Tuesdays and Thursdays 3 p.m.— 7 p.m. Heather Nickel, Facilitator www.newbrooklibrary.ab.ca Joyce Miller Telephone: 780-576-3772 Hazel Lahti Irene Rettman Manager: Tracy Woloshyniuk Collette Bonhomme Sabrina Harper-Legere Tammy Kuefler Hours Sam Docherty Monday, Wednesday, Friday Dominique Stockford 9 a.m.—12 p.m.; 1—4 p.m. Arnie & Marie Alm Tuesday & Thursday Jan Rosenthal 9 a.m.—12 p.m., 1—8 p.m. Bev Litwin Steve Kolach www,radwaylibrary.ab.ca Telephone: 780-736-3548 Manager: Morgan Johnstone Karen Schneberger Roy Kubica Hours: Krista Perry Tues, Wed., Thu, Fri, Sat Gretchen Marko John Olson 10 a.m.—1 p.m. Tues, Wed., Thu 2 a.m.—7 p.m. www.thorhildlibrary.ab.ca Tracy Woloshyniuk Telephone: 780-398-3502 Morgan Johnstone Manager: Rose Alexander Rose Alexander Thorhild County Library Board Box 615 Thorhild, Alberta T0A 3J0 November 2013 Create community involvement/ awareness To continue to provide library services within our county, ensuring that our librar- Engage youth with creative programming in a non- ies are a vibrant, essential part of each di- judgmental environment Using social media our libraries will engage verse community the online community to promote the indi- Minecraft tournaments vidual programs available within each li- Wii tournaments brary. Each library will use Facebook to contact interested parties on new and up- Advise school/community of wifi possibili- coming events We will provide a variety of materials, pro- ties at the library that would facilitate social networking. gramming, and services to support self expression, exploration and the exchange of ideas and knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAYTON VALLEY, ALBERTA, on MONDAY, 91 04 24 P? CALL to H
    1 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF BRAZEAU NO. 77 I REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA f) 91 05 09 I (May 9, 1991) If] i I MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF BRAZEAU NO. 77 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 91 05 09 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: M.D. Administration Building, Council Chambers IB Page Nos. Call to Order Present 1. Additions to the Agenda r 2. Adoption of the Agenda p? 3. Adoption of Minutes 1-12 (a) Minutes of the 91 04 24 Regular Council Meeting 13 (b) Notes from the Public Hearing held on 91 04 24 pi at 9:40 a.m. to Consider the Adoption of By- Law No. 127-91 which would change the land use designation of Pt. of SE 1/4 Sec 4-49-7 W5M from Agricultural One to Country Residential Restricted 14 - 15 (c) Notes from the Public Hearing held on 91 04 24 to Consider the Adoption of By-Law No. 128-91, being a By-Law to Adopt an Area Structure Plan for Lot 3, Plan 862-1308 in the NE 1/4 Sec 4- 49-7 W5M, to be known as the Eastview Heights Area Structure Plan 16 - 17 (d) Minutes of the 91 04 30 Special Council Meeting 4. Public Hearing - 9:30 a.m. Proposed Land Use By-Law Amendment - Change of Land PK Use Designation from Agricultural One to Rural Industrial - Block 1, Plan 4433 R.S. - Pt. of NW 1/4 7-49-7 W5M 18 - 21 - Report and Recommendation attached. 22 - By-Law attached. ./ 5. Eastview Heights Area Structure Plan 23 - 30 - Area Structure Plan attached.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Overview
    CORPORATE OVERVIEW T March, 2019 Page 1 of 2 A Target Products Limited (incorporated in 1961) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the QUIKRETE® R Companies (effective February 2008). The company employs over 200 people with the corporate sales office in Burnaby, BC. A state of the art production facility, in Abbotsford, was completed in 2006. Target also operates plants in Calgary, Morinville, Winnipeg and Olympia WA. Other G subsidiaries include GT Commodities (a transportation group) and Target Technologies Inc. (a synthetic sports field division). E Original Product Line: T The company’s original product line was cementitious mixes primarily for lumberyards and do-it- yourself box stores. These products provide customers with convenient, quality products for small projects. Over time, this product line expanded to include materials that are tailored to the industrial market. P Sand Division: The company’s sand division manufactures and distributes a variety of filter sands and blasting R media. In addition to supplying our internal requirements for spec sand materials, the Abbotsford, Morinville and Thorhild plants produce specialty sands for many different industries. O Golf Division: D The golf course and sports field division produces and distributes topdressing and bunker sands, fairway mixes and greens mixes. Target has the ability to supply large projects with on-site blending and testing plants. The company has supplied golf courses in Hawaii, Bermuda, U Washington, Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. C Alberta Operations: Calgary - Target expanded into the Alberta market with the acquisition of a plant in Calgary in T 1987. This plant manufactures cementitious products for the Alberta retail market.
    [Show full text]
  • Re: Hydrogeological Review of Proposed Landfill Facility, Thorhild County, Nw 18 & 19-61-20 W4m 1. Introduction 2. Hydrogeol
    23 April 2009 Proj. No.: B21960000 File Loc.: Edmonton Concerned Citizens of Thorhild County c/o Betty Kolewaski Delivered via Email: [email protected] Dear Ms. Kolewaski: RE: HYDROGEOLOGICAL REVIEW OF PROPOSED LANDFILL FACILITY, THORHILD COUNTY, NW 18 & 19-61-20 W4M 1. INTRODUCTION Concerned Citizens of Thorhild County (CCTC) have indicated that they require an independent hydrogeological review of the proposed Thorhild Landfill (the “Site”). The proposed location of the Landfill is NW 18 & 19-61-20-W4M. CCTC have hired a second independent consultant to complete the regulatory and design/construction review for the facility. At the request of CCTC, WorleyParsons has completed a preliminary review of selected reports prepared for Waste Management of Canada Corporation (WMCC) in order to provide a preliminary evaluation of the hydrogeological conditions beneath the proposed Landfill. 2. HYDROGEOLOGICAL REVIEW Based on the review of the reports provided by CCTC and other published reports referenced herein, WorleyParsons provides the following comments in regards to the regional and Site hydrogeology. 2.1.1 Regional Geological and Hydrogeological Conditions Although a description of the regional geology/hydrogeology is provided in the Millenium EMS Ltd. (MEMS) hydrogeological assessment report (MEMS 2007a), a more thorough understanding on the Site hydrogeology within the regional context would be of benefit in determining potential migration pathways and off-site receptors. For instance, a preliminary review of selected water well drillers’ reports for the areas adjacent to the Site (AENV 2009) suggests that varying thickness of sand and sand/gravel deposits within the till unit, as well as coal units within the upper bedrock units, are prevalent throughout the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Municipalities Assessed Using Camalot XXX = Not Using Camalot
    Municipalities Assessed Using CAMAlot XXX = not using CAMAlot CITIES Airdrie Cold Lake Leduc Red Deer Brooks Edmonton Lethbridge Spruce Grove Calgary Fort Saskatchewan Lloydminster St. Albert Camrose Grande Prairie Medicine Hat Wetaskiwin Chestermere Lacombe 15 of 18 SPECIALIZED MUNICIPALITY Crowsnest Pass Strathcona County Mackenzie County Wood Buffalo (only Ind) Jasper 5 of 5 MUNICIPAL DISTRICTS Acadia, M.D. of Foothills, M.D. of Northern Sunrise County Starland County Athabasca County Forty Mile, County of Opportunity, M.D. of Stettler, County of Barrhead, County of Grande Prairie, County of Paintearth, County of Sturgeon County Beaver County Greenview, M.D. of Parkland County Taber, M.D. of Big Lakes, M.D. of Kneehill County Peace, M.D. of Thorhild, County of Bighorn, M.D. of Lac La Biche County Pincher Creek, M.D. of Two Hills, County of Birch Hills County Lac Ste. Anne County Ponoka County Vermilion River, County of Bonnyville, M.D. of Lacombe County Provost, M.D. of Vulcan County Brazeau County Lamont County Ranchland, M.D. of Wainwright, M.D. of Camrose County Leduc County Red Deer County Warner, County of Cardston County Lesser Slave River, M.D. Rocky View County Westlock County Clear Hills County Lethbridge, County of Saddle Hills County Wetaskiwin, County of Clearwater County Minburn, County of Smoky Lake County Wheatland County Cypress County Mountain View County Smoky River, M.D. of Willow Creek, M.D. of Fairview, M.D. of Newell, County of Spirit River, M.D. of Woodlands County Flagstaff County Northern Lights, County of
    [Show full text]