Edmonton (Alta.) -1996 - Conservation of natural sites in Edmonton's table lands...

1996 Planning Awards Submission to the Alberta Association of the Canadian Institute of Planners

City Policy C-467

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

effributon Submitted to AACIP: Marcb 1996

Alberta Association Canadian Institute of Planners

gibertarnortbianta Xtrritorief‘

abarb of Bi4tinttion preanteb to

TO City of Cbmonton for the preparation of

eitp ipotitp C-467 Con4rthation of Paturat -s)ite4 in ebntontonT4 Table 1Lanbt4 benton4tratrb treatibitp anb extritEnte in Or profttqiional prattitr of tonttnunitp planning

kujicIj

Ztprit 1.996

,501taltimENIOVE,,,

MEW

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

March 22, 1996

AACIP Awards c/o Ron Ui, ACP 3rd Floor, APWSS Building Strategic Planning 6950 - 113 Street Edmonton, Alberta 160 5A9 Dear Mr. Ui: I am pleased to submit City Policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands to the Alberta Association, Canadian Institute of Planners for the 1996 Planning Awards Program.

City Policy C-467 is submitted under "Category 1, Planning Policy, Strategy or Method". I believe that the attention paid to issues, the community and communications in preparing this policy has resulted in an innovative, flexible, cooperative and effective policy, which leads the way in environmental planning in Alberta.

City Policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands fully meets or exceeds the Category 1 criteria: The policy is innovative in terms of: its focus on the conservation of sustainable natural sites; its mandatory "Natural Site Assessments" for sites affected by large scale public and private development; its provision for private conservation; its encouragement of voluntary conservation; - its encouragement of private sector sponsorships; - its creation of a Conservation Coordinator position; and - its contribution to proactive conservation of regional environmentally sensitive areas.

Policy development addressed short-term and long-term issues related to conservation of natural sites within an urban municipality, including: the optimum municipal approach to conservation; inventories, mapping and data bases; changing community needs; - fiscal realities; ompensation; blanket protection; sustainability of sites; process; responsibilities; and management.

City of Edmonton 1

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

Policy development addressed community needs through community involvement. This successful approach is demonstrated by: continual requests of the Edmonton Natural History Club and other environmental groups to become more involved with conserving natural sites and educating the public; and - the initiative shown by the development industry, who collectively conserved, in full or in part, a woodlot, a wetland and a peatbog/woodland in three new neighbourhoods while the policy was being developed.

As the Conservation policy was developed, effective communication alleviated concerns by conveying clear, consistent messages throughout the process. Highlights of the program include: - the use of two working groups, an inter-departmental one and an external one; - holding a non-statutory public hearing for the draft policy; - five mail outs to over 1700 landowner and interest groups combined with newspaper advertisements to inform the public; - continual input from landowners, interest groups and the public as the policy developed; and - positive acceptance of the policy by those most affected: landowners, the public, environmental groups, and the administration.

City Policy C-467 addresses an issue facing all Alberta municipalities. The policy demonstrates a reasonable and consistent approach for conserving natural sites while recognizing individual property rights and fiscal realities. In Edmonton, the policy has already improved the future environmental quality and biological diversity of several new Edmonton neighbourhoods.

Translating the elements of the policy to other Alberta municipalities may successfully enhance environmental planning in Alberta.

Enclosed are the four binder copies of the submission. Should you have any questions regarding this submission, please contact Heather McRae at 496-6059 or Mary Ann McConnellBoehm at 496-6063.

Thank you for your consideration of City Policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands for a 1996 AACIP Planning Award.

Cordially,

Bruce Duncan, ACP, MCIP General Manager Enclosure

City of Edmonton 2

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

INDEX AACIP 1996 Awards Submission

Divider 1

Letters of Support

Divider 2

City Policy C-467 Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

Divider 3

Map - City of Edmonton Table Lands Inventory of Environmentally Sensitive and Significant Natural Areas

Divider 4

Environmentally Sensitive and Natural Area Protection Within Edmonton's Table Lands: Policy and Implementation Background Study

Divider 5

Policy Directions — Conserving Edmonton's Environmentally Sensitive and Significant Natural Areas - Background Paper

Divider 6

Chronology

Divider 7

Communication Examples

Divider 8

Council and Media Acceptance

Divider 9

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

Submission of City Policy C-467

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands to the Alberta Association, Canadian Institute of Planners for the

1996 Planning Awards Program Submitted by the

City of Edmonton

City Policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands is submitted in:

"Award Category 1 — Planning Policy, Strategy or Methods"

The purpose of the AACIP Planning Awards Program is to recognize significant contributions to the planning of land, resources, services and facilities in Alberta."

The criteria for the "planning policy, strategy or method" planning award category include: • "innovative or excellent policy, strategy or methods of plan development..."

• "depending on the type of submission, extensive consideration of issues, attention to short and long term community needs, community involvement through analysis and definitive solutions."

• "effective communication of ideas, rationale and intentions."

Submitted: March 1996 gMEMMEgRiMic

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467 L

1. INTRODUCTION The issue of identifying environmentally sensitive areas and preserving these areas in the face of growth and development is noted in municipal development plans throughout Alberta. In Edmonton, an innovative approach to addressing this issue is taken in City Policy C-467 Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Land (approved

by City Council in July, 1995). The policy presents a cooperative way for Edmontonians to work together to conserve natural sites, individually or through the development process.

The project began in 1992 with direction from City Council to develop a city policy to allow the Corporation, the development industry, landowners and the public to take a consistent and proactive approach to conserving environmentally sensitive areas and significant natural areas within Edmonton's table lands.

The Policy The policy applies in Edmonton's table lands, defined as those suburban and agricultural lands, outside of the North Saskatchewan River Valley, which were annexed to the City in 1982. It also applies to new development proposals and strategies or any major amendments to approved development proposals and strategies on substantially undeveloped lands. ' Two inventories (Inventory of Environmentally Sensitive and Significant Natu- Site NW 302 - offers a unique set of environmental ral Areas, City of Edmonton, and Inven- conditions for education and research due to its unparalleled diversity of vegetation communities. tory of Additional Environmentally Sensitive and Significant Natural Areas) prepared by Geowest Environmental Consultants Ltd. in 1993, identified 54 environmentally sensitive areas, 31 significant natural areas and 269 natural areas (see map - divider 4). The criteria used for site identification and classification, approved by City Council, can be used to identify and classify other natural sites.

The natural sites were identified due to their ecological sensitivity or significance to Edmonton. The sites range in size from 2 to 50 hectares and contain features such as old growth forest (trees 100 to 130 years old), young woodlots (trees 20 years old), native prairie, rare plants and birds, sand dunes and lakes.

The policy is implemented through an overall direction to the Corporation to conserve; through the physical planning and development process; by encouraging and supporting voluntary conservation and private sector sponsorship; promoting awareness; and by working with landowners to conserve the four regionally significant environmentally sensitive areas prior to development.

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

Extensive consideration of implementation and conservation issues, considerable stakeholder and general public consultation, continuing attention to the short and long term needs of Edmonton, thorough analysis of options and effective communications led to the development of this innovative policy.

The policy allows the City of Edmonton to take an innovative, flexible and cooperative approach to an issue that faces all Alberta municipalities.

2. INNOVATIVE POLICY City policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's' Table Lands demonstrates that municipalities can take the initiative in natural site conservation, in the absence of supporting provincial legislation. The more outstanding features of the City Policy follow: Voluntary conservation on the part of landowners addresses the conflict between the community's desire to retain environmentally sensitive areas and individual property rights. This is also an innovative approach to the lack of supporting legislation for a municipality wishing to support conservation of natural sites located on private land.

Voluntary conservation is enhanced by the provision for future partnerships and support for conservation by the Corporation.

Extensive community consultation addressed resistance to conservation on the part of the development industry and landowners. As people became more informed and policy development progressed, attitudes became more supportive and some developers began to propose integrating natural sites into their neighbourhood designs. In the Hodgson neighbourhood, an environmentally sensitive area will be conserved due to the developer's initiative.

A focus on conservation of sustainable sites ensures that Corporate and private resources are not spent on sites that would be nonviable in an urban environment. To support this, an assessment mechanism for sustainability has been drafted.

Mandatory information requirements known as "Natural Site Assessments" allow consistent treatment of sites within the development process. Assessments are required for natural sites affected by large scale public and private development. The results of the policy's mandatory requirement are that: • City Council, landowners, the administration and the public are now aware of the existence of sites, the sustainability of the sites and the actions necessary to conserve the site within a development. There was no mechanism in the past for providing this information.

• The environmental attributes of sites, including their biological diversity, are examined and made public.

• Conserving natural sites becomes part of the development discussion, although the policy's voluntary nature gives landowners the option of not conserving a site.

• Over the long term, successful implementation will lead to the conservation of more natural sites.

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

Creation of the Conservation Coordinator position gives tangible support to environmental groups or landowners wishing to conserve natural sites. The Conservation Coordinator also has the mandate to seek partnerships and creative solutions to support conservation of natural sites. The Conservation Coordinator also uses a "Tool Kit" of flexible and innovation approaches to unique conservation situations.

Proactive conservation, with the landowners, of the four regionally significant environmentally sensitive areas on the table lands (see photos) allows the administration to work with interested individuals and to contribute to the conservation of a network of regional sites.

Site NW 7026 - is the most important single wetland for wetland-related wildlife within Edmonton.

3. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES The policy was a response to Objective 6.D of Edmonton's 1990 Municipal Development Plan, Bylaw 9076 "To retain and obtain environmentally sensitive areas."

'uterus' -An inter-departmental working group (NaturalAreas Policy Development Group) was struck to explore the issues related to protecting environmentally sensitive areas and to examine alternative civic approaches for their protection. Environmentally Sensitive and Natural Area Protection Within Edmonton's Table Lands: Policy and Implementation Background Study (Divider 5) outlines their findings and the recommended approach - a city policy. A city policy has the greatest potential for creative implementation; requires both public and private projects to consider the protection of natural areas, and; allows ease of amendment by Council in response to civic and public requests.

External - Input from the public, affected landowners and interest groups was solicited at the initial and subsequent stages of policy development In response to a request by the Urban Development Institute, a committee (representing landowners, developers, environmental and agricultural interests and the general public) was struck to advise the administration as the policy developed. Issues of compensation, blanket protection, sustainability of sites, process and responsibilities were dealt with. The outcome of these discussions are outlined in Policy Directions,Conserving Edmonton's Environmentally Sensitive and Sigmficant Natural Areas Background Paper (Divider 6).

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

ii 4. ATTENTION TO COMMUNITY NEEDS New neighbourhoods are locating an average of 5 to 7 kilometers away from the green and natural North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System. Access to the natural features in the river valley and ravine system for residents in these new neighbourhoods may be more difficult. Integrating existing natural sites into new development will give residents in new neighbourhoods proximity to these features.

Lackof_public knowledge about the existence, significance and biodiversity of natural sites was addressed by initiating and Site NW 5007 - is the largest continuous tract of "native" vegetation in south Edmonton. publishing the Inventory of Environmentally Sensitive and Significant Natural Areas, City of Edmonton (1993).

The Inventory has provided Edmontonians and Albertans with concrete information on natural sites on Edmonton's table lands. The Inventory was partly funded by the former Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission and forms part of a regional data base.

Environmental groups within Edmonton, such as the Edmonton Natural History Club, and landowners had not been aware of the location, significance or biological diversity of all of the treed and wet areas on the table lands. Placing the information from the Inventory on a GIS database and in a dBase file allows easier monitoring of sites and distribution of this information. In the short term, knowledge of these sites has begun to change attitudes towards conserving natural sites. Over the long term, the Inventory information impacts all future development proposals affecting natural sites and focuses environmental groups' conservation and naturalist efforts to these sites.

Ensuring that Corporate and_private funds are_spent_wisely by assessing the sustainability of sites proposed for conservation provides a cost effective way of improving Edmonton's quality of life over time.

5. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT While the draft policy was being prepared, awareness of the existence of natural sites and the potential for conserving natural sites on the table lands grew at City Council, within the administration, on the part of the public and on the part of developers. City Council responded to planning reports with questions about the status of natural sites and the plans of developers for conserving natural sites. Developers began to come in with proposals to retain and integrate natural sites within new developments on the

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467 table lands. The Edmonton Natural History Club and other environmental groups became aware of this initiative and asked to become more involved with conserving natural sites and educating the public.

The shift in public and corporate attitudes towards natural sites became apparent during policy development. Increased awareness of City Council, developers and the administration led to the conservation, in full or part of a woodlot, a wetland and a peatbog/woodland. It also led one developer to put a naturalized stormwater management facility in a new neighbourhood rather than the traditional sterile, man made facility. The policy has already improved the future environmental quality and biological diversity of four new Edmonton neighbourhoods. Continuing implementation of the policy should further this trend.

6. EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION At the outset of the Inventory project, landowners, the public, interest groups and environmental groups were invited by letter, brochure, poster and advertisements to nominate sites, and outline their concerns and suggestions. The same people and groups were notified of the criteria used to classify the identified sites and notified of the publication of the Inventory. Landowners with natural sites on their land were given the information from the Inventory about their site. Landowners, the public, interest groups and environmental groups were invited to come to Open Houses to learn more about the Inventory and proposed policy and to contribute ideas to the policy.

At the direction of City Council a committee (representing landowners, developers, environmental and agricultural interests and the general public) was struck to advise the administration as the policy developed.

Anon-statutory public hearing (unusual for a draft city policy) was held at City Council's Executive Committee. The administration met with those who had made presentations at the hearing to resolve their concerns and revised the draft policy accordingly.

7. CONCLUSION City Policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites on Edmonton's Table Lands leads the way for municipalities interested in conserving natural sites while recognizing individual property rights and fiscal realities.

In Edmonton, the policy has already improved the future environmental quality and biological diversity of four new Edmonton neighbourhoods. Continuing implementation of the policy should further this trend.

The attention devoted to conflicting issues and community needs combined with extensive community involvement and effective communication contributed to the development of this innovative, flexible and cooperative policy.

City of Edmonton

AACIP 1996 Planning Awards Submission — City Policy C-467

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City Policy C-467, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton s' Table Lands was prepared by the staff of the Forecasting and Policy Development Section, City of Edmonton Planning and Development Department. The prime authors were: Harvey Crone, ACP, MCIP, Director Heather McRae, ACP, MCIP, Senior Planner Mary Ann McConnell-Boehm, ACP, MCIP, Planner

Advice from the following contributed greatly to policy development: Natural Areas Policy Development Group Natural Areas Advisory Committee The contributions of the following are also acknowledged: Bruce Duncan, ACP, MCIP Bob Caldwell, ACP, MCIP Jim Low Berry Wijdeven Janice Talbot Molly Smith Dale Lewis Dan Henry Charlie Barton Ron Cook Jeff Brasok Gord Willis Jim Guthrie Linda O'Farrell Lori Carlson Nita Johal

City of Edmonton

Alley gftvItonmentat

consulting

JOHN LILLEY M.Sc. 1003 Garland Terrace Sherwood Park, Alberta Canada T8A 2R5

AACIP Awards c/o Ron Ui, ACP 3rd Floor, APWSS Building, Strategic Planning 6950- 113 Street Edmonton, Alberta T6G 5A9

Office: (403) 464 5238 Fax: (403) 464 5238 Home: (403) 464 6973

March 15, 1996

To whom it may concern: I am pleased to provide a letter of support for the City of Edmonton's Policy "Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands" for the 1996 AACIP's Planning Awards. As a member of the Advisory Committee on the policy, I can attest to the level of effort that city planners put into preparing the inventory of environmentally significant and sensitive natural areas and in developing the city's innovative policy to conserve these areas.

The policy is among the first (if not the first) policy in Alberta aimed at conserving natural sites in new developments within a major municipality. The policy addresses a need which is long overdue - the need for protection of natural sites within urban areas. The difficulty of long-term conservation of natural sites within the urban environment required careful consideration of the ecology of these areas and the potential impacts of development including impacts on hydrology, soil conservation, biodiversity, and survival of species and area integrity. All these factors are incorporated into the policy.

The policy supports voluntary conservation and sponsorships towards conservation. It promotes awareness among landowners, interest groups and the public of the importance and value of natural sites. It provides mechanisms for landowners to work with the City and with interest groups to conserve environmentally significant areas prior to development. The policy is innovative in its completely voluntary approach to conservation. Voluntary conservation, private conservancy, cooperative approaches, partnerships, and education programs will be the backbone of the policy and its successful implementation.

In preparing the policy, the range of ecological and economic issues and community interests and needs received extensive consideration. Issues and approaches included: Lack of public knowledge about the existence, significance and biodiversity of natural sites within the city limits which will be addressed the development of an education program; Resistance to conservation on behalf of the development industry and landowners which was addressed through the formation of a Natural Areas Advisory Committee, through individual meetings and through the voluntary nature of the policy; Individual property rights which were addressed by making the policy voluntary and through provisions for partnerships and support by the City;

• Project Management • Scientific Research & Writing

• Consultation and Facilitation • Conference Planning • Policy Development

<2> The future ecological viability of conserved sites which will be addressed through a mechanism for assessing sustainability; and Long-term continuity and commitment to the management of natural sites which was demonstrated through the appointment of a Conservation Coordinator.

The sensitivity of conserving natural sites on private land within urban areas required extensive communication, consultation and consideration of economic and environmental issues from a range of perspectives. Community and other interests were involved in developing the policy from the outset. During the inventory project, landowners, the public, interest groups and environmental groups were invited to nominate sites. These same groups and individuals were notified of the criteria used to classify the identified sites and notified of the publication of the inventory.

Landowners with natural sites on their property were given information about those sites.

Landowners, the public, interest groups and environmental groups were invited to open houses to learn more about the inventory and the proposed policy. A multi-stakeholder, Natural Areas Advisory Committee was formed to provide the administration with advice on the proposed policy.

A public hearing was held at the City Council's Executive Committee to help resolve concerns.

This hearing resulted in a revised draft policy which was approved by the City.

In summary, the City of Edmonton's approach to the development of this policy and the intent of the policy itself reflect an innovative response by the City to the conservation of natural sites within urban boundaries. All issues and concerns have been dealt with as a result of extensive community involvement, thorough examination of the issues and development of innovative ways of addressing these concerns. In response to this policy, landowners and developers are already beginning to incorporate environmental features and natural sites into their development plans. The result will be a city that maintains a high level of environmental quality for the protection of biodiversity and the enjoyment of its citizens.

Yours truly,

John Lilley

EDMONTON NATURAL HISTORY CLUB Box 1582 Edmonton, Alberta T5.1 2N9 March 19, 1996 AACIP Awards do Ron Ui, ACP 3rd Floor, APWSS Building, Strategic Planning 6950- 113 Street Edmonton, Alberta T6G 5A9 Dear Mr: Ui: I am pleased to write on behalf of the Edmonton Natural History Club in support of the City of Edmonton's application for an AAC1P award. The City of Edmonton approved the Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands policy on â&#x20AC;&#x17E;July 25, 1995. This. is, a progressive policy that has enabled Edmonton to join other environmentally aware . municipalities across Canada in recognizing the importance of urban natural areas in maintaining local biodiversity and in enhancing the quality of human life. Edmonton has long been proud of its green river valley but this policy provides opportunities for natural lands on the. periphery of the city to be preserved too, where development is occurring or can be expected to occur, by identifying and incorporating them into the planning Process. As well, the policy allows nature-loving Edtnontonians to. feel a renewed sense of pride and involvement in their city, knowing that the City sanctions proactive conservation, and the destruction of native habitat with development need not be inevitable The City Planning and Development Department have worked assiduouslyfor three years to get the policy passed: in drawing up the Inventory of Natural Sites, developing the policy and providing for its implementation; communicating its unfamiliar terms to the public, and meeting the considerable objections and criticisms raised, especially on the part of landowners and developers.

The Edmonton Natural History . Club (ENHC) has been involved in the development of the policy by way of public participation sinceits inception. Members have contributed to the Inventory, attended public open houses on the draft policy and made submissions to City Council in its favour. The Club had representation onthe Natural Areas Advisory Committee, which was a vehicle for public input and negotiation while the policy was being drafted and- revised. For the last few months the ENHC's urban natural areas Committee has been working with the City's Conservation Coordinator to facilitate the Conservation of one particular site of. Which the ENHC has considerable knowledge. The partnership is an enthusiastic one involving an exchange of expertise and we hope that the mutual support it provides 'May produce results that neither party could achieve alone. The Club is also committed to assisting with public education and, where appropriate, with monitoring, management and wise use of some of the sites In return, members . can look forward to increasing their own knowledge of Edmonton's natural heritage, and to honing their interpretation 'skills. .

Although compliance with the policy is voluntary on the part of landowners, the mandatory requirement for developers to perform a natural site assessment at the planning stage' is, we believe, a major step forward in encouraging a new tradition of awareness of the environment 'and the importance of Planning for conservation in the city.

We applaud the City's far-sightedness in bringing us a vision of a better, greener Edmonton in the future. We appreciate the persistent and innovative approaches the administration has taken to establish this policy, and we would like to see their ongoing efforts encouraged with appropriate recognition. . Sincerely,

Harry Stelfox President Edmonton Natural History Club

Ducks Unlimited Canada

THE CITY OF EDMONTON .

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPT. GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE

MAR

19 96

Referred-W---

AvAbn Copies to: March 14, 1996 City of Edmonton Planning and Development 10310 - 102 Ave NW Edmonton, AB T5J 2X6

Re: Nomination for the 1996 Planning Awards

By July 14, 1992, the City of Edmonton became committed to protection of environmentally sensitive areas within its table lands. It was with pleasure that Ducks Unlimited Canada (DU) accepted the City's invitation to participate on its Natural Areas Advisory Committee. DU had completed an inventory of significant wetlands and wetland complexes within the City in October of 1992 and came to the committee with anticipation that these 20 wetland areas could be conserved.

As with any resource conservation plan it was essential to identify each natural area with the City's table lands. This was effectively done through a private consultant by the Planning and Development Department.

The standard of urban development is that all natural areas are lost. So it was a major leap of faith that the City of Edmonton took steps to save its natural areas. Marketing the conservation strategy to its citizens and landowner/developers was not an easy task. However, through full participation of all stakeholders and strong leadership of the Planning and Development Department the process to conserve natural areas within the City was forwarded to City council and approved on July 25, 1995. It is now a pleasure for DU to be involved in policy implementation.

Through its commitment and initiative, the City of Edmonton has become a leader in urban open space protection and DU strongly supports the Policy and recommends the City for the 1996 Planning Awards.

Sincerely,

G rdon Edwards Provincial Manager

202, 10470-176 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T55 1L3 Ph: (403) 489-2002 Fax: (403) 489-1856

University of Alberta Edmonton

Department of Anthropology

Canada T6G 21-14

13-15 HM Tory Building, Telephone (403) 492-3879 Fax (403) 492-5273

March 14, 1996 AACIP Awards c/ o Ron Ui, ACP 3rd Floor, APWSS Building, Strategic Planning 6950 - 113 Street Edmonton, AB T6G 5A9 Dear Mr. Ui, I am writing in support of City Policy C-467 Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands, a nominee for your 1996 Planning Awards.

My involvement in the development of the Policy began in early 1992 when the City of Edmonton approached the University of Alberta's Environmental Research and Education Centre for advice on natural areas protection. I had served for several years as a member of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo's Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee and was well familiar with the conservation of urban natural areas.

The Planning Department in the City of Edmonton faced two special challenges which became apparent early in the process. First, Edmonton is known for its vast network of river valley natural spaces and open areas.

Convincing City Council and members of the public that civic attention was required outside of the valleys was no easy conceptual or practical task.

Second, the City and developers had little experience and few precedents with voluntary (or any other) table lands conservation programs. This meant that arguments in favor of the Policy began at square one. Justifications for the legitimacy of the Policy itself were necessary at almost every stage of the process. The development community was a very powerful force on the Natural Areas Advisory Committee, on which I sat.

The resulting Policy is remarkably innovative in light of these two challenges. A Natural Areas Coordinator, a site identification requirement, and a 'tool kit' of protective measures is an effective combination.

The Planning Department has achieved a fine balance between realistic policy mechanisms and voluntary compliance. It could have gone farther in a number of respects (e.g., legislation, enforcement, financial incentives). Such

extensions, however, would simply not be viable in Edmonton currently. The genius in this Policy is that it works.

The Policy and the process deserve significant recognition for the following reasons: â&#x20AC;˘ The tenacity of the Planning staff who stuck behind the policy development through considerable negative pressure. â&#x20AC;˘ The difficulty in enacting any new environmental policy requirement under declining budgets and sagging public support. â&#x20AC;˘ Extensive consultations through the Natural Areas Advisory Committee, meetings with stakeholders and public meetings.

There is little doubt the Policy will improve protection of urban natural areas in Edmonton and increase environmental awareness more generally. It will, as well, serve as a model to follow for other municipalities facing similar circumstances. I urge the selection committee to give serious attention to this application.

Sincerely,

Eric Higgs

SPENCER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES LTD. 401 Boardwalk, 10310 - 102nd Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta T5J 2X6 Phone (403) 429-2108 Fax (403) 429-2127

07 March 1996 File 94-2 AACIP Awards do Ron Ui, ACP 3rd Floor, APWSS Building Strategic Planning 6950-113 Street Edmonton, Alberta Dear Sir:

RE: 13TH ANNUAL PLANNING AWARDS PROGRAM The purpose of this letter is to recommend an award (Planning policy, strategy or method category) for City of Edmonton Planning and Development Department for its work in developing and implementing a Natural Sites policy for City of Edmonton Table Lands. As a member of an advisory committee to the City of Edmonton for the policy development, I had the opportunity to witness the hard work and patience of the City administration and stakeholders that resulted in the policy becoming reality. This policy is long overdue for lands outside of Edmonton's river valley. The policy's benefits will not be limited to the protection of natural sites. There will be other important benefits: •

More aesthetically pleasing neighbourhoods.

•

A more attractive city that will assist in encouraging organizations to locate their businesses here. This will, in turn, result in a more economically vibrant community.

•

Fulfillment of a previously unrealized real estate consumer demand for "more natural" neighbourhoods.

I have worked in the field of environmental management for 25 years and have always believed that insufficient attention has been given to the benefits of urban natural areas and sites. This new policy meets an important need and the City of Edmonton deserves an award for its efforts in addressing the need.

It is my pleasure to write this letter in support of the City of Edmonton Planning and Development Department_ Yours very truly Spencer Environmental s Ltd. Marra encent Se ‘,/ Rfchar. . Spencer, M. Sc. president

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTRE `.111 IP"

MEI

March 18, 1996 AACIP Awards c/o Ron Ui, ACP 3rd Floor, APWSS Building, Strategic Planning 6950- 113 Street Edmonton, AB T6G 5A9 Dear Mr. Ui: Re: Recommendation for the City of Edmonton, Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands Policy

On behalf of the Environmental Law Centre ("ELC") I am pleased to strongly recommend for Category 1 of the AACIP Awards, the City of Edmonton, for its Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands Policy (the "Natural Sites Policy"). Edmonton is blessed with sensitive, biologically diverse natural areas, which, if development proceeded unchecked, would be forever destroyed. The City was wise in avoiding this end by including in its General Municipal Plan and By-law 9076 the objective "to retain and obtain environmentally sensitive areas" and by passing its Natural Sites Policy to achieve this objective.

In my capacity as a lawyer with the ELC, I was a member of the Natural Areas Advisory Committee which was struck to advise City adminstration during policy development. As a Committee member I have first hand experience of the significance and magnitude of the City's achievement. Initially it was clear to me that initially a number of Committee members found the idea of preservation abrasive and perhaps even incomprehensible. I was enormously impressed on how City staff educated the Committee on the many values of maintaining natural areas within the City, including natural, aesthetic and economic values.

I also was tremendously impressed with how Planning and Development Staff did everything they could do make this policy as good and effective as it could possibly be. Although staff carefully studied models from throughout Canada and elsewhere, the Natural Sites Policy is innovative. It was prepared on!y after extensive community, stakeholder and Committee involvement. This policy was made in Edmonton, for Edmonton. During its evolution, the Policy went through several drafts to better respond to community and development needs as well as to ensure better site conservation.

I am confident that all Committee members feel that an excellent Policy has been produced; a policy which addressed their concerns, and will effectively and efficiently provide the means for the City to carry out By-law 9076.

I highly recommend the City of Edmonton's Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands Policy for this award. If you have any questions or should require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours truly,

Arlene J. Kwasniak Staff Counsel

Recycled Paper

201, 10350. 124 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T5N 3V9 Telephone (403) 482-4891 Fax (403) 488-6779 Alberta Toll Free 1-800-661-4238

e

y/18,95

1447

URBAN DEVELOPMENT INST 4 403 496 6299

NO.956 P002/002

URBAI DEVELOPMENT INSTITUt c ALBERTA

GREATER EDMONTON CHAPTER July 18, 1995 Mayor Reimer & Members of City Council City Hall 1 Sir Winston Churchill Square Edmonton, Alberta T5J 2R7 Dear Mayor Reimer & Members of City Council: RE:

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

On behalf of the Urban Development Institute (UDI), Greater Edmonton Chapter, I would like to express our support for the Conservation of Natural Sites policy.

UDI, as the voice of the development industry, is supportive of efforts to promote conservation of our natural resources to the benefit of society. The costs of conservation,_ however, must not be borne on the backs of individual landowners Through the Natural Areas Advisory Committee (NAAC) and in a series of meetings with the Administration in the past few months, we have had an opportunity to resolve this and most of our other concerns with the policy.

As we understand the policy, if a landowner submits a development proposal for lands containing identified environmentally sensitive or significant natural areas and the City cannot offer satisfactory incentives from the "'tool kite, then the landowner is under no legal obligation to conserve those lands. The landowner must comply with the mandatory information requirements, but if he or she chooses not to participate in conservation, then we expect that the development approval process would proceed in a timely fashion.

I would like to express our thanks to the staff of the Planning & Development Department and the other members of the NAAC for their patience and effort in developing this policy.

Yours truly, UR

VELOPMENT INSTITUTE, GREATER EDMONTON CHAPTER

Don arke Exe tive Director

mu, JUL-20-95 1:56PM

403 459 2759

P.02 â&#x20AC;˘

C

r

CiT CLERK

95 JUL 20 14: 35 URBAN LAND CORP. REF. NO. Land Development Consultants 50 Glenhaven Cres., St.Albert, AB, TON IA5 P11./FAX. (403)459-2759 Cell. (403)990-8136

July 20, 1995.

Mayor Reimer & Members of City Council City Hall, 1 Sir Winston Churchill Square Edmonton, AB, T5J 2R7 Dear Mayor Reimer & Members of City Council: RE: Conservation of Natural Site in Edmonton's Table Lands (City Council meeting Tuesday July 25, 1995.)

Desert Properties, Inc. has instructed me to write to you in support of the policy which is being presented to you on July 25.

We thank you for listening to and acting on our requests for amendments to this policy. We believe the policy as now presented is fair and meets the objectives of the stakeholders.

We understand that participation in this policy is voluntary (except for the information requirements) and my client may participate to the extent his circumstances allow. Also his property rights, including his right to develop his land, have not been changed by this policy.

Again, thank you very much.

Yours truly URBAN

as L. Jackson, P. Eng.

TOTAL P. 02

ST ALBERT PLACE 5 ST ANNE STREET ST ALBERT, ALBERTA CANADA T8N 3Z9 (403) 459-1500

Planning & Development Services

Fax: [403] 458-1974

August 3, 1994 The City of Edmonton Planning & Development 3rd Floor, The Boardwalk 10310-102 Avenue, N.W. Edmonton, Alberta T5J 2X6 Attention:

Ms. Heather McRae

Dear Ms. McRae: Re:

Table Lands Project

Our Department hereby wishes to congratulate your Department on the effort being made to ensure the conservation of viable environmentally sensitive areas within expanding urban surroundings. This is a concept which is wholeheartedly supported by the City of St. Albert.

As an adjacent municipality we would appreciate receiving from you, when available, the final draft policy and map, as well as the final document upon completion. At this time it does not appear probable that the City of St. Albert will wish to make any presentation.

Yours very truly,

rge du Cloux enior Planner cc:

Director of Planning & Development Services

/I p

C) Panted on recycled paper

15 November 1994

,

The Mayor and City Aldermen 2nd Floor, #1 Sir Winston Churchill Square Edmonton, Alberta T5J 2R7

L)

94 NOV 16 R3 : 147 OFFICE THE MAYOR

Dear Mayor Reimer et al:

After having reviewed the draft policy, "Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands", I am excited and encouraged that Edmonton is following the initiatives of other Canadian municipalities in both establishing a proactive conservation policy that is an integral part of the planning process and in creating a policy that suggests a wide range of innovative conservation incentives for landowners.

Although I am disappointed that there is currently no legal means to protect the table land sites (many of which deserve such protection), I believe this policy is an excellent beginning to a new "mindset" on exactly what constitutes recreational, park or educational nature sites within a community. Amazingly, I see developers continue to drain wetlands/cut trees and 'sterilize' what could be something of educational and aesthetic value for the entire city.

These developers need their "mindsets" re-tuned. Vast acres of clipped grass with a few shrubs do not make for a 'park', as was once thought in the '50's or '60's.

I urge council members to consider the flexibility and cooperative spirit of this policy in regards to potential community, landowner, developer, environmentalist and government teamwork. This policy shows that it need not be necessarily a costly and antagonist battle when it comes to natural areas preservation. There are alternatives. Communities throughout Edmonton, and not just those fortunate to front the river system, deserve access to nature.

In conclusion, our city forefathers had the foresight to preserve the river valley ravines.

Your decision about approving this policy is the legacy that council leaves for future citizen's enjoyment plus the extended benefits of eco-tourism and civic reputation.

Decisions on land use become part of the city's complexion for decades. Destroying natural sites is not a reversible process; they are too important as historical/natural resources to not preserve.

Sincerely,

C. E. Radke #301, 4611-20th Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T6L 5W7 450-1638

Cc

>

â&#x20AC;˘ ,

No v /(,/`/

â&#x20AC;&#x17E;a-3a

[II-

PETER D. HAWKER #204, 15503 - 87 Avenue, EDMONTON, Alta., T5R 4K4

L\ --86 -el 19 AH 2 6

i 'LI m Airj-R

December 15, 1994

The Mayor and City Council, CITY HALL, 1 Sir Winston Churchill Square, EDMONTON, Alta., T5J 2R7

Dear Elected Representative,

EDMONTON'S TABLE LANDS

City Council is to be commended for its consideration of preserving Edmonton's Table Lands. This policy is in continuation of that forward thinking in 1907 that led to the preservation of The North Saskatchewan River Valley as parkland for Edmonton's future generations.

In the 1970s City Council decided to hire a Heritage Officer within the Planning Department in order to obviate the problems-arising from the destruction and proposed destruction of the City's older buildings.

Public opposition at the time was coming in the very last stages of proposed development, causing considerable concern to developers who thought their project was under way and about to commence. This public pressure caused considerable delay to the start. One of the main opening tasks of the heritage Officer was to set up an inventory of buildings - homes and corporate buildings - and subsequently streetscapes that were worthy of preservation. This information is incorporated into the planning process so that developers 'mow ahead where they are likely to run into major public concern.

The City's regard for preservation of parts of its Table Lands appears to me to have similar aims, in addition to the preservation aspects. I see considerable parallel between the duties of the Heritage Officer and those of the new Environment Officer, who no doubt will be a member of the Planning Department with close liaison with the Parks Department.

City Council can expect considerable lobbying from developers, who are very averse to any changes in the way they do their operations. Developers are interested in making money. City Council is interested in the quality of life for the present and future citi7Pns of Edmonton. Developers were at first very opposed to the heritage Officer and his mandate but now work with it and even ahead of it. Down the road that will happen with the Environment Officer. Tradition and experience are on your side for a strong policy. I wish you all well Sincerely, et..0 Peter a Hawker.

A Past Chairman, Edmonton Historical Board,

Cc

OCC

P

"11

6-16/7,

91 EEC 15 GI i Y

64,

10: 51

77 ID

Dv rvo,

/

)7?

6,,x_a.4ce.."

e

_.-2.,6,/

,a---Ar l

r<

//t&lAtiJ7,)

I

, e . e -Pt -ZI,Zi

1

1 ‘de-.

re(AigA-ee,d

/C

G6-4,c2J

(_=/I - LLAJ 7a,e‘

,

? 7

7&

AA/

ae-c,

7'

Ducks Unlimited Canada THE CITY OF EDMONTON POLICY & INFORMATION BRANCH

September 16, 1994

SEP 1 9 1994 REFERRED TO,

Mr. Harvey Crone 3rd Floor The Boardwalk 10310 - 102 Ave NW Edmonton, Ab. T5J 2X6

ACTION cOPIES TO

Dear Mr. Crone: Thank you for giving Ducks Unlimited the opportunity to review the draft City of Edmonton policy on "Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands". We believe it to be crucial that steps are taken immediately to protect wetlands in Alberta's urban areas and the City of Edmonton is setting the example and leading the way for the rest of the province.

Ducks Unlimited Canada continues to support your natural site conservation initiatives. Through our representation on the Natural Areas Advisory Committee have maintained a strong interest in the development of the policy. DU,will continue to work with the City of Edmonton to finalize the policy and once approved to assist where possible in its implementation.

Once again, thank you for the opportunity to review the draft policy.

Sincerely,

o don Edwards Provincial Manager

202, 10470-176 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T5S 1L3 Ph: (403) 489-2002 Fax: (403) 489-1856,

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTRE

November 18, 1994

P-93-727

Harvey Crone, Director Forecasting and Policy Development Section Policy and Information Branch 3rd Floor, The Boardwalk 10310 - 102 Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 2X6

Dear Mr. Crone: RE:

Draft Policy: Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

On behalf of the Environmental Law Centre I wish to confirm that we fully support this draft policy. We believe that it is crucial that immediate steps be taken to save what little natural areas we have remaining within our city before their natural values are forever destroyed by human development.

We applaud the City's taking a leadership role in initiating this program.

It is now time to take the next step to formally accept and implement this vital and urgent policy.

Yours truly,

Arlene J. Kwasniak Staff Counsel

cc. Mayor Jan Reimer

Recycled Paper 201, 10350- 124 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T5N 3V9 Telephone (403) 482-4891 Fax (403) 488-6779 Alberta Toll Free 1-800-661-4238

CITY POLICY REFERENCE

C - 467 ADOPTED BY

Objective 6.D, General Municipal Plan, Bylaw 9076 PREPARED BY TITLE

NUMBER

City Council

SUPERSEDES

New

DATE

July 25,1995 Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

Policy Statement*

THE CITY OF EDMONTON WILL ENCOURAGE THE CONSERVATION AND INTEGRATION OF AS MANY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AND SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS INTO EDMONTON'S FUTURE URBAN ENVIRONMENT AS ARE SUSTAINABLE AND FEASIBLE. THE IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS AND SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS HAS NO LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR THE RESPECTIVE OWNERS AND, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS, PARTICIPATION IN THIS POLICY IS VOLUNTARY.

enhance the liveability, attractiveness and bio-diversity of Edmonton and ensure consistent, uniform and equitable conservation of natural sites by: The Purpose of this Policy is to:

directing the Corporation to conserve environmentally sensitive areas and significant natural areas in discharging their duties; encouraging the retention and integration of natural areas through the physical planning and development process recognizing the environmental and municipal reserve commitments contained within the Municipal Government Act; encouraging voluntary conservation and corporate and private sponsorship of natural sites; promoting the awareness and participation of landowners, the general public and special interest groups in conserving natural sites; and, seeking to conserve in a proactive fashion, with the landowners, the four regionally significant environmentally sensitive areas identified on Edmonton's table lands and encouraging conservation of the nationally, provincially and regionally significant environmentally sensitive areas identified in Edmonton's river valley.

This policy is subject to any specific provision of the Municipal Government Act, the Local Authorities Board Act or other relevant legislation or Union agreement.

CITY PROCEDURE AUTHORITY

EFFECTIVE DATE

CITY POLICY NUMBER

PAGE

TITLE

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

1 of 8

1.

DEFINITIONS

1.01

Bio-diversity - the variety of life in all its forms, levels and combinations. Includes ecosystem and landscape diversity, species diversity, and genetic diversity.

1.02

Conserved site - a natural site, for which a formal conservation agreement and management plan have been signed, voluntarily, by the landowner(s) and the City of Edmonton.

1.03

Conservation - maintaining a site's ecological conditions to renew living things and to replenish soil, water and air.

1.04

Conservation Coordinator - a person appointed to the position of Conservation Coordinator by the City Manager from time to time. The Conservation Coordinator is responsible for the implementation of this policy.

1.05

Development Proposals and Strategies - Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Structure Plans, Servicing Concept Design Briefs, major amendments to Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Structure Plans, Servicing Concept Design Briefs, major redistrictings, subdivisions, all projects noted in the Capital Priorities Plan, major capital projects, plans, strategies, bylaws and policies.

1.06

Environmentally Sensitive Area - undisturbed or relatively undisturbed sites which, because of their natural features, have value to society and ecosystems worth protecting, but are susceptible to further disturbance.

Environmentally Sensitive Areas meet the criteria outlined in the Inventory.

1.07

Feasible - public and private fmances or means are available to conserve or integrate a natural site into the urban environment.

1.08

Information Requirements - information provided by the proponent in conjunction with development proposals and strategies. This may include an identification and description of affected natural sites; a description of the proposed development and associated facilities and services that may affect the natural sites; a description of the potential impacts of the proposed development on the affected natural sites; and, an indication of interest in voluntary conservation.

1.09

Inventory - the executive summary and technical report prepared by Geowest Environmental Consultants Ltd. for the City of Edmonton Planning and Development Department entitled Inventory of Environmentally Sensitive and Significant Natural Areas. City of Edmonton (1993). The inclusion of sites in the Inventory has no legal implications for the respective owners.

1.10

Major Amendments - where broad structural changes to land use, servicing or roads are proposed and may impact on environmentally sensitive or significant natural areas. Policy will apply to sites identified within the plan amendment area and may take off-site impacts into consideration.

Management Plan - a document formulated to ensure that all responsibilities and actions necessary to support a natural site's conservation are considered and understood, once a landowner(s) has decided to voluntarily conserve a site. Generally, the document may outline: existing biophysical resources and values of the site; site ownership;

CITY PROCEDURE AUTHORITY

EFFECTIVE DATE

CITY POLICY NUMBER

PAGE

TITLE Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

2 of 8

management intent; management objectives; responsibilities; guidelines for use; permitted management activities such as burning, fencing, monitoring, enforcement, and education; guidelines for responding to changes in site conditions over time, such as the site ceasing to be sustainable, and the necessary administrative support, program support, financial support and sponsorship required to implement the plan. The plan may also identify information gaps requiring additional evaluation or research.

1.12

Monitoring Plau - a document formulated to ensure that the objectives of the Management Plan are met over time.

Generally, the document may outline periodic activities necessary to support the ongoing health of a conserved site.

1.13

Nationally. Provincially and Regionally Significant Environmentally Sensiti e Ar_egas - environmentally sensitive areas identified in the Inventory and deemed by Geowest Environmental Consultants to be natural landscapes or features that are of limited distribution or the best examples of a feature in the nation, province or region.

1.14

Natural Area - presence of native vegetation, water or natural features. Natural areas meet the criteria outlined in the Inventory.

1.15

Natural Site - Any environmentally sensitive area, significant natural area or natural area that meets the criteria outlined in the Inventory by Geowest Environmental Consultants.

1.16

Significant Natural Area - sites that have the potential to remain sustainable within an urban environment and are significant from an environmental perspective to the community of Edmonton because of their size or features on the site. Significant Natural Areas meet the criteria outlined in the Inventory.

1.17

Subdivision - the division of a parcel by an instrument per The Planning Act.

1.18

Sustainable - the ability to survive as a natural site within a developing urban environment.

1.19

Table Lands - those suburban and agricultural lands, outside of the North Saskatchewan River Valley, which were annexed to the City of Edmonton in 1982 (Attachment I).

1.20

Tool Kit - a range of financial incentives, operational or management activities and partnerships that will be pursued by the Conservation Coordinator to promote voluntary conservation of natural sites.

1.21

Voluntary - acting freely without external compulsion

2.

AREA OF APPLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

2.01

Participation in this policy is voluntary, with the exception of the information required (Attachment II) when considering development proposals and strategies on Edmonton's table lands (Attachment I) and any new development proposals and strategies or any major amendments to approved development proposals and strategies on substantially undeveloped lands within the City of Edmonton.

2.02

This policy becomes effective upon approval of the policy by City Council.

CITY PROCEDURE EFFECTIVE DATE

AUTHORITY

CITY POLICY NUMBER

PAGE

TITLE Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

3.

RESPONSIBILITIES

3.01

City Council to: a)

3.02

3.04

3.05

approve this policy and any amendments to this policy.

Executive Committee to: a)

3.03

3 of 8

review and recommend to City council any changes to this policy.

City Manager to: a)

review and recommend to the Executive Committee any changes to this policy; and

b)

appoint a Conservation Coordinator.

General Manager. Planning and Development to., a)

coordinate and provide guidance for the consideration of all natural sites in planning applications and major planning projects;

b)

coordinate the review, analysis and negotiation related to conserving natural sites through the development process;

c)

ensure that long range and strategic planning supports conservation activities; and

d)

assist development proponents interested in voluntary conservation of natural sites.

General Manager. Parks and Recreation to: a)

participate in the review, analysis and negotiation related to conserving natural sites through the development and private conservancy processes;

b)

provide guidance and support for the development of management plans for conserved sites;

c)

manage conserved sites where other agencies/groups have not assumed this responsibility;

d)

ensure park and green space planning considers the conservation of natural sites; and

e)

ensure that municipal reserve and environmental reserve dedications consider conservation of natural sites identified in the Inventory.

.aiw=a;

CITY PROCEDURE AUTHORITY

EFFECTIVE DATE

TITLE

CITY POLICY NUMBER

PAGE

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands 3.06

Manner. Office of the Environment to:. a)

3.07

3.08

3.10

3.11

participate in the review, analysis, negotiation and monitoring related to conserving natural sites through the development and private conservancy processes.

Office of the City Solicitor to: a)

assist in review and analysis and provide advice on a case by case basis, on conservation proposals or opportunities as they arise, as requested by the Conservation Coordinator; and

b)

assist the Conservation Coordinator, as requested, in the preparation of conservation, management and monitoring agreements.

General Manager. Emergency Response to:. a)

3.09

4 of 8

provide support for development of management plans for conserved sites.

General Manager. Finance to; a)

assist with preparation of a financial impact report, on a case by case basis, for conservation proposals or opportunities as they arise, as requested by Conservation Coordinator;

b)

assist the Conservation Coordinator to identify sources of financing, on a case by case basis, on conservation proposals or opportunities as they arise, and

c)

advise the Conservation Coordinator, as requested, in the preparation of conservation, management and monitoring agreements.

Department General Managers to: a)

ensure that projects undertaken in their departments have due consideration of the existence of natural sites;

b)

ensure that their departments are aware of this policy, its intent and guidelines;

c)

identify and mitigate the impact of planned projects on identified natural sites; and

d)

provide support for development of management plans for conserved sites.

Conservation Coordinator to: a)

Corporate Activities 1)

act as liaison with other levels of government to ensure jurisdictional harmony with regard to conservation policies and programs;

CITY PROCEDURE EFFECTIVE DATE

AUTHORITY

CITY POLICY NUMBER

PAGE

TITLE

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

5 of 8

2)

act as liaison with other conservation groups;

3)

act as resource person for the Corporation;

4)

coordinate conservation of natural sites for the Corporation;

5)

develop guidelines for the consideration of natural sites in development proposals in City of Edmonton plans and strategies;

6)

develop management guidelines for conserved sites and ensure that management plans are developed for conserved sites;

7)

ensure that priority in implementation activities is devoted to those sites on the table lands, identified in the Inventory as being regionally significant environmentally sensitive areas;

8)

prepare a comprehensive information package outlining policy implementation for distribution to the public, the development industry and the Corporation;

9)

Monitor i)

develop and implement a monitoring program to evaluate the success of the implementation procedures in attaining the objectives of the policy;

ii)

prepare an annual Council report on the policy's progress;

10) Rep= i)

b)

make recommendations to the General Manager of Parks and Recreation and the General Manager of Planning and Development, as appropriate, on the issues and activities related to the conservation of natural sites;

Development Process 1)

act as resource person to the Administration throughout the development process;

2)

develop and keep an up to date "tool kit" of conservation incentives and funding sources to be considered as potential resources using the examples in Attachment III;

3)

develop a Terms of Reference for information requirements;

CITY PROCEDURE AUTHORITY

EFFECTIVE DATE

TITLE

PAGE

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands 4)

c)

d)

6 of 8

incorporate policy approach and information requirements into the Land Use Bylaw and into the Terms of Reference for Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Structure Plans, and Servicing Concept Design Briefs;

Private Conservancy 1)

develop and execute a City of Edmonton program to encourage and support voluntary private conservancy and conservation sponsorships; and

Education 1)

4.

CITY POLICY NUMBER

develop and execute an education and awareness program on the value of conservation within Edmonton.

IMPLEMENTATION

4.01(1) Daily Operations - Development Process a)

The Planning and Development Department will inform applicants of this policy by incorporating policy requirements into the Terms of Reference for Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Structure Plans, Servicing Concept Design Briefs and the Land Use Bylaw. When applying for information on subdivision or development, an applicant shall be informed of the policy.

b)

Information requirements, prepared by the proponent, will be required as outlined in Attachment II. A Terms of Reference for information requirements, guided by the natural and financial viability evaluation framework and criteria, will be made available to the proponent. The information will be used by the affected Department(s), and the Conservation Coordinator to assess sustainable and feasible sites and to propose voluntary conservation, where appropriate.

c)

All Corporate and private development and conservation proposals will be evaluated on their own merits, based upon the unique sites(s) and development situation. Reports and recommendations prepared by the Conservation Coordinator should recognize past and present conservation efforts.

d)

A range of conservation tools, known as the "tool kit" (Attachment III) will be used to promote conservation of sites. Tools may take the form of financial incentives, operational or management activities or partnerships. Appropriate tools will be determined by the sites(s) unique characteristics and development situation.

e)

Where required, the affected Department(s) or Conservation Coordinator will access technical expertise in the form of consultants or a technical committee, as appropriate, to determine the final recommendations regarding conservation of the affected natural sites.

pu.sqp VtVi14641

CITY PROCEDURE

AUTHORITY

EFFECTIVE DATE

TITLE

CITY POLICY NUMBER

PAGE Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

7 of 8

4.01(2) Daily Operations - Corporate Activities

4.02

a)

Civic projects, plans, strategies, bylaws and policies will have regard for the policy by providing the required information.

b)

All existing City policies and programs will be revised, as necessary, to support conservation of identified natural sites.

c)

A priority activity will be the development of a proactive program to conserve nationally, provincially and regionally significant environmentally sensitive areas prior to the time of development.

d)

Legislative changes that support conservation and the ongoing management of conserved sites will be supported.

e)

External sources of funding for conservation and management of conserved sites will be actively pursued.

0

Partnerships with conservation organizations will be actively pursued.

g)

Management plan guidelines and a monitoring structure will be developed.

Private Conservancy a)

A program to facilitate private conservancy in Edmonton will be developed. A wide range of voluntary conservation activities will be developed.

b)

A range of private conservancy options, identifying options for conservation of natural sites along with identification of requirements and potential partners, will be developed through liaison with conservation organi7ations.

c)

Legal recognition of private conservancy options will be pursued.

d)

Partnerships in federal and provincial stewardship programs will be pursued.

e)

Landowners/groups interested in private conservancy will be referred to established conservation organizations.

1171?•-• , .

TT**tehiT

CITY PROCEDURE

I .-qc-07:41:

EFFECTIVE DATE

AUTHORITY

PAGE

TITLE

Conservation of Natural Sites in Edmonton's Table Lands

4.03

CITY POLICY NUMBER

8 of 8

Education a)

An information distribution program will be developed and pursued.

b)

Partnerships with existing agencies will be pursued, to produce and distribute educational conservation material.

APPENDIX Attachment I - City of Edmonton Table Lands Map Attachment II - Method of Application Attachment III - "Tool kit" of Conservation Incentives and Funding Sources for Conserving Natural Sites

Attachment I

City of Edmonton Table Lands

t.:

A.;F

Table Lands

EZ1 Restricted Development Area

6Y.1 f 1 I 61

0

lolamenve

0 The City of Edmonton disclaims any liability for the use of this map.

Ethiiiinton

Attachment II INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS

Information Requirements - information provided by the proponent in conjunction with development proposals and strategies. This may include an identification and description of affected natural sites; a description of the proposed development and associated facilities and services that may affect the natural sites; a description of the potential impacts of the proposed development on the affected natural sites; and, an indication of interest in voluntary conservation.

••••

%N.V.

1.0 Plans [Area Structure Plan (ASP), Neighbourhood Area Structure Plan (NASP), Neighbourhood Structure PlanfiSP,), Servicing, Concept Design Brief (SCD19, Approved Subsegyent To Policyl_ Proponent to comply with information requirements 1.1 NEW ASP, SCDB 1.2 Residential 12)

New NSF. NASP

Proponent to comply with information requirements

i)

Redistricting

No information requirements

Subdivision

No information requirements

Development Permit

No information requirements

iii)

1.3 Industrial Redistricting b.) Subdivision pevelopment Permit

No information requirements No information requirements No information requirements

2.0 Plans (ASP, NASP, NSP, SCDB) Approved Prior to Policy 2.1 Residential g) 12)

Major Amendment to ASP. SCDB New NSP, NASP After Policy i) Redistricting

iii)

Proponent to comply with information requirements Proponent to comply with information requirements No information requirements

Subdivision

No information requirements

Development Permit

No information requirements

NSP, NASP Approved Prior to Policy i)

Redistricting

No information requirements, Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

JNFORMATION REQUIREMENTS -'•••••••

•• •

••

.0 Plans (ASP, NASP, NSP, SCDB) Approved Prior to Policy (cont'd) ii)

Subdivision

No information requirements

iii)

Development Permit

No information requirements

di

Major amendment to existing NSP. NASP

e)

No NSP in place

Proponent to comply with information requirements

i)

Redistricting

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

ii)

Subdivision

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation issues, if warranted

iii)

Development Permit

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

2.2 Industrial

12)

Major amendment to ASP. SCDB or Outline Plan Redistricting

c)

Subdivision

No information requirements

J.)

Development Permit

No information requirements

3.0

NO APPROVED OR STATUTORY PLAN IN PLACE

A)

Proponent to comply with information requirements

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

Redistricting

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

b)

Subdivision

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

c.)

Development Permit

No information requirements. Conservation Coordinator and project planner to initiate discussion with proponent on site and voluntary conservation, if warranted

Attachment III "Tool Kit" of Conservation Incentives and Funding Sources for Conserving Natural Sites The Conservation Coordinator will be responsible for developing and recommending the use of the "tool kit" to promote conservation of natural sites. As the policy is implemented, the flexibility of the "tool kit" and allowance for future innovations will allow the Conservation Coordinator to develop and apply "tools" appropriate to the unique site(s) and development situation. A shopping list of "tools", which may consist of the following but is not limited to this list, is provided below: City Council The following "tool" suggestions would be approved by City Council on a case by case basis:

Conservation Coordinator

Financial "Tools"

The following "tool" suggestions would be developed and used under the direction of the Conservation Coordinator: Financial "Tools"

•

Provide a funding envelope in the operating budget for capital and maintenance costs of natural site conservation.

•

Solicit grants and seed money from other levels of government to support the work of the Conservation Coordinator and conservation of specific natural sites.

•

Use a percentage of the Land Revolving Fund to provide funds for a natural site conservation fund.

•

Use municipal cash-in-lieu funds (derived from development in the plan area) for funding/management of conserved natural sites.

•

Seek sponsorships and management partnerships with individuals, groups, and organizations interested in conserving natural sites.

•

Use a portion of proceeds from land sales to provide funds for a natural site conservation fund.

•

Creation of a natural sites conservation fund.

•

Use local assessment to charge back the cost of a conserved natural site to a benefiting neighbourhood (similar to the Weinlos Tree Stand assessment). In this scenario, the City would buy the conserved natural site and charge the cost back to the neighbourhood.

•

Place some municipal reserve cash in lieu funds in a natural site conservation fund.

Conservation Coordinator

City Council

Operational "Tools" •

Create a new land use district for conserved natural sites where owner accepts development constraints on site in exchange for incentives,

•

Create a new assessment classification for conserved natural sites.

Management "Tools" •

Allow homeowners associations/bare land condominium owners to own and manage conserved natural sites.

•

Revise the joint use agreement to include natural sites as part of school sites.

•

Revise site management requirements in development approvals to allow developers more leeway in developing management plans for conserved natural sites.

Operational "Tools" •

Combine conserved natural sites with other municipal requirements such as utility lots, parks, schools, sports fields, walkways or bicycle trails.

•

Consider the use of municipal reserve, environmental reserve dedications and environmental reserve easements to conserve natural sites, while ensuring that a maximum of 10% municipal reserve is dedicated and that the normal practices of the City are followed.

•

Dedicate unallocated municipal reserve in approved plan areas to conservation of natural sites.

•

Assist landowners to obtain tax write offs (up to 100%) for land donations to 3rd parties.

•

Link up with existing organization or establish a steering committee with mandate to pursue and use external funding for natural site conservation.

•

Develop marketing strategies to solicit private sector donations towards funding or management of conserved natural sites.

•

Encourage private landowners to retain the natural features on their properties.

r

Environmentally Sensitive and Natural Area Protection Within Edmonton's Table Lands: Policy and Implementation Background Study

This report was received as Information by City Council on July 14,1992 as a basis for further discussion.

April1992

Qmaton

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of Report 2.0 BACKGROUND

1 1 3

2.1 Definitions 3.0 POLICY CONTEXT 3.1 Federal and Provincial Initiatives 3.2 Regional Initiatives 3.3 Other Municipal Initiatives 3.4 Private/Not for Profit Conservation Organizations 3.5 General Municipal Plan 3.6 Area Structure Plan Terms of Reference 3.7 River Valley Protection 4.0 ISSUES/CHALLENGES/IMPLICATIONS 4.1 Why Protect Natural Areas?

4.2 Current Practice 4.2.1 Assessment of Current Practice 4.3 The Challenge 4.4 Issues 4.4.1 Acquisition of Environmentally Sensitive Areas 4.4.2 Potential Financial Impacts 4.4.3 Provincial Legislation 4.4.4 Ownership 4.4.5 Districting 4.4.6 Inter-Departmental Coordination 4.4.7 Managing Natural Areas 4.4.8 Regional Coordination 4.4.9 Data Base 4.4.10 Restoration 4.4.11 Suburban Neighbourhood Concept 4.4.12 Linkages and Corridors 4.4.13 Holistic Ecological Management/Green City Concept 4.4.14 Summary

6 6 7 7 7 8 11 11 11 11 13 14 14 16 17 18 19 19 20 21 21 21 21 22 22 22

PAGE 5.0 PROPOSED NATURAL AREA CLASSIFICATION 5.1 Classifying Natural Areas 5.1.1 Common Elements 5.2 Proposed Classification System 5.3 Implementation Proposal 5.3.1 Protection Through the Planning and Development Process 5.3.2 Voluntary Protection Through Communication/Education 6.0 CORPORATE IMPLEMENTATION OPTIONS 6.1 Recommended Alternative

23 23 23 23 27 27 29 30 30

7.0 CONCLUSION

32

8.0 GLOSSARY

33

BIBLIOGRAPHY

35

APPENDIX A - Proposed Implementation Alternatives APPENDIX B - Nomination Criteria for Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas APPENDIX C - Nomination Criteria for Type 2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas APPENDIX D - Synopsis of 1986 Natural Area Inventory

Al B1 Cl Dl

MAP 1 Edmonton's Table Lands MAP 2 North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System

2 10

CHART 1 Issues tied to Protection of Natural Areas FIGURE 1 Illustration of Natural Area Classification System FIGURE 2 Protection Through the Planning and Development Process

15 26 28

TABLE 1 How Area Structure Plans have Protected Natural Areas TABLE 2 Natural Area Classification System

12 24

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AND NATURAL AREA PROTECTION WITHIN EDMONTON'S TABLE LANDS: POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION BACKGROUND STUDY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In wilderness is the preservation of the world."

Henry David Thoreau, 1862.

The enjoyment of wildlife and wildlands strikes a chord deep in all of us. In the most densely populated regions of North America, less than ten percent of natural, terrestrial ecosystems remain in some semblance of their natural state.

Protection of environmentally sensitive and natural areas is a growing concern. Both the North Saskatchewan River Valley and Edmonton's table lands (those suburban and agricultural lands, outside of the North Saskatchewan River Valley, which were annexed to the City in 1982) contain relatively untouched environmentally sensitive and natural areas. Within the North Saskatchewan River Valley environmentally sensitive and natural areas are protected by mechanisms supported by City Council. Presently there is no comprehensive mechanism in place to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas located within Edmonton's table lands.

Adoption of the General Municipal Plan (Bylaw 9076) indicated Council's interest in protecting environmentally sensitive areas (Objective 6.D). Development of the Ribbon of Green Plan for the North Saskatchewan River Valley gave Edmontonians an opportunity to clearly express their desire for more natural places and experiences.

PURPOSE This report explores proactive, innovative methods to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas located in Edmonton's table lands. Environmentally sensitive areas may be protected because of their intrinsic ecological value. Natural areas, areas with natural characteristics but no environmentally sensitive features, may be protected because of their contribution to Edmonton's quality of life.

The body of the report identifies federal, provincial and municipal protection initiatives, examines existing civic practices, and discusses the issues related to protection of environmentally sensitive and natural areas. The report proposes that Edmonton's natural areas be identified in an inventory and classified to identify unique or environmentally sensitive areas that are worthy of protection. The report examines five alternative civic approaches for protecting environmentally sensitive and natural areas within Edmonton's table lands and recommends the fifth approach, creation of a City Policy.

The Planning and Developinerti Department prepared the report in consultation with the Office of the Environment, Finance, the Office of the City Solicitor, Edmonton Power, ED TEL, Transportation and Parks and Recreation. Dr. Eric Higgs, Assistant Professor, Environmental Research and Studies Centre, University of Alberta reviewed previous drafts of the report.

PROCESS FOR PROTECTING NATURAL AREAS This report proposes that an up to date, inventory of natural areas located in Edmonton's table lands be made available to the Corporation and the public. In most cases, the City encourages protection of natural areas through the statutory planning process (ie. the use of municipal or environmental reserve), negotiation, or voluntary actions of individuals or the private sector. In some instances, acquisition may be the best way to protect an area.

As an example of the process, consider where the inventory is consulted at the planning stages of a project. The inventory indicates that an environmentally sensitive or natural area exists.

The development proponent would be required to do an environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the site. The information provided by the EIA would allow the Administration to determine if an important environmentally sensitive or natural area is present. The Administration would develop an acquisition and management strategy for the site and recommend to Council that the area be protected. Where Council endorses the recommendation the acquisition and management strategy would be followed. In other cases, the Administration may negotiate voluntary protection or other protection mechanisms with the proponent.

TERMINOLOGY Three terms were defined to assist with the classification of Edmonton's environmentally sensitive and natural areas (Figure 1). Although these terms refer to sites on Edmonton's suburban and agricultural lands, two are synonymous with those used in the Ribbon of Green Plan by the Parks and Recreation Department.

Natural Area An area of land or water which either retains or has re-established its natural character, although it need not be completely disturbed, or which contains unusual flora, fauna, geological or similar features of scientific or educational interest. A Natural Area may have no special features, other than the presence of wetlands or vegetation, but may be prott..c.:ed because of its contribution to Edmonton's quality of life.

Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Area/Conservation Zone An area of land or water which has been identified through an environmental impact assessment (EIA) as having ecological features of value to the community of Edmonton. These lands are suited for the maintenance of existing vegetation, wildlife habitat, wetlands and watercourses as well as limited recreational use. These lands may include natural wooded areas; water courses and watershed drainage areas; wildlife nesting, breeding grounds or foliage areas; and areas which provide a linking system for wildlife movement. This term is synonymous with the Conservation Management Zone described in "Ribbon of Green: North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan".

Lii Type 7 Environmentally Sensitive Area/Preservation Zone An area of land or water which has biter. identified through an EIA as having unique or fragile features that must be protected from human disturbance to survive. This term refers to a disturbed or undisturbed site which, because of its natural features (see glossary) has value to society and ecosystems worth protecting, but is susceptible to further disturbance. This term is synonymous with the Preservation Management Zone described in "Ribbon of Green: North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan".

IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATION This report recommends that environmentally sensitive and natural area protection be implemented through a City Policy. A City Policy, adopted by City Council: • has the greatest potential for creative implementation within each civic department; • will require both public and private projects to consider the protection of natural areas, and; • will allow ease of amendment by Council in response to civic and public requests.

A City Policy would contain the City's policy for protection of environmentally sensitive and natural areas within Edmonton's table lands; the purposes behind the policy; definitions; responsibilities of Council, civic departments, and individuals; and procedures and guidelines pertaining to the policy. The draft Policy would be circulated to all civic departments and made available to the public for their comments. CaLe adopted by Council, implementation of the Policy will be the responsibility of each General Manager. As use of the Policy progresses, amendments to the Policy may be required and the Departments implementing the Policy may ask Council to make the necessary amendments.

If a City Policy is enacted, the Capital Priorities Plan could be used to integrate the Policy with current civic practices. Other approaches, such as the creation of a Natural Areas Advisory Committee, development of education and communication programs, and further research may also be considered in support of the City Policy. Eventual coordination of policy implementation may rest with the Office of the Environment, which was created in 1990 to address environmental issues that are beyond the scope of a single department.

Council approval of this report's recommendation will allow the administration to take the first steps toward developing a City Policy. These steps include updating the natural areas inventory, investigating funding sources for implementing the policy and initiating a public participation process to involve the public in developing the policy.

iv

Figure 1 Illustration of Natural Area Classification System

411111111.4.1111MIF

Natural Areas All areas identified in the proposed inventory that contain features that may prove to be environmentally sensitive or of value to the community of Edmonton.

Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (Conservation Zone)

Natural areas identified through an EIA as having ecological features of value to the community of Edmonton . These areas may withstand limited recreational use. There may be several of these areas present in Edmonton's table lands.

Type 2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (Preservation Zone)

Natural areas identified trough an EIA, as having unique or fragile features that must be protected from human disturbance to survive. There may only be a few of these areas present in Edmonton's table lands.

1 1.0 1.1

INTRODUCTION Purpose of Report

Presently, protection of natural areas in Edmonton is limited. Through policies of the Planning and Development Department and the Parks and Recreation Department, the North Saskatchewan River Valley and ravine system is protected. (These policies and mechanisms are discussed in Section 3.0 of this report). In the case of natural areas outside of the river valley, the onus is placed upon development proponents to identify natural areas and advise the City of their existence. Once these areas are identified, the developer usually has the discretion to use or develop the natural area. Frequently, natural areas have been lost to development without regard to their existence or value to Edmontoni....ns.

This report proposes policy and implementation approaches to protect natural areas, under public and private ownership, located on Edmonton's table lands (comparable to lands annexed to Edmonton in 1982, Map 1). This report is based on the premises that to protect these natural areas it is necessary to identify existing natural areas prior to development, and to develop criteria to classify the relative importance of these natural areas.

Once these two steps are taken, this report examines issues related to the protection of natural areas and discusses various mechanisms that the City can use to protect natural areas. It is anticipated that the proposed implementation process will become a part of Edmonton's strategy for environmental responsibility.

MAP 1 EDMONTON'S TABLE LANDS TABLE LANDS (Lands annexed to Edmonton in 1982) Note: Edmonton's table lands exclude the North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System as shown on Map 2.

i

1 '11,6::4;,P14ft s ; IAjligAof

tâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;FINWP"'li ir Itermintat

infnit

..46

95

O m( OP* 111 63

IMIal i i

: 1104

1/46

4

11:11/1111111

MUM

ati

ROMPAIRIB

4

r#, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

3 2.0 BACKGROUND Population growth and land development are causing widespread alterations in the world's natural ecological systems. Ecological diversity is decreasing as species become extinct at an exponential rate. In the most densely populated portions of Europe, Asia and North America less than 10 per cent of the natural, terrestrial ecosystems remain in some semblance of their natural state (Eagles).

World attention focused on this and other environmental problems with the presentation of the Brundtland report, "Our Common Future," to the General Assembly of the United Nations. ;in Canada, several initiatives at the federal and provincial level have identified the need to preserve and protect natural areas and wild life. (Environment Canada, Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife, World Wildlife Fund Canada) Establishing a process to retain and protect natural areas located on Edmonton's table lands will benefit everyone.

Residents of Edmonton and area will benefit from: • • •

an improved quality of life in the city; the opportunity for co-operation between conservation and development interests; and the development of a vehicle for community protection of natural areas.

The development industry will benefit from: • •

future certainty in decision making; and a preserved natural environment, more attractive to prospective residents and investors.

The City of Edmonton will benefit from: • • • •

established internal policies regarding the conservation and preservation of natural areas; the actions that Council takes to conserve/protect Edmonton's environmentally sensitive areas; the demonstration of Council's responsiveness to community and environmental concerns; and, the integration of an aspect of environmental planning into the City's corporate planning.

Conservation groups will benefit from: • • •

the creation of an awareness for the need for conservation at the local level; the identification of local conservation issues; and the support of actions by individuals and small groups.

4 Natural areas contribute to a community in the following ways: 1.

Natural areas in a City perform important "urban work." They protect the water supply and support natural drainage, reduce flooding by absorbing run-off, provide a habitat for flora and fauna, and help to reduce air and noise pollution.

2.

Natural areas in a City are ideal outdoor classrooms or laboratories. Schools, interest groups, field naturalists and individuals can use such areas for environmental education.

With the introduction of interpretive programs, man's place in the natural world can be better understood and appreciated.

3.

A well-managed natural area can give a community a sense of place or identity and can become a source of pride. Further-more, a green space or range of forest can give strength to an urban form which might otherwise be a monotonous sprawl.

4.

The recreation function of an urban natural area is perhaps its most frequently mentioned aspect. Some recreation experiences are exclusive to natural areas (ie. natural viewing and appreciation). Many authors have stressed the psychological and emotional needs of contact with nature. Natural areas can be effective in providing temporary escapes from the pressures and tensions created by urban life. (Calgary Parks/Recreation and Planning Departments, 1979).

The identification, development and protection of natural areas in Edmonton requires coordination, cooperation and monitoring at the municipal, regional, provincial and federal levels and within the civic corporation. The first step is to identify existing natural areas in Edmonton and develop criteria to determine which natural areas may be classified as environmentally sensitive, unique and important to Edmontonians.

2.1

Definitions

Three terms were defined to assist with protection of Edmonton's natural areas. Although these terms relate to sites on Edmonton's table lands, two are consistent with those used in the "Ribbon of Green" Plan for the North Saskatchewan River Valley by the Parks and Recreation Department. For an explanation of other terms, please see the glossary.

Natural Area A NATURAL AREA may be identified where an area of land or water either retains or has reestablished its natural character, although the area need not be completely undisturbed, or the area contains unusual flora, fauna, geological or similar features of scientific or educational interest (Eagles, 1984). In other words, a NATURAL AREA may have no special features, other than the presence of wetlands or vegetation, but may be protected because of its contribution to Edmonton's quality of life.

5 At the same time, the term NATURAL AREA is a generic term which may be used to refer to any lands that have natural characteristics. (The term natural area is:.'also used in provincial legislation and refers to the power of the Lieutenant Governor in Council to designate any area of public land as a natural area in order to protect sensitive or scenic public land from disturbance, and ensure the availability of public land in a natural state for use by the public or recreation or any other purpose).

Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Area/Conservation Zone This term refers to an area of land or water which has been identified through an environmental impact assessment (EIA) as having ecological features of value to the community of Edmonton.

These lands are suited for the maintenance of existing vegetation, wildlife habitat, wetlands and watercourses as well as limited recreational use. These lands may include natural wooded areas; water courses and watershed drainage areas; wildlife nesting, breeding grounds of foliage areas; and areas which provide a linking system for wildlife movements. These lands may be characterized by some human disturbance but considerable native vegetation and wildlife habitat will be intact. This term is synonymous with the CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT ZONE described in "Ribbon of Green: North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan."

Management practices may include limiting development to trails, routine garbage pick up and trail edge maintenance, limited wildlife control, some habitat restoration and some safety and security services. Recreation will be limited to trail based on activities such as: snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, portaging, orienteering, photography, fishing, bicycling, walking, jogging, nature study observation, horseback riding.

Type 2 Environmentally Sensitive Area/Preservation Zone This term refers to an area of land or water which has been identified through an EIA as having unique or fragile features that must be protected from human disturbance or survive. This term refers to a disturbed or undisturbed site which, because of its natural features (see glossary) has value to society and ecosystems worth protecting, but is susceptible to further disturbance. This term is synonymous with the PRESERVATION MANAGEMENT ZONE described in "Ribbon of Green: North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan."

Management practices may include no development, no routine maintenance, periodic garbage cleanup, restricted wildlife control (only when ecological balance is threatened), and emergency safety and security services only. Human intrusion will not be encouraged, although sites of considerable significance may be managed/sensitively developed to encourage human appreciation of the site. This zone could include areas with sensitive or unusual habitats, geological features or cultural remains. Examples of activities which may be allowed are: portaging, walking, jogging, nature study observation, photography.

6 3.0

POLICY CONTEXT

3.1

Federal and Provincial Initiatives

The federal and provincial governments have indicated their concern with protecting the environment through recent initiatives. The federal government has supported the Bnmdtland report with the publication of "Toward a Common Future: A Report on Sustainable Development and its Implications for Canada", and "The Green Plan". Several federal programs (Canadian Wildlife Service, Agriculture Canada) also support protection of wildlife and conservation.

The province of Alberta's initiatives are varied. New legislation is proposed in the form of a discussion draft on "Proposed Environmental Protection and Enhancement Legislation." Concern for the preservation of wetlands is shown in a draft policy paper on the management of wetlands.

The Province has developed a program to protect special areas on public lands- the Natural Area Program administered by the Public Lands Division, Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife. The Parks Ventures Fund, administered by the Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation accepts donations of land and gifts to preserve and conserve Alberta's natural heritage. The Alberta Landowner Habitat Program, administered by Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife, provides financial and other incentives to encourage (volunteer) landowners to maintain wildlife habitat on their land.

The federal and provincial proposals and plans mention the protection of natural areas, but do not discuss practical ways for municipalities to achieve that goal. In practice, federal and provincial programs support voluntary individual and municipal initiatives.

3.2

Regional Initiatives

Environmental protection policies in the Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Plan are directed to municipalities and subdivision approving authorities. To support these policies the Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission initiated studies to inventory environmentally sensitive areas in the municipal district and counties that surround Edmonton. As well, the Region is classifying the local, regional, provincial, national and international importance of these areas. To date, 100 environmentally sensitive areas in the Counties of Strathcona and Leduc and the M.D. of Sturgeon have been identified and classified by the Region. Once the inventory is complete, the Region will urge appropriate municipalities to amend their planning documents.

At this point, the Regional Planning Commission and the municipalities surrounding Edmonton are considering environmental protection, but have not developed specific strategies to actively achieve protection.

3.3

Other Municipal Initiatives

An interest in conserving natural areas is emerging throughout North America. In Strathcona County, ConservACTION, a wildlife habitat conservation program is underway. The program,

7 supported by the County, Environment Canada, Alberta Fish and Wildlife, and the Sherwood Park Fish and Game Association, works with landowners to preserve and enhance wildlife habitat. In Red Deer, the environmentally sensitive Gaetz Lake Sanctuary has been precerved due to the efforts of the community over several years. In Calgary, planners are exploring approaches to protecting remaining natural areas. Communities in both Ontario and the United States have identified their existing natural areas and require sensitive development to protect and enhance them.

3.4

Private/Not for Profit Conservation Organizations

Programs to protect wildlife and natural areas may be supported by private and/or not for profit conservation organizations. These organizations may provide funding, technical assistance, volunteers or information to individuals or municipalities interested in protecting natural areas.

For a list of those organizations that may assist with protecting natural areas please see the Draft Directory of Land Conservation Programs and Agencies in Alberta.

3.5

General Municipal Plan

One of the key commitments and objectives identified in Edmonton's General Municipal Plan (Bylaw 9076) is the retention of environmentally sensitive areas (ESA). There is an opportunity to incorporate these areas into the design of new development, thus mitigating negative impacts upon these areas from development and, in some cases, retaining these areas in their natural state.

Policy 6.D.1 of the General Municipal Plan directs that an ESA study be prepared for the City to identify locally and regionally significant ESAs; classify such areas as to their importance; and to identify which areas should be protected. Policy 6.D.2 directs that a process be established for undertaking impact assessments for proposals affecting ESAs. Policy 6.D.3 directs that design and mitigating measures to preserve ESAs be established. This report is the rust step towards implementing this objective and these policies.

3.6

Area Structure Plan Terms of Reference

Edmonton's Terms of Reference for Area Structure Plans (ASPs) identifies several items relating to natural areas and environmentally sensitive areas for inclusion in ASPs: 1.

Information on the natural environment of the area, soils, agricultural capability, topography, special features, natural drainage courses, ravine or river valley systems, extractive industries, land conservation areas and the like;

2.

An assessment of the environmental impact of the proposed development on the natural environment and the manner in which the natural site characteristics will influence the development propocai;

3.

Development and design guidelines relating to the overall area or portions of it in regard to:

8 •

special treatment for environmentally sensitive areas, for conservation areas, for historic or archaeological preservation areas, for development adjacent to the ravine and river valley system or for special development areas;

4.

Whether, and the manner in which, existing land uses will be incorporated into the plan or phased out, as development progresses.

5.

Maps showing the following: • • •

6.

A statistical summary for the plan areas, to include the following: • •

7.

vegetation in the area; contours in the plan area; boundaries or locations of any restricted area or indications of areas which may be affected by any government regulation

breakdown by sub-area of municipal reserve required and available; disposition of any city-owned land in the area;

Tne aesignation of additional open space features on the basis of environmental conditions, following the guidelines of the Planning Act, River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan Bylaw, the General Municipal Plan, the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and other city policies and bylaws.

The effectiveness of the ASP Terms of Reference in protecting known natural areas is discussed in Section 4.2.

3.7

River Valley Protection

Protection of natural areas in the North Saskatchewan River Valley (Map 2) is achieved through the designation of Environmental Reserve, the Top of Bank Policy, and floodplain mapping.

Edmonton's efforts to retain natural areas of value to society are shown by the development of Capital City Park and the North Saskatchewan River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan (ARP).

Edmonton's efforts have been recognized through its nomination as the first Green Survival City by the American Nursery Trees Association in 1975. The river valley is to be protected, used for educational and recreational purposes, and maintained as an important resource for Edmonton's future.

The North Saskatchewan River Valley ARP (Bylaw 7188) is the main means through which sensitive areas of the river valley are protected from development. Environmental Impact Assessments (ETA) are required for public development and development on public land in the river valley. Corporate or private development proponents are required to submit background information on projects to the Planning and Development Department, who refer to Bylaw 7188 to determine if an ETA is required. The proponent then prepares the ETA. This process has had shortcomings and a review of the process has been recommended.

9 The performance of the River Valley ARP (Bylaw 7188) is not at issue here as this study focuses on the protection of natural areas on Edmonton's table lands.

The Parks and Recreation Department protects natural areas in the North Saskatchewan River Valley through the North Saskatchewan River Valley ARP; the preparation of detailed master plans for specific areas; and inventories of the resources in the river valley. The North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System - Concept Plan (1990) (Ribbon of Green) establishes the Department's future plans for management and development of the river valley and ravine system. The Plan identifies parks that will have a natural focus and establishes three management zones to be used in future planning. Two of the zones may translate to the two Environmentally Sensitive Areas defined in this study. The management zones are identified in the glossary.

The Parks and Recreation Department has had few opportunities to protect natural areas outside of the river valley. A new environmental focus is emerging in the Department with the naturalization project. The proposed systems plan for Edmonton's Parks and Open Spaces may address protection of natural areas located outside of the river valley as well. It is anticipated that the contents of this study will be integrated with the proposed Systems Plan.

10

MAP 2 NORTH SASKATCHEWAN RIVER VALLEY & RAVINE SYSTEM RIVER VALLEY SYSTEM North Saskatchewan River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan (Bylaw 7188) protects sensitive areas in the river valley.

Note: The North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System excludes Edmonton's table lands as shown on Map 1.

r#J PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

11 4.0 ISSUES/CHALLENGES/IMPLICATIONS 4.1

Why Protect Natural Areas?

Edmonton's large, relatively undeveloped table lands contain many natural areas (Ealey). The City's knowledge of these natural areas is limited. Often, the City allows development before becoming aware of the presence or importance of a natural area. Because of this, the City has lost and is losing natural areas that may be of value to Edmonton. Now, Edmonton has the opportunity to take a proactive role in protecting the environment.

The impetus to protect natural areas has been growing. Internationally, nationally and provincially the need for green space and special natural areas has been recognized. The City of Edmonton's General Municipal Plan indicates the City's commitment to protecting natural areas (Policies 6.D.1, 6.D.2, 6.D.3).

A preliminary inventory of natural areas located in Edmonton's table lands exists. Raley (1986) and Russell and Spiers (1984) contributed to the identification of Edmonton's natural areas.

Russell and S piers interpreted 1:5,000 maps to pre-type (classify) vegetation remnants on Edmonton's table lands, excluding the North Saskatchewan River Valley. Subsequently, Ealey documented, listed and mapped all stands of natural vegetation 1 ha. or greater. He included slough/wetlands greater than 0.1 ha. in the documentation and mapping as he felt that wetlands had a relatively greater interpretation value. Larger areas or those that had been investigated by natural history groups were described and mapped at a smaller scale. Ealey's inventory of natural areas presents information on vegetation, ownership, location and area for each site (See Appendix D for synopsis).

Unfortunately, this inventory is out of date. Before this information can be used, its accuracy and the actual presence of significant features must be confirmed.

4.2

Current Practice

Table 1 illustrates how natural areas have been treated by four area structure plans. From this it is possible to evaluate the effectiveness of the Area Structure Plan (ASP) Terms of Reference in protecting known natural areas.

4.2.1 Assessment of Current Practice In most of the cases illustrated in Table 1, the basic environmental requirements of the ASP Terms of Reference have been met. The presence of tree stands, view points, sloughs, soils and the desirability of environmentally sensitive development are discussed selectively in each ASP, although the importance and sensitivity of the features are not examined. In most cases the solution for environmental integration is the location of school/park sites in conjunction with tree

TABLE 1- HOW AREA STRUCTURE PLANS HAVE PROTECTED NATURAL AREAS West Jasper Place (South) Planning Initiated

1972

'

Riverbend

Lake District

Big Lake

Lewis Farms

1977

1979

1987

1988

Natural Areas Identified

. wooded area, marshes and viewpoints identified in outline plan

. vegetation and potential arche°logical sites identified in outline plan

.. ASP mentions slough and coniferous tree stands 50-60 ft high . F,aley identified 15 ha. lake and several treed sites greater than 10 ha.

. ASP briefly discusses soils, topography and vegetation.

Reader referred to supporting Environmental Evaluation.

. vegetation identified in ASP . Ealey identified West Edmonton Bog

Environmental Planning Philosopy

. integrate urban development with fine landscape features .. schools and parks to be sited to preserve existing tree stands

. conserve and optimize the use of the natural environment through sensitive integration of the development with natural features

. suggests that notable vegetation be incorporattd into design

. conserve and optimize the use of natural environment through sensitive integration of development with natural features

. bush of little value and will be disturbed by urban drainage, more mature trees should be preserved where the potential exists

Protection of Natural Areas

. all natural areas to be developed in Ormsby Place NSP . development of school/ park site will result in loss of existing trees in Jamieson Place NSP

major road right-of-way runs through only woodlot in ASP . NSP Five incorporates treed sites into development

. treed areas slated for residential development . lake slated for infilling and use as stormwater management lake

. portions of golf course and residential development proposed on lands identified as having severe development limitations . proposal that ER not be designated until actual subdivision . supporting Environmental Evaluation recommends more detail and delineation of sites at NSP stage, does not discuss impact of golf courses

. ASP Development Concept does not show integration of Bog into development . Potter Greens NSP states most vegetation will require removal

Implications

. loss of natural areas

.. limited preservation of natural areas

0. loss of natural areas

. potential for loss of natural areas (limited preservation)

. loss of natural areas

/0

13 stands. In the case of Big Lake, the environmental evaluation was undertaken as a requirement of the North Saskatchewan River Valley Bylaw, not as a requirement of the ASP Terms of Reference.

Except for Big Lake, none of the ASPs or NSPs considered the impact the proposed development will have on the natural environment; special treatment through the use of development or design guidelines or designating additional open space due to environmental conditions (items 2,3, and 7 of the ASP Terms of Reference). The protection of natural areas for their own sake is not examined, only the integration of sensitive lands with golf courses or school sites is proposed.

In most cases, the actual development of the ASP has resulted or will result in the loss of all original natural sites. No ASP discusses the implications of its environmental decisions. In the case of Big Lake, a large area was identified as worthy of conservation. The lands were not within the North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System so they could not be acquired as Environmental Reserve. At present, no funds are available to acquire these lands although municipal reserve may be used to acquire a portion of these lands. If a strategy to acquire these lands is not developed, they will be developed per the Big Lake ASP. A new planning approach, the Terwillegar Heights Service Concept Design Brief (SCDB) is being tried. This approach identifies all natural areas and directs they be protected at the Neighbourhood Area Structure Plan stage.

To date, the Corporation has had no method of measuring, on a city wide basis, the implications of the loss of natural areas in ASPs. Current protection is internal and not based upon comprehensive guidelines.

For the ASP Terms of Reference, and consequently ASPs to conform with the policies of the General Municipal Plan and this study, the ASP Terms of Reference should be more specific in its requirements and the Planning and Development Department will have to be more analytical in its approach to the environmental information presented in ASPs. 4.3 The Challenge The City of Edmonton has the opportunity to initiate a pro-active process to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas in Edmonton's table lands. Environmentally sensitive lands may be protected because of their intrinsic ecological value. Natural areas, areas with natural characteristics but no environmentally sensitive features, may be protected because of their contribution to Edmonton's quality of life.

Environmentally sensitive and natural areas on both public and private lands can be protected if everyone gets involved. Protection can be initiated through municipal action, but would be enhanced by support from other levels of government, not for profit conservation organizations, and the private sector. Programs to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas could extend to voluntary actions by individuals.

14 The time to act is now, while relatively untouched environmentally sensitive and natural areas still exist in Edmonton's table lands.

4.4 Issues If urban natural areas are to be retained and protected, several issues should be considered. Chart 1 and the following discussion highlights these issues.

4.4.1 Acquisition of Environmentally Sensitive Areas Protection of environmentally sensitive and natural areas is best achieved through acquisition of the site. Various mechanisms, such as purchase, donation of land and acquisition through the statutory planning process may be considered. Purchase of sites is a limited option and may only be considered in extremely important cases. Donation of environmentally sensitive and natural areas to the Corporation is a feasible option but will require comprehensive guidelines to avoid the acceptance of sites that may be contaminated, or have arduous maintenance requirements.

The Alberta Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation has guidelines for accepting land donations.

The legislative option available to the City is the taking of Environmental Reserve (ER) and Municipal Reserve (MR) through subdivision. Through the subdivision process, the City may require provision of ER on that part of a proposed subdivision that consists of: "(a)

a swamp, gully, ravine, coulee or natural drainage course,

(b)

land that is subject to flooding or is, in the opinion of the subdivision approving authority, unstable, or...

(c)

a strip of land, not less than 6 metres in width, abutting the bed and shore of any lake, river, stream or other body of water for the purpose of (i) preventing pollution, or (ii) providing public access to and beside the bed and shore."(Section 98, Division 3, Planning Act)

Unfortunately, the existing legislation for ER limits the potential for acquisition of lands identified as Environmentally Sensitive Areas.

Through the subdivision process the City may require provision of municipal reserve and/or school reserve. Ten percent of the area of the parcel, less any land to be provided as environmental reserve, may be taken. The City does not have the authority to take municipal and/or school reserve where one lot is created from a quarter section of land; the land is subdivided into lots of 40 acres or more and is used solely for agricultural purposes; the land to

15

CHART 1 ISSUES TIED TO PROTECTION OF NATURAL AREAS ISSUE

r

DISCUSSION I

I. Acquisition of Natural Areas of Value to Edmonton

- land presently acquired through MR and ER - donations may be considered - purchase only considered as last resort - need for Corporation to re-examine priorities in the Joint Agreement and Capital Priorities Plan

2. Potential Financial Impacts

- costs to both Corporation and private sector - if costs built into planning for projects, likely small percentage of total project costs - internal and external funding options

3. Support through Provincial Legislation

- provincial environmental legislation is emerging - provincial legislation does not address protection of natural areas in municipal context - need for provincial legislation to allow for protection of natural areas in municipalities - cooperation with other municipalities to push for improved legislation.

4. Ownership of Identified Natural Areas

- protection of a natural area must be undertaken with consent of owner - Corporate purchase of lands identified as Environmentally Sensitive Areas may be necessary - to encourage flexibility and protection of the maximum number of natural areas it is necessary to explore alternate ownership and management approaches

5. Districting Natural Areas

- need to allow for protection of natural areas in the City's Land Use Bylaw

6. Inter-Departmental Coordination

- several civic departments becoming involved with environmental issues - any approach should be coordinated and consistent with other Department's initiatives - responsibilities for protection of natural areas should be made clear and coordinated by one body

7. Management

- need to allow for creative management of natural areas in natural state

8. Regional Coordination

- opportunity to link Environmentally Sensitive areas (ESA) in Edmonton with ESAs identified in rural municipalities outside Edmonton

9. Data Base

- need to confirm and update database - need for effective monitoring of change to database - potential to create information as a (US coverage

10. Restoration

- potential exists to create or enhance ESAs

II. Suburban Neighbourhood Concept

- review of neighbourhood concept will allow natural areas to have a greater priority in future suburban planning

12. Linkages and Corridors

- most viable way to protect species

13. Holistic Ecological Management/Green City Concept

- opportunity to develop a larger integrated vision for Edmonton - management plan might be developed to identify priority natural areas, linkages to the River Valley System and integration of natural areas with servicing

16 be subdivided is 2 acres or less; or reserve land or money was previously provided for the subject land.

The City's land acquisition policies presently constrain acquisition of land identified as environmentally sensitive areas. The Joint Agreement and the Capital Priorities Plan determine the City's land acquisition process. The Joint Agreement between the City and City school boards identifies and allocates municipal and school reserve requirements. The portion allocated to the Parks and Recreation Department is used to assemble neighbourhood and district level parklands. If more attention is to be given to acquisition of land identified as environmentally sensitive areas through the allocation of municipal reserve, it is necessary to review the existing Joint Agreement to see if there is any room for re-negotiation.

The Capital Priorities Plan develops and prioritizes budget allotments. The Plan ranking process does not give a high priority to acquisition of lands identified as environmentally sensitive areas.

To do so, it is necessary for the City to upgrade the priority of these capital expenditures or to wait until the City has more funds at its disposal for this type of project.

4.4.2. Potential Financial Impacts The costs of protecting environmentally sensitive and natural areas will affect both the Corporation and the private sector. On the part of the Corporation costs will include updating the information available on natural areas, an increase in operating costs for line departments as environmental screening for projects (ie. power lines, roads, facilities) will be necessary, and an increase in capital costs for line departments as project development takes into account requirements for protection of environmentally sensitive and natural areas. There may also be long term costs associated with maintaining environmentally sensitive areas, if they become part of the City's land inventory. On the private side, costs to development proponents will be for environmental screenings and mitigation. If these costs are built into the original planning process, they should only be a small percentage of both the public and private sector's total project costs.

If City Council recommends that an environmentally sensitive or natural area be acquired, several strategies may be considered. These include acquisition through the statutory planning process (Municipal Reserve, Environmental Reserve) and donation of land and obtaining funding from outside organizations. Once these options are exhausted, the Corporation's last resort may be purchase. This type of purchase may have a big impact upon the operating costs of the Corporation. Where a project is initiated by the Corporation or located upon City-owned land, the proponent department's operating budget will take into account the costs of an environmental screening. The capital budget will take into account the costs of any mitigation or avoidance.

17 Several approaches for funding acquisition of environmentally sensitive or natural areas may be considered.

1.

The ranking of environmentally sensitive area protection and acquisition could be elevated in the Capital Priorities Plan.

2.

Other internal funding sources could be considered upon discussion with affected Departments.

3.

External sources of funding could be sought Sources may include: grants from other levels of government, such as the Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, the federal government's Environmental Partners Fund and the Green Plan; grants from not for profit conservation groups; grants from private conservation organizations; and, donations or gifts to the Parks Ventures Fund, Alberta Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation.

4.

Non-fmancial assistance may be considered. This may take the form of legal strategies for protection such as conservation easements or restrictive covenants voluntarily placed on private property; recognition for landowners who voluntarily protect natural areas or land exchanges to divert use or development from natural areas.

4.4.3 Provincial Legislation Provincial initiatives to protect the environment have emerged in the form of the "Proposed Alberta Environment Protection and Enhancement Legislation" and "A Draft Policy for the Management of Wetlands in the Settled Area of Alberta." Unfortunately neither of these initiatives address the protection of natural areas in a municipal context.

The Province has a mechanism to protect natural areas located on public land (Wilderness Areas, Ecological Reserves and Natural Areas Act). The City may wish to use this process, in tandem with the Province, to protect lands identified as environmentally sensitive areas on public lands in Edmonton. The Parks Ventures Fund, Alberta Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation may consider accepting donations of environmentally sensitive or natural lands in Edmonton, although the fund has a provincial mandate.

In Edmonton, the Province has regulated land use through the establishment of Restricted Development Areas (RDAs). Three RDAs exist within Edmonton's boundaries. They are the Edmonton-Devon Restricted Development Area, the Edmonton-Fort Saskatchewan Restricted Development Area, and the Transportation and Utility Corridor Restricted Development Area.

The Edmonton-Devon RDA and the Edmonton-Fort Saskatchewan RDA were established to protect marginal or valuable natural lands associated with the river valley. Lands are privately owned but development is regulated to protect environmentally sensitive lands, future outdoor recreation lands and lands of public importance, ie. watersheds. When development is proposed

18 in these RDAs both municipal and Ministerial (Environment) approvals must be given. As the role of Alberta Environment changes, and municipalities make concrete plans to protect environmentally sensitive areas, it is likely that all decision making authority for these areas will be returned to the appropriate municipality, with the understanding that sensitive lands will be protected.

The Province established the Transportation and Utility Corridor RDA to provide land for a future ring road and utility right-of-way to circle Edmonton. The Province has purchased 90% of the area identified in the RDA and the area is just large enough to contain the planned roadway and utility alignments. Although Ealey's report identified natural areas within this RDA, the constraints of the alignments may mean that there is little room to negotiate to protect potential environmentally sensitive areas in this RDA. The City of Calgary has recognized that existing practice and legislation do not encourage the protection of large treed sites, or lands identified as Environmentally Sensitive Areas within municipalities. Both Edmonton and Calgary have had experiences where an identified site was lost due to developers fearing revenue losses and/or communication breakdowns. The City of Calgary's Parks/Recreation and Planning Departments have prepared papers urging improved legislation.

Recently, two suggested amendments (written by City of Edmonton Parks and Recreation Department) to the Planning Act were submitted to the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association as resolutions. These were to broaden the definition of Environmental Reserve (ER) to include environmentally sensitive areas and to allow ER to be taken in small lot subdivisions.

4.4.4 Ownership Ownership and management of natural areas are inter related. An area may not be managed, protected, used or developed without either the consent or active participation of the owner.

On private land where natural areas have been identified and the City's planning process is initiated (through subdivision, the area structure planning process, the development permit process) negotiation and education will be the primary tools used by the City to encourage the protection, maintenance and management of the natural area by the private owner.

Where an environmentally sensitive area has been identified on private land, it may be necessary for the City to purchase the area in order to protect and maintain the area properly.

Some environmentally sensitive areas may be identified on private lands. The City may not have the resources to purchase all privately owned environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore, alternate approaches for ownership and management should be explored, possibly in conjunction with the Province and new legislation.

19 Private initiatives for protection are viable options. Recently, a private citizen in Edmonton donated lands, including an environmentally sensitive area to the University of Alberta on the understanding that the land was to remain in a natural state and be leased and managed by the City of Edmonton. In Strathcona County, the Alberta Planning Board allowed a landowner to place a restrictive convenant on a wildlife habitat area as part of a subdivision.

Creative land owner arrangements, in which detailed plans for protection and management are developed, afford excellent short and medium term protection of natural areas. Landowners like to be recognized for efforts beyond the ordinary as shown by the Province's experience with the Volunteer Stewardship Program. However, administration of such a program will be a timeconsuming process and will involve the regular commitment of City staff. Also, such arrangements must be underwritten with some form of legislative agreement that ensures protection in perpetuity (ie. protective covenants), mechanisms for handling proposed modifications to the environmentally sensitive area, management agreements, and penalties for misuse of the land. (Higgs, 1991).

4.4.5 Districting Once a natural area or environmentally sensitive area has been identified and the Corporation or another agency has decided to designate or protect the site in some manner, the Land Use Bylaw or the Administration should recognize this use. This may be accomplished through the addition of these uses to the existing Urban Service Districts, through the development of new districts or through the use of an overlay.

Districting has proven to be an effective way of legally restricting uses in an ESA. Strict regulations affecting the use of ESAs has drawn support from the public in the United States.

Development concerns may be assuaged with promises of City cooperation in careful environmental planning, fair impact assessment procedures and effective public relations. (Higgs, 1991).

4.4.6 Inter-Departmental Coordination Environmental issues have emerged in Edmonton and both Council and the civic administration are responding to these issues. Council has directed that a civic Environmental Task Force propose environmental initiatives for the City. Council has also created a special office to deal with civic environmental issues.

Several departments have given environmental considerations higher priority. The Planning and Development Department has initiated this study to protect natural areas. The Parks and Recreation Department is working on a Naturalization Project and considering developing a system plan for Parks and Open Spaces which will prioritize protection of the environment.

Parks and Recreation and Council have just approved three use zones (Conservation, Preservation and Extensive Use) for the River Valley. The designations proposed in this study should interrelate with the zones and future designations that Parks and Recreation develop.

20 If the Corporation is to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas, the functions of monitoring the inventory/map, communicating with the public, overseeing Corporate involvement, preparing acquisition and management strategies, and preparing reports for Council should be coordinated. The responsibilities for these duties should be made clear. Two options may be considered. First, that Council consider establishing a Natural Areas Advisory Committee to oversee these duties, supported by the Administration. Second, that a Coordinator of Natural Areas function be established through the re-allocation and re-definition of duties within the responsible department(s).

4.4.7 Managing Natural Areas Where protection of a site is agreed to, a management plan for the site is imperative. A management plan may outline: the site's existing uses; permitted management activities such as burning, fencing, monitoring, enforcement, and education; responsibilities of those involved; implementation of the plan; administration of the plan; and, guidelines for use of the site.

This study focuses on the protection and management of lands identified as environmentally sensitive areas in their natural state. Unfortunately, some provincial and municipal regulations direct that open space and parks be groomed and controlled for the public good (ie. weed and insect control, grass cutting). This type of action will damage the natural state of the designated areas. Some flexibility or negotiations to preserve the' natural state of these areas should be considered.

The importance and scope of management activities should not be underestimated. Natural sites, no matter what type and size, are enormously complex, dynamic systems. A well-established deciduous woodlot may require very little intervention to maintain its integrity (ie. the composition and qualities that led to its protection). A shortgrass prairie remnant, on the other hand, will require regular intensive intervention (eg. burning) to preserve integrity. Some ecosystems change very slowly and are tremendously resilient to changes from the outside.

Others, particularly fast changing ecosystems, will require constant monitoring and intervention to keep the system from changing to something other than what it was designated to be. (An example of this might involve the protection of a rare plant species. A very specific set of conditions in the ESA serve to support the dwindling species, and any change natural or otherwise, will threaten elimination. Active involvement with the function of the ecosystem is necessary to protect the primary reason for which it was designated. With the disappearance of the plant, so goes the main reason for designating the ESA). And, for some ESA's, it will be desirable to encourage natural succession processes. (Higgs, 1991).

In Edmonton, management of natural areas may include use, modification, restoration, intervention and natural succession. Management of environmentally sensitive areas may limit or prohibit some of these options. Sites may be managed by Parks and Recreation, by private, not for profit, or community groups, by volunteer stewards, by landowners, or by homeowners associations.

21 4.4.8 Regional Coordination Environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) are identified in the rural municipalities that surround Edmonton, although strategies for ESA protection have not been developed. It may be possible for the City of Edmonton to work with surrounding rural municipalities to integrate the protection of ESAs in a regional context to protect linkages such as wildlife corridors, ravine and drainage systems and cross-jurisdictional sites, and areas of regional significance.

The Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Plan is under review. It may be possible to develop a regional strategy for the protection of ESAs through this review.

4.4.9 Data Base The information compiled in the preliminary inventory is based on 1984 and 1986 data. In most cases, the information available for specific natural areas is limited and out of date. To ensure that natural areas are reviewed fairly, it is necessary to update the inventory and monitor it through field checks and collection of more detailed information.

In the future, an updated natural areas map and inventory may be created as a Geographic Information System (GIS) coverage and related to other City wide GIS coverages. Creation of this database as a GIS coverage will allow pro-active planning in terms of identifying sites that might be protected to enhance existing environmentally sensitive areas. For example, protecting a site that links two natural areas may be more beneficial than protecting an environmentally sensitive area in isolation.

4.4.10 Restoration Agencies involved in protection of endangered spaces and species are taking two approaches, the protection of existing endangered spaces and the restoration of damaged spaces. Over the past few years, strong advances have been made in the restoration of habitat areas. Restoration of damaged spaces or habitats has not been examined in this report, but should be considered in the future as an alternative to or enhancement of the City's protection of natural areas.

Some activities of the Corporation or the private sector may require that natural or environmentally sensitive areas be disturbed or destroyed. In those cases, restoration of the natural characteristics of the site may be considered.

4.4.11 Suburban Neighbourhood Concept Protection of natural areas may be incorporated with the concepts and policies that guide the City in planning new areas. Presently, the components of Edmonton's suburban neighbourhood concept are being reviewed. With the shift in focus to protection of natural areas, this may allow a new environmental focus to emerge in the planning of suburban neighbourhoods.

22 4.A.12 Linkages and Corridors Protected wildlife and vegetation are most likely to survive where species movement is feasible.

Linkages and corridors of environmentally sensitive and natural areas arc mcre conducive to species maintenance, rather than isolated biological islands. The Parks and Recreation Department encourages the development of linkages and corridors. Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission's Regional Trails project will enhance the development of linkages and corridors as well.

4.4.13 Holistic Ecological Management/Green City Concept The "green city" movement, just gaining momentum, is urging a comprehensive approach to urban environmental responsibility. Instead of enacting separate and sometimes conflicting plans, cities have begun to combine formerly piecemeal initiatives: natural gardening, reduced pesticide use, ecological rehabilitation of derelict sites, environmental education, linking Environmentally Sensitive Areas with natural corridors, increasing use of public transportation, emphasizing passive recreational pursuits and so on.

Protection of natural areas may become part of an integrated vision for an environmental management plan for Edmonton. A visionary environmental management plan might tackle issues such as relating Environmentally Sensitive Areas to the River Valley System and the use of linkages to the river valley system in the form of swales or storm water management facilities.

4.4.14 Summary Each of the above issues have been discussed briefly and will likely require further investigation as this project progresses. Some issues require investigation and/or resolution through follow-up projects. Further research may be spearheaded by the Planning and Development Department, but where it is more appropriate other departments may take the lead.

Successful implementation of this project will require recognition and incorporation of these issues in the approach taken to protect Edmonton's natural areas.

23

5.0

PROPOSED NATURAL AREA CLASSIFICATION

5.1

Classifying Natural Areas

5.1.1 Common Elements An understanding of common terms and the employment of consistent standards is necessary to identify natural areas. The process of identifying natural areas is relatively new and agencies have used varying definitions. A literature review identified some of the common elements of these definitions as summarized below.

Natural areas/preserves: • have a natural character, • contain unusual flora and/or fauna or unusual geological or similar features of scientific or educational interest;or • are undisturbed by man, or have recovered from earlier disturbance.

Environmentally sensitive areas: • protect the public ie. safety, hazard lands; • have value to society ie. scientific, educational, species maintenance, preservation of unique species; • protect and maintain public resources for the future ie. water supplies.

Environmentally significant areas: • represent the natural or cultural heritage of the area; or • contain sensitive or important resources.

5.2

Proposed Classification System

Table 2 and Figure 1 illustrate a method of classifying natural areas in Edmonton. Natural areas would be identified through a broad identification of lands with natural features that may prove to be environmentally sensitive or of value to the community of Edmonton. Both Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) and Type 2 ESAs would be identified through an environmental impact assessment. Type 1 ESAs would be identified by more restrictive criteria and may contain natural features significant either to the community of Edmonton or in an ecological sense. This ESA type could withstand limited human use. Type 2 ESAs would be identified by the most restrictive criteria and may contain unique or fragile ecological features that must be protected from human disturbance to survive. The proposed classification system is consistent with the system used in the Ribbon of Green Plan for the North Saskatchewan River Valley.

TABLE 2- NATURAL AREA CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

Function

Natural Area

Type 1 - Environmentally Sensitive Area Conservation Zone

Type 2 - Environmentally Sensitive Area Preservation Zone

Objective

Established to allow for the creation of a data base identifying natural areas on Edmonton's table lands and to develop a background resource for the Corporation,

Established to protect natural features on the site, to enhance recreational opportunities on the site, to preserve the site's scenic natural landscape features and to ensure control of activities in order that the impact of recreational use on the natural environment will be minimized.

Established to preserve and maintain the natural conditions and functions of a natural area by prohibiting, managing or integrating those activities which would have a harmful effect on the natural environment.

Definition

An area of land or water which either retains or has re-established its natural character, although it need not be completely undisturbed, or which contains unusual flora, fauna, geological or similar features of scientific or educational interest (Eagles, 1984). In other words, a natural area may have no special features, other than the presence of wetlands or vegetation,

An area of land or water which has been identified through an environmental impact assessment (EIA) as having ecological features of value to the community of Edmonton.

These lands are suited for the maintenance of existing vegetation, wildlife habitat, wetlands and watercourses as well as limited re-creational use. These lands may include natural wooded areas; water courses and watershed drainage areas; wildlife nesting, breeding grounds or foliage areas; and areas which provide a linking system for wildlife movement.

An area of land or water which has been identified through an EIA as having unique or fragile features that must be protected from human disturbance to survive. This term refers to a disturbed or undisturbed site which, because of its natural features (see glossary) his value to society and ecosystems worth protecting, but is susceptible to further disturbance.

Proposed Nomination Criteria

a) minimum area of 0.1 ha; b) presence of vegetation, either undisturbed, or re-established; C) presence of wetlands, either undisturbed or re-established; d) presence of unusual features, in. geologic features, of importance to Edmonton; or e) retention of natural character.

a) area sufficient to withstand external changes and low impact, passive recreational use, while retaining natural character, b) ability of a public body to acquire the area and to manage it as a Conservation Zone; c) area has a history of usage by wildlife and people; d) area is accessible; e) area provides linkages critical for the flora or fauna of recognized importance in the area; disruption of links would result in the isolation of pockets of habitat and thus degrade the overall value of the habitat; or, f) area with intrinsic appeal due to widespread community interest or the presence of highly valued features or species.

a) area is a habitat for significant populations* of flora or fauna which arc locally, provincially or nationally significant, or have been identified as a rare or endangered species and will sustain itself or be protected from proposed surrounding urban I. developments; b) presence of distinctive and unique landfonns and geologic features; c) presence of unique aesthetic features of importance to Edmonton; d) area performs an important role within Edmonton's ecosystem; e) area provides unique opportunities for environmental education or nature interpretation in Edmonton;

In order to be identified as a Natural Area, a site would be required to fulfil criteria (a) and (e) and one of either (b), (c), or (d).

Table 2 - continued

Function

Natural Area

Nomination Criteria (Cont'd)

Type 1 - Environmentally Sensitive Area Conservation Zone

Type 2- Environmentally Sensitive Area Preservation Zone

0 area contains a pataeotological, archaeIn order to be identified as Type 1 logical or historical site identified by the Environmentally Sensitive Area, a site would Edmonton Heritage Officer or Alberta be required to fulfil criteria (a), (b) and (d) and Culture as significant, rare or sensitive; one of either (c), (e), or (f). g) area performs a vital environmental, ecological or hydrological function such as aquifer recharge; h) area contains a large and relatively undisturbed habitat and provides sheltered habitat for species which are intolerant of human disturbance; or i) area contains an unusual diversity of plant and/or animal communities due to a variety of geomorphological features and microclirnatic effects. *see glossary In order to be identified as a Type 2 Environmentally Sensitive Area, as area would be required to meet one of the above criterion.

Identification Process

If a natural area meets the above criteria, it will be identified in the proposed inventory.

If the Natural Area EIA (required by the Planning and Development Department and prepared by the development proponent) indicates that the site meets the above criteria, a Type 1 - ESA will be identifiecL A Type 1 ESA may also be identified by a Parks and Recreation report where the site is deemed essential and Parks and Recreation is willing to acquire and manage the site. (Appendix B outlines a sample of the type of questions that would be addressed by the more detailed information provided in an EIA).

If the Natural Area EIA (required by the Planning and Development Department and prepared by the development proponent) indicates that the site meets one of the above criteria, a Type 2- ESA will be identified. A Type 2- ESA may be identified by a Parks and Recreation Department report where the site is deemed essential and Parks and!

Recreation or Council is willing to acquire the site. (Appendix C outlines a sample of the type of questions that would be addressed by the more detailed information provided in an EIA).

A Type 2- ESA may also be identified by a federal, provincial, or benevolent/philanthropic agency (ie. Ducks unlimited, Nanual Areas Program, Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife), subject to the criteria used by the City.

26

Figure 1 Illustration of Natural Area Classification System

Natural Areas All areas identified in the proposed inventory that contain features that may prove to be environmentally sensitive or of value to the community of Edmonton.

Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (Conservation Zone)

Natural areas identified through an EIA as having ecological features of value to the community of Edmonton . These areas may withstand limited recreational use. There may be several of these areas present in Edmonton's table lands.

Type 2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (Preservation Zone)

Natural areas identified through an EIA, as having unique or fragile features that must be protected from human disturbance to survive. There may only be a few of these areas present in Edmonton's table lands.

27 5.3

Implementation Proposal

The following example will be used as a basis for discussion to develop procedure.

A 1986 inventory of areas containing vegetation and wetlands on Edmonton's table lands is available (Ealey). This inventory was based on an air photo analysis done in 1984. The inventory does not provide information on the existence of or significance of environmentally sensitive features. The information in the inventory does indicate that some sites might contain features that may be ecologically sensitive and of value to the community of Edmonton (see Appendix D). Some of these sites will have disappeared and others may be disturbed by use or adjacent activities.

This proposal is based upon the existence of an accurate, descriptive inventory of natural areas on Edmonton's table lands. An updated inventory is required. The updated inventory will confirm the existence of the natural areas identified in the 1986 inventory, describe the natural areas and identify sites that contain environmentally sensitive features.

5.3.1 Protection Through the Planning and Development Process The updated inventory will be made available to developers, the public and the Corporation. The process will be triggered at the planning stage for Area Structure Plans, Neighbourhood Structure Plans, subdivisions, proposed developments or capital projects. Where the updated inventory or map indicates that a natural area is contained in tlie project area or that the project is within 500 m. of a natural area, the proponent will be required to do an environmental impact assessment (ETA) of the site(s). The information provided by the ETA will allow the administration to determine if a Candidate environmentally sensitive or natural area is present (see Glossary and Figure 2). Where a Candidate area is present, the administration will prepare a site specific acquisition and management strategy (using the various options discussed in Section 4.0) for the Candidate area. The administration will recommend to Council that the Candidate area become a Designated environmentally sensitive or natural area. Where Council agrees with the recommendation, the acquisition and management strategy prepared by the administration will be followed for the Designated area.

Where a natural area or Candidate environmentally sensitive or natural area is not protected through the above process, the administration may approach the proponent and suggest that the site be incorporated into the proposed development The proponent and the administration will negotiate the integration and management of the site.

28

Figure 2 Protection through the Planning and Development Process Inventory Available All natural areas in Edmonton's table lands will be mapped and information placed in an inventory, to be used as a corporate information base and as a resource for development proponents and the public.

Proposed ASP, NSP. Subdivision. Development or Capital Project Where proposal will affect natural areas identified in the inventory, the development proponent (public or private) will be required to do an environmental impact assessment (EIA) on the area(s).

Assessment of EIA Inforrnotion provided in ElA allows the administration to determine if a CANDIDATE environmentally sensitive or natural area (ESNA) is present.

CANDIDATE ESNA Identified CANDIDATE ESNA Not Present

watiml

Administration prepares an acquisition and management strategy for the area(s) and proposes to City Coundl that the area(s) become DESIGNATED ESNA.

Designated ESNA Not Created

Negotiation to Protect Administration negotiates protection of area(s) with proponent.

Council Creates Designated ESNA Acquisition and management strategy is followed for the area(s).

NOTE: THIS REPRESENTS ONE EXAMPLE OF POSSIBLE PROCEDURE

29 5.3.2 Voluntary Protection through Communication/Education The updated inventory will be made available to the public. The admiiiistration will prepare an information package (if possible, in partnership with established conservation groups) for distribution to interested members of the public on how to protect and preserve natural areas in partnership with the City. The approaches may include recognition of landowners, the use of restrictive covenants, conservation easements and donations of land.

30 6.0

CORPORATE IMPLEMENTATION OPTIONS

To be effective, the approach taken to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas within Edmonton's table lands should be incorporated into any larger environmental strategies for Edmonton. The approach should be open to creative implementation and the incorporation of future developments in the designation, assessment, management add rchabitation of natural areas that may extend the scope and effectiveness of the approach (Higgs, 1991). As well, the approach should be supported by an indication of the City of Edmonton's commitment to protecting natural areas.

Alternative approaches for protecting natural areas located on Edmonton's table lands are discussed in Appendix A. These alternatives were evaluated in the Appendix and the alternative that had the best performance is recommended as the implementation mechanism.

6.1

Recommended Alternative

A City Policy has the best performance of the alternatives discussed in Appendix A. Development and implementation of the Policy will involve all civic departments and the public.

Civic implementation will result in both public and private projects considering the protection of natural areas. A City Policy has the greatest potential for creative implementation within each civic department. And finally, a City Policy may be amended by Council in response to civic and public requests. Therefore, it is recommendcd that the City implement protection of environmentally sensitive and natural areas within Edmonton's table lands through the preparation and adoption of a City Policy.

If a City Policy is adopted, the Capital Priorities Plan is an excellent medium to integrate the Policy with current civic practices. Integration through the Capital Priorities Plan will allow: the Corporation to note environmental implications at the design stage of Corporate or joint projects; environmental features to be considered in every Corporate or joint project; the Corporation to note the need for extra funds at various stages of Corporate or joint projects and project maps to be checked against the Natural Areas inventory.

Several mechanisms may be used to implement a City Policy including: â&#x20AC;˘

forming a Natural Areas Advisory Committee, comprised of informed citizens, members of pertinent civic departments, scientists, and members of the development community, reporting to City Council or one of its designated committees to advise on process, implementation, and arbitration of natural areas protection. The Natural Areas Advisory Committee could be supported by one full time staff member, providing liaison with the public and developers, and coordinating the daily activities of natural area protection;

â&#x20AC;˘

developing effective communication and education programs to ensure developers and the public are well acquainted with the virtues and importance of natural area protection procedures;

31 â&#x20AC;˘

developing effective communication and education programs to ensure developers and the public are well acquainted with the virtues and importance of natural area protection procedures;

â&#x20AC;˘

commencing background studies to provide careful mapping and inventories of potential environmentally sensitive areas. These could be supervised by staff and the Natural Areas Advisory Committee;

â&#x20AC;˘

making a commitment to use creative implementation mechanisms, such as landowner arrangements, financial mechanisms and districting.

32 7.0 CONCLUSION Adoption of a City Policy will indicate the City of Edmonton's resolve to protect environmentally sensitive and natural areas within Edmonton's table lands. Developing a City Policy may require co-ordination through the Office of the Environment. The City of Edmonton may also work with other interested urban municipalities in Alberta to prepare a position paper to urge that Alberta's legislation be changed to encourage the protection of environmentally sensitive areas by municipalities.

Council approval of this report's recommendation will allow the administration to take the first steps toward developing a City Policy. These steps include updating the existing natural areas inventory, investigating funding sources for implementing the policy and initiating a public participation process to involve the public in developing the policy.

The guidelines suggested in this study and the development of a city policy will allow the City of Edmonton to take a step toward developing a larger environmental strategy for Edmonton, to achieve the City's environmental objectives in the General Municipal Plan and to protect the natural areas that enhance Edmonton's quality of life.

33 8.0 GLOSSARY Candidate Environmentally Sensitive or Natural Area A natural area, Type 1 Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) or Type 2 ESA that, in the opinion of the administration contains features of value to the community of Edmonton and may be protected for the benefit of the community.

Conservation Zone Characterized by some human disturbance; considerable native vegetation and wildlife habitat remain intact Management practices will include development limited to trails, routine garbage pick up and trail edge maintenance, limited wildlife control, some habitat restoration and some safety and security services. Recreation will be limited to trail based activities. Examples of activities which may be included are: snowshoeing, cross-country, skiing, portaging, orienteering, photography, fishing, bicycling, walking, jogging, nature study observation, horseback riding.

(North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan, 1990).

Designated Environmentally Sensitive or Natural Area A Candidate environmentally sensitive or natural area that, in the opinion of City Council, should be protected for the benefit of the community of Edmonton.

Environmental Impact Assessment The procedure leading to the detailed statement that: a) b) c) d)

identifies the substantive impacts of a development on the natural environment; measures the potential impacts of the development on the natural environment; evaluates the potential impacts of development on the natural environment; and identifies alternatives to any part of the project and the steps the proponent proposes to take to minimize adverse impacts during construction and operation.

Natural Feature may be: â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘ O O â&#x20AC;˘

habitat for locally, provincially, or naturally significant or rare species of plants and animals; unique geologic features; unique aesthetic features; a feature that performs an important role within the urban ecosystem; or a feature that provides unique opportunities for environmental education or nature interpretation

34 Preservation Zone Characterized by minimum disturbance, leaving native vegetation and wildlife habitat intact.

Management practices will include no development, no routine maintenance, periodic garbage cleanup, restricted wildlife control (only when ecological balance is threatened), only emergency safety and security services. Human intrusion will not be encouraged. This zone could include areas which are very steep and/or unstable and areas of unique characteristics such as sensitive or unusual habitats, geological features or cultural remains. Examples of activities which may be included are: portaging, walking, jogging, nature study observation, photography. (North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan, 1990).

Significant Population Refers to populations of rare flora and fauna which are self-sustaining. Occurrences of individuals or single nest sites are not considered significant unless they are one of the very few localities for the species.

Urban Ecosystem A complex of living and non-living forms which have value and importance in the environmental life cycle of a given urban area, and which contribute to the urban area's quality of life, ie. water supplies, water quality, presence of wildlife, presence of vegetation.

Wetland A wetland is land that is saturated with water long enough to promote wetland or aquatic processes as indicated by poorly drained soils, hydrophytic vegetation and various kinds of biological activity which are adapted to a wet environment. Wetlands include bogs, fens, marshes, swamps and shallow waters (usually 2 m deep or less) as defined in "The Canadian Wetland Classification System" published by the National Wetlands Working Group of the Canada Committee on Ecological Land Classification (1987).

35 BIBLIOGRAPHY General Adams, Lowell W. and Daniel L. Leedy, Integrating Man and Nature in the Metropolitan Environment: Proceedings of a National Symposium on Urban Wildlife, Natural Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, Maryland, 1986.

Adams, Lowell W. and Louise E. Dove, Urban Wetlands for Storrnwater Control and Wildlife Enhancement, National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, Maryland, 1984.

Adams, Lowell W. and Louise E. Dove, Wildlife Reserves and Corridors in the Urban Environment: A Guide to Ecological Landscape Planning and Resource Conservation, National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, Ma., 1989.

Alberta Environment, Discussion Draft of Proposed Environmental Protection and Enhancement Legislation, Edmonton, 1990.

Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife, Natural Areas Bulletins, Land Management Branch, Public Lands, Edmonton, 1989-1990.

Alberta Water Resources Commission, Wetlands: Values and Options, A Draft Policy for the Management of Wetlands in the Settled Area of Alberta, Edmonton, 1990.

Anderson, W.A. and J.L. Crammer - Byng (1981) Urban Ecology Areas: Ecology and Preservation Environmental Monograph No. 2, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto, 1981.

Beak Consultants Ltd., Environmental Guidelines: Section 6.0 of Kananaslds Country Design Principles and Guideline Manual, Alberta Fish and Wildlife, Calgary, 1980.

Bird, C.D. (ed)., Natural Areas 1973: A Report Prepared by the Natural Areas Committee of the Calgary Field Naturalist's Society, Natural Areas Committee, Calgary Field Naturalists' Society, 1974.

Brandy, R.F., "A Typology for the Urban Ecosystem and its Relationship to Larger Biographical Landscape Units," Urban Ecology, 4:11-28, 1979.

Crockett, Kevin J. and Richard C. Shelford, Terrain Sensitivity Classification Methodology, Report No. T/17, Land Classification Section, Alberta Energy and Natural Resources, Edmonton, 1982.

Davis, Stephen D.(et al), Plants in Danger, What do we know? International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Cambridge U.K., 1986.

36 Department of Planning and Development, A Critical Review of the Implementation of Policies Affecting Environmentally Sensitive Policy Areas 1976 - 1981, -Regional Planning and Development Series, Publication Number Seven, The Regional Municipality of Waterloo, 1981.

Dorney, R.S. (et. al), An Ecological Analysis of the Waterloo - South Wellington Region, Division of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo, 1970.

Domey, R.S., The Professional Practice of Environmental Management, Springer-Verlag Inc., New York, 1989.

Eagles, Paul F., The Planning and Management of Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Longman Group Ltd., New York 1984.

Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Regional Outdoor Recreation Area Study, Part 1 -Resource Inventory, DRAFT, Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, 1990.

Environment Canada, The Green Plan, A National Challenge: A Framework for Discussion on the Environment, Ottawa, 1990.

Environment Canada, World Conservation Strategy - Canada, Ottawa 1986.

Federal Activities Branch, Guide for Environmental Screening, Environmental Protection Service and Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office, Environment Canada, 1978.

Finlay, Cam and Joy, Parks in Alberta: A Guide to Parks, Ponds, Parklands and Prairies for Visitors Hurtig Publishers, Edmonton, 1987.

Fish and Wildlife Division, Forestry Lands and Wildlife, The Landowner Habitat Project, October 1987.

Fish and Wildlife Division, Status of the Fish and Wildlife Resource in Alberta, Alberta Energy and Natural Resources, Edmonton, 1984 Government of Alberta, Wilderness Areas, Ecological Reserves and Natural Areas Act, Queen's Printer Publication Services, 1984.

Green, Jeffrey E. and Richard E. Salter, Methods for Reclamation of Wildlife Habitat in the Canadian Prairie Provinces, Environment Canada and the Alberta Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation, Edmonton, 1987.

Hoffman, Douglas W. (1985), "Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Ontario: An Assessment," Environments, Volume 17, No. 13, p. 83-89.

37 Johnson, Derek, Alberta Naturalist, Volume 17, No. 3, Federation-sof Alberta Naturalists, Edmonton, 1987.

Keating, Micheal, Toward A Common Future: A Report on Sustainable Development and its Implications for Canada, Environment Canada, Ottawa, 1989.

Kowlowski, Jerry, Planning with the Environment: Introduction to the Threshold Approach, University of Queensland Press, New York, 1986.

Krutilla, John V. and Anthony C. Fisher, The Economics of Natural Environments: Studies in the Valuation of Commodity and Amenity Resources, Resources for the Fun= Inc., Washington, 1975.

Kwasniak, Arlene J., Legal Mechanisms for Private Land Conservancy in Alberta: A Law Reform Proposal, Environmental Law Centre (Alberta) Society, Edmonton, 1991 Leedy, Daniel L., An Annotated Bibliography on Planning and Management for Urban Suburban Wildlife, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Purchase Order 98210-0235), 1979.

Leedy, Daniel L. (et. al)., Planning for Wildlire in Cities and Suburbs, Biological Services Program, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1978.

McGregory, Ann, Ministry for Planning and Environment, Australian Environment Council, Looking Forward: A Guide to Preparing a Local Conservation Strategy, 1989.

Meshenberg, Michael J., Environmental Planning: 1, Environmental Information for Policy Formulation, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 263, 1970.

National Institute of Urban Wildlife, The Urban Wildlife Sanctuary Program of the National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, Maryland, n.d.

National Wetlands Working Group, Canada Committee on Ecological Land Classification, The Canadian Wetland Classification System, Ecological Land Classification Series No. 21, Lands Conservation Branch, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, 1987. , Wetlands of Canada, Ecological Land Classification Series, No. 24, Sustainable Development Branch, Canadian Wildlife Service, Conservation and Protection, Environment Canada, 1988.

Nature Trust Alberta, (Draft) Directory of Land Conservation Programs and Agencies in Alberta, Gwyne, Alberta, 1990.

38 Nelson, J.G., P.G.R. Smith and J.B. Theberge (1985), "Environmentally Significant Areas (ESA) Their Role, Identification, Designation and in the Northwest Territories, Canada: Implementation," Environments, Volume 17, No. 13, p. 93-109.

Ontario, Ministry of Natural Resources, Implementation Strategy: Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest, Parks and Recreation Areas Branch, Outdoor Recreation Group, Toronto, 1987.

Parker, John G. and Cheryl E. Bradley, A Checklist of the Rare Vascular Plants in Alberta, Natural History Occasional Paper No. 5, Provincial Museum of Alberta, Alberta Culture, Edmonton, 1984.

Parks and Recreation Department, Natural Areas of Calgary (brochure), City of Calgary, n.d.

Shelford, Richard C. and Neville B. Ferguson, Terrain Sensitivity Interpretation Township 61, Range 3, West of the 6th Meridian, Report No. T/27, Land Classification Section, Alberta Energy and Natural Resources, Edmonton, 1982.

Thurow, Charles (et. al)., Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands: A Practical Guide for Local Administr&o. s, Parts 1 and 2, Planning Advisory Service Report Nos. 307, 308, 1975.

Veitch, Ian, Ecological Approaches to Land Use Planning, Student Discussion Paper No. 7, York University, 1978.

Webb, Calvin, Reserves for Nature: A Discussion Paper Prepared for the Alberta Conservation Strategy Project, Environment Council of Alberta, Edmonton, 1987.

Wilken, E.B. and G.R. Ironsicle, Ecological (Biophysical) Land Classification in Urban Areas, Proceedings of a Workshop, Ecological Land Classification Series No. 3, 1977.

World Wildlife Fund Canada, Prairie Conservation Action Plan 1989 -1994, Toronto, 1989.

Edmonton Andriashek, L.D. & R.A. MacMillian, Preliminary Report on the Urban Geology of the Annexed Areas in Edmonton, Prepared for the City of Edmonton, Planning Department, 1981.

Associated Engineering Services Ltd., Development Constraints Study, Prepared for the City of Edmonton Planning Department, Edmonton, 1981.

Bibby, R., Hydrogeology of the Edmonton Area, (Northwest Segment), Alberta, Report 74-10, Alberta Research 1974.

Brycon Consulting Group, Ormsby Place Neighbourhood Structure Plan and Amendments, Edmonton, 1986.

39 City of Edmonton, Planning and Building Department, Guidelines for the Integration of Transmission Pipelines and Urban Development (draft), Edmonton, ncl., City of Edmonton, Planning and Development Dept., Edmonton General Municipal Plan, Bylaw 9076, Edmonton, 1990.

City of Edmonton, Planning and Development, Transportation, Parks and Recreation, Terwillegar Heights, Servicing Concept Design Brief (SCDB), MPC Amended Proposal, March 1992.

Ceroic, W., Hydrogeology of the Southwest Segment, Edmonton Area, Alberta, Earth Sciences Report 78-5, Alberta Research Council, 1979.

Ealey, David M., Articles on the Natural History of Edmonton - A Compilation, Prepared for the John Janzen Nature Centre, Edmonton, 1986.

Ealey, David M., Urban Natural History Interpretive Sites in and Adjacent - Edmonton, Prepared for the John Janzen Nature Centre, 1986.

Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Big Lake Plan (draft), Edmonton, 1989.

Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Big Lake Background Report: The Management Study, Edmonton, 1987.

Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Plan, Edmonton, 1984.

Edmonton City Planning Department, Riverbend, Terwillegar Heights District Outline Plan, Edmonton, 1977.

Edmonton Parks and Recreation, Nature Trails in Edmonton, Third Edition, City of Edmonton, 1974.

Edmonton Parks and Recreation, Ribbon of Green, North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Concept Plan, City of Edmonton, 1990.

Environment/Recreation Task Force, Capital City Recreation Park, Inventory and Analysis, Addendum to Volume 1, Prepared for the City of Edmonton and the Government of Alberta, Edmonton, 1975.

Environment/Recreation Task Force, Capital City Recreation Park Volume 1, Prepared for the City of Edmonton and the Government of Alberta, Edmonton, 1975.

EPEC Consulting Western Ltd., The Edmonton - Devon Restricted Development Area Biophysical Inventory, Prepared for Alberta Environment, 1982.

40 Freeman, Dennis and Duncan Fraser, Policy to Encourage the Designation and Rehabilitation of Municipal Historic Resources in Edmonton, Planning and Development Department, City of Edmonton, 1988.

Genstar Development, Edmonton North (Castle Downs Phase II) Area Structure Plan, Bylaw 5739 City of Edmonton. 1979.

Genstar Development, Lake District Neighbourhood 1 Structure Plan (Lago Lindo), Bylaw 5898, Edmonton, 1980.

Genstar Development, Lake District Neighbourhood 2 Structure Plan (Klarvatten). Bylaw 6368, Edmonton, 1982.

TBI Group, Riverbend Neighbourhood 5 Structure Plan, (Bylaw 5833), Edmonton, 1979.

IMC Consulting Group Inc., Big Lake Area Structure Plan, Prepared on behalf of Carrington and Liberty Joint Venture Ltd., Edmonton, 1990.

Kathol, C.P. and R.A. McPherson, Bulletin 32 - Urban Geology of Edmonton, Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, 1975.

Land Use Planning Branch, City of Edmonton, Riverbend Area Structure Plan, Part 1. Plan Recommendations, (Bylaw 5710), Edmonton, 1979.

Land Use Planning Branch, City of Edmonton, Riverbend Area Structure Plan, Support Information, (Bylaw 5710), Edmonton, 1979.

Lehnclorff General Partners Inc. Jamieson Place Neighbourhood Structure Plan Amendment, Edmonton, 1987.

Marshall, Macklin, Monaghan Western Ltd., Norther Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System Resources Analysis: Technical Report, Prepared for the City of Edmonton, 1983.

Mackenzie Associates Consulting Group Ltd. & Stanley Associates Engineering Ltd., Lewis Farms: An Area Structure Plan and Design Concept, (Bylaw 8733), Prepared for the Lewis Farms Development Group, Edmonton, 1988.

Mackenzie Associates Consulting Group Ltd., Potter Greens Neighbourhood Structure Plan, (Bylaw 9390), Prepared for Lewis Estates Developments, Edmonton, 1990.

MacKenzie Spencer Associates, West Jasper Place (South) Area Structure Plan. Appendix A, Bylaw 5768, Edmonton, 1978.

Parks and Recreation Department, Bylaw No. 2202, City of Edmonton, 1986.

41 Parks and Recreation Department, Edmonton Parks and Recreation 1985 -1989 Management Plan, City of Edmonton, 1985.

Parks and Recreation Department, Draft Guidelines for Establishment and Management of Naturalized Landscapes in the Edmonton Region, City of Edmonton, 1992.

Penner and Associates Ltd., Environmental Evaluation of the Big Lake Area Structure Plan, Edmonton, Alberta. Prepared for 1/4C Consulting Group Inc. Edmonton, 1990.

Planning and Development Department, The Land Development Process in the City of Edmonton, City of Edmonton, Edmonton, 1989.

Planning and Development Department, North Saskatchewan River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan, Bylaw No. 7188, City of Edmonton, Edmonton, 1985.

Planning and Development Department, Proposed Bylaw, North Saskatchewan River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan, Bylaw 6353, City of Edmonton, Edmonton, 1981.

Proctor, Redfern, Butler & Krebes Consultants Ltd., Lake District Neighbourhood 6 Structure Fixi_(pLe_mg) 6385 Edmonton, 1981.

Smith, Carol, ConservACI1ON Final Report, Strathcona County Recreation, Parks and Culture, Sherwood Park, 1990.

Underwood McLellan (1977) Ltd., Jamieson Place Neighbourhood Structure Plan, Appendix A, Bylaw 5915, Edmonton, 1979.

Other Municipalities Charlottetown Area Regional Planning Board, The Greater Charlottetown Environmental District Plan Charlottetown, 1979.

City of Calgary, A Policy for Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Calgary Parks/Recreation and Planning Departments, Calgary, 1979.

City of Calgary, Parks/Recreation and Planning Departments, DRAFT Protection for Environmentally Significant Areas, Calgary, 1988.

Cottonwood Consultants, Environmentally Significant Areas in the Oldman River Region, Seven Volumes, Oldman River Regional Planning Commission, Lethbridge, 1987.

Grismer, Glen, Natural Areas Protection Policy, Meewasin Valley Authority, Saskatoon, 1990.

42 Infotech Services, Environmentally Sensitive Areas: County of Strathcona and M.D. of Sturgeon, Executive Summary, Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Edmonton, 1989.

Infotech Services and Associates, Environmentally Sensitive Areas: County of Strathcona and M.D. of Sturgeon, Technical Report, Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Edmonton, 1989.

Infotech Services and Associates, Environmentally Sensitive Areas Study, Phase One Report: Detailed Work Programme, Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, Edmonton, 1988.

Lamoureux, R.J. and Associates Ltd., Environmentally Significant Areas Study Phase One Report, Prepared for Calgary Regional Planning Commission, Calgary, 1984.

Lamoureux, R.J. (et. al), Environmentally Significant Areas Study, Phase Two Report: A Summary, Calgary Regional Planning Commission, 1983.

Lamoureux, R.J. G.G. Chow and B.O.K. Reeves, Environmentally Significant Areas Study, Phase Two Report, (Background Technical Report), Calgary Regional Planning Commission, 1983.

McConnell-Boehm, M.A., Revised Discussion Paper, Natural Areas Protection Policy (Draft), Meewasin Valley Authority, Saskatoon, 1985.

M.R.2 - McDonald and Associates, City of Regina Industrial Zoning Review: Environmental Control Considerations, Prepared for Urban Planning Department, City of Regina, 1989.

National Capital Commission, The Management Plan for the Greenbelt, National Capital Commission, Ottawa, 1981.

Planning and Building Department, City of Missisauga, East Credit Secondary Plan, Amendment , City of Missisauga, 1989.

Planning Department, Environmental Management Policy Report, A Summary, City of Ottawa, 1989.

Planning and Development Services, District of Surrey - Environmentally Sensitive Areas Study, (excerpt), District of Surrey, Surrey, 1990.

Planning Department, Official Plan of the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton. Volume 1: Text, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa, 1988.

Planning Department, Official Plan of the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Volume 2: Schedules, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa, 1989.

43 Planning Department, Policy Report 3.7: Environmental Management, City of Ottawa, 1989.

Planning Section, Parks and Recreation Department, (DRAFT), Protection for Environmentally Significant Areas, City of Calgary, 1988.

Regional Municipality of Sudbury, Secondary Plan for the City of Sudbury, Department of Planning and Development, Regional Municipality of Sudbury, 1987.

Regional Planning Department, Environmental Studies and the Ottawa-Carleton Official Plan: A Guide for Applicants, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa, 1984.

Sweetgrass Consultants Ltd., Environmentally Significant Areas of the County of Paintearth, Red Deer Regional Planning Commission, Red Deer, 1989.

The Corporation of the Township of Richmond, The Richmond Official Community Plan, Richmond, 1986.

The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Environmentally Significant Areas Study, Toronto, 1982.

Township of Richmond Planning Department, Official Community Plan Background Paper 19, The Environment: Natural Resources Summary, The Corporation of the Township of Richmond, Richmond, 1984.