1. Land Management Framework Project
Phase 1 Summary
9/19/2018

2. Phase 1 Goals
Review existing land use policy and environmental legislation to identify gaps
Based on that review, recommend a Land Management Framework that would create consistent policy for the BH moraine
Develop an Initial Implementation Plan to facilitate municipal adoption of the Framework
9/19/2018

3. Phase 1 Deliverables Comparison of MDP, LUB and non-statutory policies
Review of provincial/federal environmental law to identify gaps and opportunities
Comparative MDP and LUB maps
Land management framework format, performance indictor selection process, and implementation plan
9/19/2018

4. Planning Review - Summary
Although all counties have environmental goals, objectives and policies, the approach and level of detail varies considerably
References to BH moraine area not consistent in all policies (only in recently revised MDPs)
Where reference exists, protection does not include all of moraine within jurisdiction
Environmental protection measures variable in detail and force of law (in policy, vs. MDP or LUB)
9/19/2018

5. Environmental Legislation Review
Main questions:
What laws apply to development in municipalities?
How is federal/provincial legislation typically applied in development situations?
Do municipalities have jurisdiction to develop their own environmental by-laws and policies?
9/19/2018

6. Legislative Review - Summary
Federal and provincial environmental law administers individual resources, including those impacted by development
Management based on use or access (permitting) or conservation (enforcement) but at provincial or national scale
EIA used for larger developments, or those triggering permitting – new principle, based on comprehensive view of environment
Small, local projects and environmental resources may not be considered under EIA or mgmt law
9/19/2018

7. Legislative Review - Summary
MGA outlines municipal powers with respect to environment in 3 contexts:
Hazard lands (provision prevents development)
Wetlands, parkland (ER/MR)
Lands of local conservation significance (Conservation easement, subdivision mgmt provision)
Most municipalities use the first two options, few use the third
MGA offers broad opportunities to manage environment, provided it is fair and reasonable, and for the common good
9/19/2018

8. MDP Review Points:
Although all counties have environmental goals, objectives and policies, only Strathcona and Beaver MDPs reference BH moraine
Only Strathcona and Leduc have MDP implementation provisions and defined terms regarding environmental protection
Strathcona, Lamont and Beaver have MDP policy areas related to the moraine, but do not cover the entire area:
Strathcona – about 50% of moraine area
Lamont – about 25%
Beaver – about 10%
Leduc protects Ministik area only
9/19/2018

9. LUB mapping – Leduc and Camrose have draft versions developed this year, which are included.
Color coding: gold/light yellow = agricultural, tan through brown = residential at increasing density, green = conservation/watershed protection, purple = industrial with darker indicating increasing density, red = commercial.
9/19/2018

10. Extent of protection of the Blue and Yellow LMAs varies in scope and means among the municipalities, and with the currency of their planning. There is a mix of zoning protection and general restrictions tied to resources, rather than a spatial location – creates a mixed bag of protection methods among the partners.
Eg., LUB offers limited protection in terms of specific zones. Only Camrose has protected the Blue areas around Ministik and Miquelon as watershed area in their recent updated LUB. They have coupled these zones with resource specific guidelines, an approach also used by Leduc (discretionary EIA requirement).
Many of the municipalities will be updating their LUBs in the next few years, which creates opportunities to incorporate either specific zones or resource related guidelines
9/19/2018

11. Strathcona and Beaver recently updated their MDPs and have protected the parts of the BH moraine in their jurisdiction with new policy areas (Beaver Hills Moraine Policy Area, Ministik Buffer, Rural CR). Again, the other municipalities (Lamont, Leduc) will be updating their MDPs in the next few years, which presents an opportunity to incorporate spatial policy area protection.
9/19/2018

12. LMA Analysis Summary
Extent of protection of the Blue and Yellow LMAs under current MDPs and LUBs varies in scope and means
Two methods used:
Create special, protective zones within BH moraine
Create general restrictions addressing resources of concern
9/19/2018

13. LMA Analysis - Conclusions
Ideally, a Land Management Framework will incorporate both methods, in consistent way
Protective zones around Blue LMAs
General guidelines for sensitive development throughout moraine
9/19/2018

14. Land Management Framework
MDP
LUB
Coordinated
Decision Making
Awareness
Best Practices
Principles
Land Management Framework
Bottom-up approach:
Identify best practices & define ecological function zones
Implement internal/public awareness programs
Integrate into LUBs
Support revision of MDPs
9/19/2018

15. Environmental Indicators
Objective:
Monitor success of framework in assisting municipalities to incorporate Landscape Management Principles into planning practice
Benefits:
Provides accountability, continuous improvement, and information for communication, budgeting and resource allocation, strategic planning….
Framework system should be coupled to a indicator tracking system that allows BHI to measure the successful implementation of the framework.
9/19/2018

16. What is a Good Indicator?
Relevant
Reliable
Responsive
Credible
Unbiased
Useful
Timely
Comparable
Outcome oriented
Cost effective
9/19/2018

17. Implementation Plan Task 1: Development of the Framework
Task 2: Internal/public information and monitoring
Task 3: Adoption of land use policies and practices
Step 4: Adoption into statutory documents
Phase 1 ended with recommendations for implementing the proposed framework in Phase 2 of the project, beginning with more refinement of the Framework itself.
9/19/2018

18. BHI Land Management Framework Project
Phase 2 Work Plan
9/19/2018

19. Approach Voluntary Participation Based on Consensus & Understanding
MDP
LUB
Coordinated
Decision Making
Awareness
Best Practices
Principles
Voluntary
Participation
Based on
Consensus
&
Understanding
9/19/2018

20. Process Statutory Documents Code of Practice Coordinated
Decision Making
Awareness
Best Practices
Principles
Code of Practice
Reference Guide
Landscape Policies
Ecological Objectives
Ecological Function Areas
9/19/2018

21. Implementation Strategy
Task 1: Development of the Framework
Task 2: Public Education & Monitoring
Task 3: Adoption of land use policies and practices
Task 4: Adoption into statutory documents
9/19/2018

22. Deliverables Maps of Ecological Function Zones (EFZs)
EBPs applicable to EFZs and key resources
Performance Measurement Implementation Strategy
9/19/2018

23. Ecological Function Areas
Groundwater Recharge/ Discharge Areas
Habitat Connectivity Corridors
Surface Water Drainage/ Connectivity
Core Biodiversity Areas
Airsheds
9/19/2018

24. EFZ Modeling Process Updated LMA Map EFZ Maps BHI GIS WG
Updated vegetation inventory
ER/MR/CE mapping
GW recharge/discharge…others
Updated LMA Map
Fort Air Partnership
Air quality monitoring data
Other Sources
NRCAN Hydrology
PFRA Land Cover
Watersheds
EFZ Maps
9/19/2018

25. 9/19/2018

26. Questions?
9/19/2018