Post on 15-Aug-2020
transcript
Page 1 of 3
Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018, 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. Clymont Hall 1 51423 Highway 60, Spruce Grove, AB (See Attached Map, page 66 of 66)
1. Opening
1.1 Quorum Action: Confirmation Lead: Chair Shaigec
1.2 Call to Order Action: Declaration Lead: Chair Shaigec
1.3 Chair Opening Remarks Action: Information Lead: Chair Shaigec
2. Approval of Agenda Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec
3. Approval of Minutes Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec
Page 4 of 66
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the Agenda of September 21, 2018.
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the Minutes of July 13, 2018.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 1 of 66
Page 2 of 3
4. Introduction of Federal Representative – Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada – Candace Vanin
5. Regional Agriculture Master Plan
5.1 Draft Vision for Agriculture and Food 2050 Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec/ Mr. Bouma
Page 7 of 66
5.2 Draft Guiding Principles Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec/ Mr. Bouma
Page 20 of 66
5.3 RAMP Definitions Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec/ Mr. Bouma
Page 22 of 66
6. BREAK
7. Regional Context & RAMP Planning Framework Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec/ Mr. Bouma / Mr. Steil
Page 27 of 66
8. RAMP Draft Communications Strategy and Plan Action: Approval Lead: Chair Shaigec/ Ms. Lennon
Page 53 of 66
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the draft Vision Statement for Agriculture and Food to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the draft Guiding Principles to the Edmon-ton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the RAMP Definitions to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the RAMP Planning Framework to the Ed-monton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the Communications Strategy.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 2 of 66
Page 3 of 3
9. Next Steps Action: Information Lead: Chair Shaigec/ Ms. Shuya
10. Next Meeting November 23, 2018, 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m., Sturgeon County
11. Adjournment Action: Declaration Lead: Chair Shaigec
12. Additional Reading
Urban Shadow, the Impermanence Syndrome and Urban Sprawl
Page 61 of 66
13. Resources
Clymont Hall Map
Page 66 of 66
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force meeting of September 21, 2018 adjourn.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 3 of 66
Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Friday, July 13, 2018 Page 1 of 3
Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force
Friday, July 13, 2018 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Edmonton Tower – Room ET 3 MR SE 03-380 10111-104 Avenue NW, Edmonton, AB
Members: Rod Shaigec, Parkland County (Chair) Don Iveson, City of Edmonton (Alternate) Kathy Barnhart, Town of Beaumont Tanni Doblanko, Leduc County Alanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon County Paul Smith, Strathcona County Barry Turner, Town of Morinville
Technical Members: Garett Broadbent, Leduc County Darren Haarsma, Parkland County Peter Vana, Parkland County Angela Veenstra, Sturgeon County Kathryn Lennon, City of Edmonton
Consultants: Jerry Bouma, Toma & Bouma Bob Burden, Serecon Inc.
Regrets: Jason Cathcart, Government of Alberta Karen Sundquist, Government of Alberta Joel Gould, Strathcona County
EMRB Staff: Neal Sarnecki, Interim CEO Sharon Shuya, Project Manager Stephanie Chai, Project Manager Taylor Varro, Project Manager Joseana Lara, Municipal Planning Intern Loreen Lennon, Communications Manager Amanda Borman, Executive Assistant
Guests:
Neal Comeau, Sturgeon County Charleen Currie, City of Edmonton Gibby Davis, City of Edmonton Susan Evans, Sturgeon County Glen Finstad, City of Leduc Michelle Hay, City of Leduc Ryan Hall, Strathcona County Larissa Hepp, Sturgeon County Greg Hofmann, Town of Morinville Stuart Houston, City of Spruce Grove Laurie Johnson, Leduc County Cory Labrecque, City of Leduc Nancy Lyzaniwski, Strathcona County Aaron Paquette, City of Edmonton Peter Reeson, UDI Edmonton Region Shree Shinde, City of Fort Saskatchewan John Stewart, Town of Beaumont Joannes Wong, Town of Beaumont
Item 3
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 4 of 66
Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Friday, July 13, 2018 Page 2 of 3
1. Opening
1.1 Quorum Quorum achieved.
1.2 Call to Order Chair Shaigec called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
1.3 Chair Opening Remarks
2. Approval of Agenda
Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the Agenda of July 13, 2018.
Moved by: Councillor Smith Accepted by: Chair
Decision: Carried unanimously
3. Approval of Minutes
Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the Minutes of June 15, 2018.
Moved by: Councillor Barnhart Accepted by: Chair
Decision: Carried unanimously
4. Regional Agriculture Master Plan 4.1 Regional Agriculture Master Plan – Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board “Regional Agriculture Master Plan Situation Analysis” Report
Ms. Shuya provided Task Force Members with an overview of the process and updates to the Report being presented by the consultants.
Mayor Iveson arrives to the meeting at 9:02 a.m. Mayor Turner arrives to the meeting at 9:11 a.m.
Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board “Regional Agriculture Master Plan Situation Analysis” report, as amended, to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for Information.
Chair Shaigec recommends that the motion to the Board on August 9 be as amended and for Information versus approval, considering the comments from the Task Force Members.
Moved by: Mayor Doblanko
RAMP18-28
RAMP18-26
RAMP18-27
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 5 of 66
Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force Meeting Minutes: Friday, July 13, 2018 Page 3 of 3
Accepted by: Chair Decision: Carried unanimously
Mr. Bouma walked Task Force members through the presentation that will be given to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board on August 9, 2018.
4.2 LESA Update
Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force receive the LESA Update for information.
Moved by: Mayor Hnatiw Accepted by: Chair
Decision: Carried unanimously
BREAK 10:16 – 10:44 a.m.
4.3 TASK FORCE Workshop – Toward a Vision for Agriculture and Food in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region
LUNCH 11:45 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
5. Next Steps
Ms. Shuya provided the next steps to members of the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force.
6. Next Meeting
• September 21, 2018, 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m., Parkland County
7. Adjournment
Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force meeting of July 13, 2018 be adjourned at 1:27 p.m.
Moved by: Mayor Doblanko Accepted by: Chair
Decision: Carried unanimously
Task Force Chair, Rod Shaigec
RAMP18-29
RAMP18-30
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 6 of 66
Page 1 of 1
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Edmonton Metropolitan Region Regional Agriculture Master Plan Draft Vision Statement
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the draft Vision Statement for Agriculture and Food to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Background:
On August 9, 2018, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board accepted the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Situation Analysis Report, recommended by the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force, as information.
The Report recommended in the next steps the development of a shared vision for Agriculture and Food in the Region.
The RAMP Task Force participated in a workshop on July 13th, 2018 to provide input to the Vision Statement.
In addition, the RAMP Working Group participated in a similar exercise which aided in solidifying the picture of the future of agriculture and food in the region.
The RAMP Working Group met on September 7th to review the initial draft Vision Statement and proposed further refinements to be considered in the next draft.
Recommendation:
That the RAMP Task Force endorse the draft Vision for Agriculture and Food and recommend it to the Board for approval.
Rationale:
The purpose of developing a shared Vision Statement is to provide clear direction to the process and the outcomes of a Regional Agriculture Master Plan. The Vision Statement is also an important anchor for the development of a suite of Guiding Principles to guide future decisions.
Attachments: 1. Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan Vision Statement for Agriculture
and Food”. 2. July 13, 2018 Task Force Input for the Vision Statement.
Item 5.1
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 7 of 66
Attachment 1:
Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan Vision Statement for Agriculture and Food”
(Based on input from the Task Force received on July 13th 2018)
1. The Picture
The year is 2050… you are with your family, you children and grandchildren, other family members and you are asked to describe agriculture and food in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region. What do you see? What does the picture look like? Be a specific as possible
The following key words and phrases were generated by the Task Force (see text box below):
Summary:
Three themes emerged:
1. A ‘state’ rooted in leadership, respect and reputation;2. Innovation in terms of the application of advanced technologies and practices; and3. The visible presence of agricultural lands, infrastructure, spaces and facilities.
Thriving Agricultural Sector; World renowned; leader in food production & value added; responsible; ethical; engaged/highly educated/informed citizens; food autonomy/self-sufficiency; highly respected; shift to local consumption
Diversified; innovative; efficient and effective; advanced technology – UAV, VRT; 3D printing; drones; strong R & D; Smart food; vertical farming; more range of products; higher yields and densities; variety of production systems – indoor, vertical, rooftops; centre for value added industries; heat capture; biomedical products from livestock & plants; Ag is smart & technology enabled
AG Business Hubs; exporting safe value added food; a major world agricultural food hub; EMR as a Hub for regional expertise; a patchwork of urban food spaces; large greenhouse operations; farms integrated into urban landscapes; large tracts of land with ag transitional zones; large tract of lands adjacent to urban development; large protected areas; areas of dedicated agriculture production based on soil; urban growth boundaries have held up; densified; a contiguous belt of agriculture in the region accessible by LRT & transit;
Item 5.1Attachment 1
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 8 of 66
Toward a Vision Statement
The following draft vision was presented to the Working Committee:
A thriving, diverse and internationally renowned agriculture and food sector led by engaged and informed decision makers, distinguished by excellence, enabled by leading research, technology and infrastructure, committed to the long term conservation of area soils and lands upon which it can flourish and grow.
The following feedback was received from the Working Committee:
1. Need to simplify. It can be a few sentences - it does not have to compile it all into one with a whole series of clauses. Should be inspiring. 'Make us proud.'
2. Like the notion that agriculture is 'obviously and visibly present' and integrated into the fabric and lifestyle of the region.
3. There is clear social appreciation and recognition of the broad value of agriculture.
A Proposed ‘Shorter’ Vision:
Version 1
An engaged food and agriculture community with an economically vibrant and environmentally healthy future characterized by:
• A commitment to preserving the highest value agricultural land • The clear and visible presence of food & agricultural spaces, activities and
events • Innovation and commitment to excellence • Inspired leadership.
Version 2:
A vibrant regional agri-food sector that meets the triple bottom line of sustainability.
• economically vibrant promoting agricultural and food entrepreneurship
• environmentally sustainable honouring our valuable soils
• socially engaged a community that embraces agriculture and grants social license to farm
(See more short versions on the next page).
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 9 of 66
Other Short Versions for Consideration:
We offer a number of ‘short’ versions that start to move in the direction of a memorable slogan. Overall we feel that one key element that must be expressed, is the ‘intent’ to preserve agricultural land. Fundamentally, without land, the EMR will not achieve much of an agri-food vision. Hence the direct or inferred references:
A secure agricultural land base reinforcing a thriving agri-food economy, highly valued by the regional community
Honouring our valuable soils; building our agri-food future; enriching our region
A vibrant regional community committed to land, food and agriculture
Western Canada’s leading agri-food region
Enriching our region with our vibrant food & agriculture economy
Where food & agriculture matter!
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 10 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
1
July 13, 2018
RAMP Task Force Meeting – 2050 Vision for Agriculture and Food
Task Force Input – verbatim
Question #1
The year is 2050 …. You are with your family, you children and grandchildren, other family members and you are asked to describe agriculture and food in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region. What do you see? What does the picture look like? Be a specific as possible.
Page 1 Thriving Agricultural Sector – economically. Jobs,wages, etc.
EMR is world renowned, leader in Food Production- Value Added
Family Farms are reaching their sesquicentennial mark
Responsible/ Ethical
They explain it to me…. Appreciation of Agriculture by our youth. They understand Agriculture + the system better than their parents.
A system/ Network built so that a ¼ of our population is employed in agriculture.
Food Autonomy for the region Agriculture is highly respected career path, our kids went to school to become farmers. Edmonton Metro Region is seen as a Hub for Agricultural expertise.
Increased self sufficiency as a region and as individuals.
Opportunities for urbanities to enjoy food and aesthetic products of agricultural neighbors.
We can largely feed ourselves Patchwork of urban food spaces. City parks are centers for small scale community food production, with orchards, community gardens. Community u picks They also have infrastructure for food processing / storage in the parks ( e.g. Community league buildings, sheds)
Item 5.1Attachment 2
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 11 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
2
Farm to Fork Residents are highly educated about where their food comes from and have eh knowledge to garden in backyards, balconies, rooftops
Food System(s) knowledge is in the school curriculum.
We grow more food in more (and unexpected) urban places.
Question #1 The year is 2050 …. You are with your family, you children and grandchildren, other family members and you are asked to describe agriculture and food in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region. What do you see? What does the picture look like? Be a specific as possible. Page 2 Diversified Innovative – R&D investment Efficient& effective ( investment
in infrastructure & land use) Technology – UAV Techno. Pest Management / Variable rate technology. Down to the sq cm for management #D printing
Strong Research & Development to support Innovation + Sustainability
Increase Small air traffic for individual movement and drones used for monitoring, delivering, etc.
Smart Food People are knowledgeable in the way consumables are produced.
Vertical Farming around industry to use carbon capture and clean air with increased plant growth to offset detrimental air quality effects. Also to recreate
Drones over intensive livestock operations to capture+ use methane as an energy source.
Soils will be easier to build / enhance (expedited natural processes through technology. Not necessary as a growth medium in some instances. ( already that way in agri-phonics)
Transporting People and Products Larger vehicles now, more range to market products. Shift to more local consumption?
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 12 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
3
growing zones to add variety to what foods can be grown here. No need to transport food if you can grow everything you need. Within urban areas, vertical gardens
Much higher yields and denser crops
Food being produced in a variety of production systems. ( i.e. outdoor, indoor, vertical, rooftops)
Center for value added industries
Diversity of food being consumed in the region
Advanced technology providing optimum efficiency ( i.e. no waste of inputs)
Crops, livestock produced. Broad range of types. Results of biotechnology/ enclosed production
Minimum packaging and utilizing all parts of the plant.
Heat capture. Biomedical production ( livestock & plants)
Our Ag is Smart & Technology enabled. Our Farms are labs for innovators who build ag tech for the world.
Question #1 The year is 2050 …. You are with your family, you children and grandchildren, other family members and you are asked to describe agriculture and food in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region. What do you see? What does the picture look like? Be a specific as possible. Page 3 Ag Business- Hubs collocated adjacent to farmland
We export safe value-added food to a hungry world
Region will b major world agricultural food hub
Farms integrated into the landscape on urban areas
Large greenhouse operations LUF to Support: Large tracts of land with ag transitional zones between large scale commodity production and urban center
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 13 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
4
Areas of dedicated ( not mandated) Agricultural Production based on soil quality ( or defensible attributes)
Large protected agricultural areas
Urban growth boundaries that were created in 2020 have held up. Core metropolitan area has densified. There is a contiguous belt of agriculture in the region, accessible by LRT & Transit
Smaller plots for market gardens/ greenhouse supporting vibrant local food
Agriculture will become part of Urban landscape
Our best remaining land is secured in perpetuity for agriculture & Food + Economic Security.
People come from far and wide to eat here ( Foodie Tourism)
Large Tracts of land adjacent to urban development
Question #2 Thinking of the picture of the future you just described for agriculture and food in the EMR in 2050… What are some of the specific actions or initiatives that have taken place to create this picture? Outline three distinct actions that would have occurred to lead to the picture you have described. Supportive Land Use Policies Innovative land Use Zones developed to provide opportunities for small lot/ specialty agricultural activities
Supportive & enabling policies Strategy to address & overcome land owner rights
EMRB coordinate with province to create process to “preserve” farmland / enshrine the right to farm
EMRB membership agree on land use framework that preserves farmland fro minimum 100 years Land Preserved = best as related to LESA
Zoning changes to ensure only agricultural activities occur on a property
Statutory Protection of the land base is in place
Strong Leadership + governance _ regulatory policy for farmland. – Mandatory Ag impact assessments as part of land development process. Municipalities work with
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 14 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
5
development industry – clear enforceable guidelines.
Land Speculation for development has been eliminated.
Land use planning that is regularly reviewed and adjusted as it evolves
Agricultural land is conserved with a level of certainty that enables investment in innovation.
Soil reuse – science based re use + ability to regenerate organic matter + fertility in exhausted soils.
Strategic Development – HUBS, Infrastructure, Innovation Center Increased opportunity for community gardens
Specific support of government leaders working with industry stakeholders to fund + develop curriculum + research and technology. Following the example of the Human Genome Project “ information shared freely+ rapidly to accelerate the pace of discovery around the world”
Infrastructure improvements for agriculture related activities re recognized + funded.
Recognize / attach financial value to eco system services
True Collaboration – among the municipalities in the Region. Collaboration means there is a give and take for the common vision
Governments dedicate resources / budget t build up in-house capacity to develop. Implement. Evaluate food + ag policies / G. Department of Urban Agriculture
Roof top Agriculture becomes a requirement or the norm.
EMRB is a world leader in the innovative, ethical growth and development of production of local agricultural products and development.
Dynamic Agricultural processing Hubs! To value add all of our locally grown commodities
Synergistic relationships developed between producers, academia, research groups, municipalities, etc. Technology Specific to the region. Constraints/ opportunities/ needs
Entrepreneurial culture is encouraged through targeted events, associations, innovation centers.
Development of National Food/ Ag Strategy
Innovation Hubs/ Centers for processing. crops
We’ve deliberately woven Ag, Tech, Life Sciences, Health and
EMRB with GOA Edmonton Global, Alberta Innovates =
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 15 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
6
diversification/ product development
Advanced Manufacturing together in our entrepreneurship, innovation & research ecosystems.
develop long term investment plan I Ag & Ag Industry in the region
Physical and technological infrastructure in place to support Agri- food processing and production.
Strategic Development – Proactive Communications & Education Effective Communications and educational strategies
Continued education and engagement of general society to create understanding and “buy in of population.
Increase awareness and education around technology (e.g. Bio Technology) to help address consumer distrust / fear. Proving to be a significant social driver for social license etc. for farms
Education and Awareness has to be made a priority from birth forward i.e. importance of food security and agricultural development + preservation.
Edmonton Global is marketing the agricultural vision of the region to the world.
Partnerships between educational institutions; farm institutions; farm industry/ producers; local/ provincial governments
Provincial + Federal support is provided through advocacy and funding for research and innovation and collaboration
Education: a collaboration with post secondary, government industry to create technical training; e.g. certificates of urban agriculture: Ag technology; a collaboration with
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 16 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
7
school boards with the province to put more agriculture into the curriculum.
Education Curriculum committed to Agriculture – Health; food production; Ag System/ Network; Bio- technology ; etc.
Question #3 Now thinking about the actions you outlined, what were (are) some of the most significant barriers or obstacles that were overcome? Outline three distinct barriers or obstacle that were overcome. Land Use Policy and Support Issues Tradition belief systems around independence and land use rights.
A broken Ag System – no land – no processing – no value added- no value chain- no infrastructure – no community support- not support services- no farmers -
Barriers – land use decision Political will to freeze land for agriculture conflicts with – cheap development land for urban growth ; inflated land worth because of development potential – “ sell my land for billions”
Obstacles: TIME is of the essence. Wheels of government can be slow; need an incentive ( a crisis) to move along quickly.
Concerns of security and autonomy of the individual + lifestyle
Difficulty of market transformation to be able to do smart growth, which is a necessary condition of slowing demand for greenfield land.
Resolving Issues relating to property rights of landowners that do not want their property classified as outlined in plans/ land use bylaws developed out of this process
Correcting Market Failures that contribute to land price speculation
Continues unconstrained sprawl & fragmentation
Political influence , clout of development community
Unknown future land use scale requirements for agriculture
Land Development Market Economics.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 17 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
8
Political Will to meaningful regulate
Complex mix of opinions between and within stakeholders groups regarding land use policy direction
Which “public good” will be prioritized for each site? Conflict across…. City departments+ competing priorities for land - real estate; parks development; public spaces; agricultural land; affordable housing.
Barrier: creating urgency related to food + food production in a society that has never been food insecure.
We need the province to support
Lack of implementable, measureable, specific policies with clear targets + timelines
Politicians – the continuity of the vision
Perception of landowner rights.
Communication Lack of Communication and funding for a cohesive approach where all are motivated to find the best possible solution for most.
Lack of Knowledge / understanding of the current projects, ideas being explored before all stakeholders ( is there duplication? Opportunity to collaborate?. Not known if everyone is working in a silo (figuratively)
Community Resistance: Ignorance to what opportunities may lie ahead. Lack of appreciation.
Capital & Infrastructure
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 18 of 66
July 13, RAMP Task Force Meeting RAMP VISION Input
Page
9
Obstacles: Municipal Priorities – need to be aligned – economically; politically, etc. ( competing priorities may get in the way
Obstacles: Resources – need to be earmarked for this “plan” to be implemented.
Development of strategies & Implementation of plan of action involving all stakeholders; 3 levels of government; educational institutions; industry; producer
Creation of regional brand& value proposition
Infrastructure: costs of urban development around prime agricultural lands
Sectorial Fragmentation Value added Ag Product chain – understanding, identifying and acting on the gaps.
Economic competitiveness
Barrier: Financial Investment - development of long term sustainable model of investment in Agriculture/ Ag business does not have a clearly defined business case – may be overlooked in next oil/ gas boom
Access to Venture Capital and Investment for – research ; Production Facilities; market development
Fully serviced locations for production facilitates
Weather and environmental challenges happening faster than we can manage.
Succession challenges of agricultural operations. Is there and option “c”?
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 19 of 66
Page 1 of 2
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Edmonton Metropolitan Region Regional Agriculture Master Plan Draft Guiding Principles
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the draft Guiding Principles to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Background:
On August 9, 2018, the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board accepted the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Situation Analysis Report, recommended by the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force, for information.
The Report recommended in the next steps the development of a shared vision and guiding principles for Agriculture and Food in the Region.
The RAMP Task Force participated in a workshop on July 13, 2018 to provide input to the Vision Statement, which would further inform a suite of guiding principles.
The RAMP Working Group met on September 7, 2018 to review the draft Vision Statement and the context for the Guiding Principles and proposed further refinements to be considered in the drafting of the Guiding Principles to be considered by the Task Force.
Recommendation:
That the RAMP Task Force endorse the draft Guiding Principles to support the Vision for Agriculture and Food and recommend them to the Board for approval.
Rationale:
The purpose of developing a suite of Guiding Principles is to provide direction for the achievement of the shared Vision for Agriculture and Food. The Guiding Principles are an important foundation to support the direction for and development of a Regional Agriculture Master Plan.
Attachment follows:
1. Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan Guiding Principles for Agricultureand Food”.
Item 5.2
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 20 of 66
Page 2 of 2
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Attachment 1:
Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan Guiding Principles for Agriculture and Food”
To achieve the ‘Vision’ the following guiding principles are presented:
1. Agriculture and food is a vital sector - its long term future requires a set of environmentallysustainable land use, economic development, infrastructure and implementation policies. Itmust be comprehensive and no one policy alone is sufficient.
2. Agricultural land is regarded as a permanent feature of the EMR’s landscape and economyon a land base that is an irreplaceable resource that must be protected.1
3. A thriving food and agriculture sector requires strategic investment in both hard and softinfrastructure to develop entrepreneurship and a pro-active food and agriculture businessculture.
4. Broad community support is critical. Building and maintaining support requires on-goingmeaningful, ongoing engagement with the community.
5. Success requires the active participation of all orders of government- local, provincial andfederal as well as public and private agencies. EMRB cannot achieve the vision alone, butmust be seen as a driver in the process.
1This principle specific to land replaces the following statements presented in the Situation Analysis:
Recognize the importance of a long term assured land base on which the agriculture and food sector can operate without undue hindrance or limitations. This in turn requires policy direction in three critical areas:
a. Identify the actual areas that define the long term secure agricultural land baseb. Minimize fragmentation of agricultural land in the defined areasc. Minimize conversion of agricultural land to other uses
Item 5.2Attachment 1
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 21 of 66
Page 1 of 5
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Edmonton Metropolitan Region Regional Agriculture Master Plan - Definitions
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the RAMP Definitions to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Background:
The Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan was approved by the Province on October 26, 2017. To support its implementation, the Growth Plan directs the development of a Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP).
The Regional Agriculture Master Plan is to provide a policy framework for conserving a stable, predictable supply of prime agricultural lands in the Region, growing and diversifying the agri-food economy, including development of a value-added strategy, and guiding agriculture supportive infrastructure investment.
The focus of the RAMP will be to address the outcomes identified in the Agriculture Policy Area Objectives:
6.1 Identify and conserve an adequate supply of prime agricultural lands to provide a secure local food source for future generations.
6.2 Minimize the fragmentation and conversion of prime agricultural lands for non-agricultural uses.
6.3 Promote diversification and value-added agriculture production and plan infrastructure to support the agricultural sector and regional food system.
Critical to moving forward is to ensure a common understanding and interpretation exists for all stakeholders, for key terms, based on the agreement of common definitions.
Recommendation:
That the RAMP Task Force endorse and approve the Definitions to support the development of the Regional Agriculture Master Plan.
Rationale:
Agreement to key definitions early in the RAMP development process will ensure clarity in terms of addressing the Agriculture Policy Objectives.
Attachment follows:
1. Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan – Definitions”.
Item 5.3
Page 2 of 5
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Attachment 1: Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan – Definitions”
Background and Context
The EMR Growth Plan states the following primary objective:
1. Identify and conserve an adequate supply of prime agricultural lands to provide a secure localfood source for future generations;
The objective employs two terms that need to be clearly defined: • Adequate supply• Prime agricultural lands
Discussion
As a prelude to this discussion, we present the definition of agriculture which was agreed to at the July 13th 2018 Task Force meeting:
Agriculture: the growing raising, managing and/or sale of livestock, crops, horticulture and agri-food related value added enterprises including education motivated either by profit or lifestyle
The phrase ‘adequate supply of prime agricultural lands’ requires that we first deal with the latter term, namely ’prime agicultural lands’. With respect to this term, we suggest that the definition of prime agricultural land not be limited simply to the quality of the soils—all agricultural land has value. Rather the soils must be considered within the context of the area in which these soils are located. In other words, what is the nature of the agricultural system – the broader range of agricultural activities taking place?
Prime agricultural lands should therefore be based on two components:
1. The Agricultural System – defined to include all the components of a healthy farmingsystem in an agricultural area – the land base is the core including the location of primeagriculture lands and speciality crops or unqiue areas. The land base can also becategorizied by average lot sizes, the degree of fragmentation and the intrusion of non-farmuses. Other factors to consider are the presence of supporting infrastructure and services –input suppliers – feed, fertilizer, seed, farm equipment dealers, and infrastructure such aswater, roadways, irrigation systems etc. Finally the presence of marketing outlets such asprocessing plants, packing plants, auctions or regional markets should also be aconsideration in assessing the agricultural system surrounding an area or an individual farmproperty.
Item 5.3Attachment 1
Page 3 of 5
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
2. The Actual Soil Quality - prime farmland has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce economically sustained high yields of crops when treated and managed according to acceptable farming methods, including water management. In general, prime farmlands have an adequate and dependable water supply from precipitation or irrigation, a favorable temperature and growing season, acceptable acidity or alkalinity, and few or no rocks. They are permeable to water and air. Prime farmlands are not excessively erodible or saturated with water for a long period of time, and they either do not flood frequently or are protected from flooding. Prime lands are typically defined as LSRS 2-4; or CLI 1-3. Class 4 may be included if it an integral part of a pasture based/cattle grazing area.
Note: Ontario1 uses the following definition: “Prime agricultural areas are areas where prime agricultural lands predominate. Specialty
crop areas shall be given the highest priority for protection, followed by Canada Land Inventory Class 1, 2, and 3 lands, and any associated Class 4 through 7 lands within the prime agricultural area, in this order of priority.”
Adequate Supply: Finally, because the Growth Plan objectives make reference to it, we must define the term ‘adequate’ supply or otherwise set a new objective. The term ‘adequate’ is impossible to define. Agriculture in the EMR and Alberta generally, is predominately concentrated in two areas where it has competitive advantage: (1) grains and oilseeds; and (2) livestock production – mostly beef. In both cases, Alberta produces far more than local food demand and these agricultural and food products flow to serve national and international markets. At the same time, Alberta is much less proficient in the production of fresh fruits and vegetables, year-round and relies on the importation of these food stuffs. Thus, when the term adequate is used, the immediate question that arises is: adequate for what or for whom? For example, the adequate supply of agricultural lands to be a player in the supply of grains and oilseeds is a very different from the adequate supply of lands required to generate produce to meet local demand. Perhaps a more appropriate question is this: how much area is required to accommodate the forecasted urban growth in the EMR for the next 30 to 50 years? This may be easier question to assess than the adequate supply of prime agricultural. 1 The Ontario definition would have been established when the legislation for the Greenbelt Plan was developed in 2005. We have found no such ‘legal’ definition in Alberta.
Page 4 of 5
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
As a consequence, we propose the following decision-making process:
a. Begin with identifying all lands currently used for agriculture. b. Identify the urban growth requirements—with a view to being compact so as to
reduce the regional development footprint. c. Adopt the objecitve to save as much agriculture land as possible subject to the
meeting of urban growth requirements.
We propose that the definition of ‘adequate supply’ to mean – all the agriculture land currently located in the EMR. Our proposed framework to identify the ‘adequate supply’ of agriculture lands in the EMR is presented in Figure 1 below.
Page 5 of 5
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Figure 1: A Framework to Identify the Adequate Supply of Agricultural Lands in the EMR
Initial Agriculture Boundary
Define Cross-Municipal Commonalities
Regional/MunicipalImplementation
Areas to add Areas to delete Hot spots & issues?
Adjustable Boundary?
Permanent Boundary?
Sub-area 1Small Ag Holdings
Sub-area 2Large Scale Cropping
Sub-area 3Mixed
Livestock/Crops
Sub-area 4Specialty/Unique
Sub-area 5Urban Lands
Policy, Regulationsand Tools
Policy, Regulationsand Tools
Policy, Regulationsand Tools
Policy, Regulationsand Tools
Policy, Regulationsand Tools
Refined Agriculture Boundary
Page 1 of 1
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Edmonton Metropolitan Region Regional Agriculture Master Plan – Regional Context & RAMP Planning Framework
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force endorse and recommend the RAMP Planning Framework to the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board for approval.
Background
The Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan was approved by the Province on October 26, 2017. To support its implementation, the Growth Plan directs the development of a Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP).
The Regional Agriculture Master Plan is to provide a policy framework for conserving a stable, predictable supply of prime agricultural lands in the Region, as articulated in the first of three Policy Objectives in the Agriculture Policy Area 6 of the Growth Plan.
Specifically, Policy Objective 6.1 states: Identify and conserve an adequate supply of prime agricultural lands to provide a secure local food source for future generations.
To begin the process of addressing the first Policy Objective, the existing agricultural areas must be identified in the context of the region, in order to support how future conservation can be addressed.
On September 7th the RAMP Working Group met to review the consolidated regional approach to agriculture lands and discuss how it could be simplified, respecting that different areas within the region need different approaches.
Recommendation:
That the RAMP Task Force endorse the RAMP Planning Framework and recommend it to the Board for approval.
Rationale:
The identification of the agricultural land base in the region and the agreement on a common approach to classifying agricultural lands - based on common characteristics, understanding of intent, and policy outcomes - is instructive to arriving at a proposal for a regional approach to identifying “Ag Sub Areas”.
Attachments:
1. Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Regional Agriculture Master Plan – Sub Area Table”2. Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Sub- Area as the Basic Planning Tool”3. Edmonton Metropolitan Region “Draft RAMP Reference Map 7 – Agriculture Sub-Areas”
Item 7
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 27 of 66
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesStrathcona
Agriculture: Large Holdings
Long term extensive ag operations on large
unfragmented contiguous lands with limited
supporting commercial and residential uses
Primarily high quality soils with a wide range
of field and specialty crops
Limit fragmentation, direct non-ag elsewhere, reduce impact on
environment & adjacent lands. Residential limited to single
dwellings and collective communal housing.
Leduc
North Central
To preserve large contiguous tracts of high
capability land in crop and oil seed production.
This area includes some of the most
productive soils in the region (and Alberta)
and is also under the most pressure for
development given its proximity to the EIA
and neighbouring urban municipalities. This
area has been subject to a number of
annexations (Town of Beaumont, Town of
Devon, City of Leduc) and is currently
subject of the City of Edmonton annexation
which involves approximately 15,900 ha
(39,237 ac) of agricultural land. This area is
within the Metropolitan Tier of the EMRGP
that stipulates the lands will remain in
agricultural use until such time as it is
needed for development. A significant
number of
To preserve large contiguous tracts of high capability soils for
extensive field crops. Eliminate fragmentation, eliminate
conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, minimize
land use conflict.
Sub-AreaStrathcona
Agriculture: Large Holdings
Leduc
North Central
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsLimited to one parcel out of
unsubdivided quarter. In the AG
district, depending on policy area,
a quarter section can be either
split in half or one lot between
0.8 and 2.0 ha may be subdivided
out for an existing or proposed
dwelling.
LESA and TDC not likely useful as
only one parcel allowed per quarter
OCP is being revised to be more in
line with Ag Study.
Environmental - proximity to North
Saskatchewan River where
development should be sensitive to
this environmental significant area;
diversity of crops grown; soil
capability; proximity to airport – a
regional economic generator, but
also consideration of ag export
potential and support for value-
added processing at the airport;
proximity to urban development;
infrastructure (some areas are
difficult to gain access to – can’t
move ag equipment through urban
development); proximity to ag
support services.
While not an allowable use in the existing
district regulations, the conversion of the
agricultural land to non-agricultural uses such
as industrial and urban development. Unclear
direction of the Edmonton Metropolitan Tier as
to whether the Metropolitan Tier is a policy
area or growth boundary and the resulting land
speculation. Whether the development of an
agricultural business warrants the removal of
high capability soils from production.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesLeduc
South/Central
To protect the CFOs (dairy operations) from
encroachment of residential and other non-
compatible uses and to preserve high capability
soils for crop/feed production.
This area has a mix of higher and lower
capability soils and contains a large number
of dairy operations. The topography of this
area is generally flat in the south. The
eastern area is rolling with numerous
wetlands. This area includes Wizard Lake
(south) and the Beaver Hills UNESCO
Biosphere (east). There are a number of
unplanned agricultural support services
developed throughout this area (fertilizer,
seed plant, etc.).
To ensure the CFOs (dairy operations) are not impeded; to
ensure the CFOs have access to high capability soils nearby to
grow feed for the operation; and to conserve large tracts of land
for crop production.Manage fragmentation, minimize conversion
of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, minimize land use
conflict, concentrate agri-business in agricultural hubs to create
synergies.
Sturgeon B Support the neighbourhood's existing
agricultural uses such as livestock grazing,
poultry and hog production, mixed grain and
cattle operations and hay and forage production
and promote other types of agricultural use
such as fruit and berry production.
Livestock Grazing, Livestock Feedlots,
Poultry Barns, Hog Barns, Communal
Farming (Morinville Colony), Mixed Grain &
Cattle Operations Example Agricultural
Support Services: Fertilizer Supplier (Falls
Fertilizers), Mechanics Shop (RQB)
Sturgeon C Support large scale grain farming, mixed grain
and cattle operations, poultry and dairy
operations in this area by managing land use
conflicts and ensuring that agriculture is
identified as a priority land-use while enhancing
the agricultural support services available
through commercial and value-added clustering
Large Scale Grain Farming, Mixed Grain &
Cattle Operations, Dairy Operations, Feed
Lots, Example Agricultural Support Services:
Grain Terminals, Seed Cleaning Plant, Input
Suppliers/ Agronomists/ Custom Services
(SVF, McEwans), Bulk Fuel (UFA, Co-op),
Sturgeon Agriplex, Class 2 Landfill/ Pesticide
Container Recycling Depot
Sub-AreaLeduc
South/Central
Sturgeon B
Sturgeon C
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsEnvironmental - proximity to Wizard
Lake and within the Beaver Hills
UNESCO Biosphere where
development should be sensitive to
these environmentally significant
areas; soil capability; proximity to
potential hubs or existing support
services; infrastructure; proximity to
CFO (dairy barns).
Subdivision and dispersed development of
agricultural support services. Subdivision and
development of non-agricultural uses
(residential) in close proximity to CFO’s. The
agricultural operators in this area subdivide the
existing farmstead and retain the agricultural
lands so as not to be landlords.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesSturgeon D Support the existing agricultural production that
includes livestock grazing, mixed farming
operations, hay and forage production, poultry
production and equestrian facilities while
promoting further agricultural uses that are
complimentary to the other industries within
the area.
Equestian, Livestock Grazing, Livestock
Feedlots, Poultry Barns, Dairy Operations,
Mixed Grain & Cattle Operations, Hay and
Forage Production
Parkland South East Aims to preserve large tracts of land for larger
farm operations (grains, vegetables, livestock,
etc.) while promoting diversification and
expansion into new agricultural sectors.
Preserve the PAASE for large-scale farm
operations and crop production of both
traditional field crops such cereal grains,
oilseeds, potatoes, pluses and other seeds; b.
Preserve high quality agricultural lands in the
PAASE for continued large-scale farm operations
and crop production by limiting fragmentation
of agricultural parcels from incompatible and
non-agricultural uses including County
Residential development, and major industrial
uses; and, Preserve prime agricultural area in
order to conserve and restore natural features
such as wetlands and riparian areas to improve
overland drainage and water quality in the
Modeste Creek watershed, and parts of the
North Saskatchewan River Valley.
characterized by intact quarter-sections
used for large-scale farm operations and
crop production
The continued use of this area for large-scale field crop
production and operations, with the ability to promote and
diversify the types of pulse and seed crops requiring this scale of
production. The subarea policies in the MDP reinforce current
work that the County is doing to preserve large tracts of land and
protect wetland and riparian areas through its Alternative Land
Use Services (ALUS) program projects. Parkland County is trying
to reduce the premature and speculative fragmentation of large
parcels of high quality farmland that would prevent the retention
of large-scale farm operations. This includes the typical “4-40’s”
subdivisions which are not supported in the County’s current
MDP, and when subdivided, create land parcel sizes too small to
farm for traditional farm practices. The County is also
encouraging the ability to diversify the PAASE into new
agricultural sectors/products.
Sub-AreaSturgeon D
Parkland South East
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsRecreational Use of Redwater Natural Area
interfaces with Agriculture, Oil & Gas
Production interfaces with Ag
Parkland County’s Land Use Bylaw
(LUB) has not yet been updated to
incorporate the policy direction in
the Municipal Development Plan
(e.g. parcel fragmentation and
subdivision regulations).
Permitted and discretionary uses
in the LUB have not yet been
reviewed, and may not fully align
between the two documents.
Lands on the eastern edge of the
PAASE may be susceptible to land
speculation and premature
subdivision for rural residential
parcels.
The requirement for an agricultural
assessment tool such as a LESA
evaluation would assist the County
in requiring landowners to assess
factors such as climate factors, soil
quality, surface factors, subsurface
factors landscape factors, future
impact of proposed land uses and
suitability of the proposed parcel
size on adjacent farm operations.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesEdmonton
South Annexation Area
The regional vision for the proposed annexation
area is for urban growth; most of the proposed
annexation area is within the Edmonton
Metropolitan Region Growth Plan’s
Metropolitan Area policy tier. The proposed
annexation area is a logical extension of
Edmonton’s urban growth. This growth will be
compact, contiguous and contain a variety of
land uses. The conversion to urban uses will only
occur according to the conditions set forth in
the Growth Plan (6.2.4). As conversion to non-
agricultural urban uses will take decades,
maintaining agricultural viability in the interim is
important.
Edmonton’s policies promote contiguous growth, minimize
fragmentation and conversion of agricultural land allowing
interim uses. Also included is the encouragement of support for
agriculture including provision of agricultural services as land
uses transition to urban.
Sub-AreaEdmonton
South Annexation Area
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsThese issues, and their complexity,
will come out through the creation
of an Agricultural Impact
Assessment that is required for any
new area structure plan in the city
proposing development in a
greenfield area that contains prime
agricultural lands. LESA will allow
effective land use planning of
agricultural lands. LESA will assess
land quality and contextual factors
and identify and quantify a supply of
prime agricultural lands. This could
impact the pattern of urban growth
, define agricultural zones and save
special lands for the future.
The challenge is compatibility with new and
existing urban development, the
discouragement of the premature
fragmentation of agricultural land and the
encouragement of agriculture. .Confined
Feeding Operations (existing) will be
grandfathered in and but will be limited or
reduced in number in the future. Farm Based
Alcoholic Beverage Production Facilities as
defined in the Leduc County LUB will not be
permitted.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesLeduc
West
To provide for a broad range of agriculture
(grazing, feed (hay), limited crop production and
cow/calf operations and confined livestock
operations) on a mix of lower and higher
capability land
this area has diverse land uses, and a range
of soil qualities. This area has lower
capability soils for grain and oil seed in
comparison to other areas of the County. It
is also has more hills, trees and drainage
issues. It is further removed from the urban
centres. The population in this area has
been decreasing and there is a need to
retain the population to keep the schools
and community services operational
Preservation of large contiguous tracks of higher capability soils
for crop production and forage (hay), retention/expansion of
existing confined livestock operations and cow/calf operations.
Manage fragmentation, minimize conversion of agricultural land
to non-agricultural uses, minimize land use conflict; encourage
diversification of agriculture.
Sub-AreaLeduc
West
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsAG Agricultural District: tallows 2
principal and 2 accessory
dwellings and for 80+ acre
parcels. Lots less than 80 acres
can have 1 and 1.
Environmental - proximity to North
Saskatchewan River, Pigeon Lake
and Wizard Lake where
development should be sensitive to
these environmentally significant
areas; water requirements; soil
capability; long term and cumulative
impact of the proposed
development; large tracts of land in
vicinity of the development
proposed; distance to existing CFOs;
proximity to similar operation or
potential to create synergy; access
to markets (cattle, grain); proximity
to support systems; topography of
the land; proximity to urban centres
(Warburg, Thorsby).
There is a misguided belief that allowing further
subdivisions will help retain the population in
this area. There is pressure to subdivide lands in
close proximity to the North Saskatchewan
River and its tributaries for recreational
purposes as these lands are generally treed and
have lower capability soils. This area has
numerous sand and gravel deposits and
aggregate operations as well as a large coal
seam and coal mine. Landowners subdivide to
obtain maximum profit from their sale.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesParkland
West
Aims to preserve large tracts of land for larger
farm operations (grazing, other specialty crops,
etc.) and reduce fragmentation for non-
agricultural purposes. Preserve the PAAW for
traditional large-scale farm operations and
production (i.e. cattle grazing such as the
Tomahawk Cattle Ranch);
b. Preserve the PAAW for localized large-scale
agricultural production facilities and operations
(such as Sun-Grow peat harvesting operations);
and,
c. Preserve the PAAW as a prime agricultural
area in order to conserve and restore natural
features such as riparian areas and wetlands for
overland drainage and water quality in the
Sturgeon Headwaters, Tomahawk Creek, and
Pembina River watersheds.
characterized by lands suitable for large
animal grazing (western extents), foraging
crops and peat production.
The continued use of this area for large-scale farm operations
and production, grazing and forage crops, and ranching with the
ability to diversify into other agricultural products and localized
operations. The continued work the County is doing with farmers
and ranchers to conserve and enhance riparian areas and
wetlands in order to improve water quality and ecosystem
services through its Alternative Land Use Services (ALUS)
program projects in the PAAW. Parkland County is trying to
reduce fragmentation of larger parcels into smaller non-
agricultural and incompatible uses such as Country Residential,
and non-agricultural industrial uses, while encouraging the ability
to diversify into new agricultural sectors/products. The County is
also attempting to reduce the potential for the typical “4-40”
subdivisions which are not supported in the County’s current
MDP, and when subdivided, creates parcel sizes too small to farm
given the soils and landscape conditions.
Parkland
Rural, not in AG area
Strathcona
Agricuture: Small Holdings
Allow for ag, small scale commercial and
associated residential that supports ag viability
Generally prime soils. Area serves as
transition on urban rural continuum
Same as above, but allows subdivsion for small scale ag
Sub-AreaParkland
West
Parkland
Rural, not in AG area
Strathcona
Agricuture: Small Holdings
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsParkland County’s Land Use Bylaw
(LUB) has not yet been updated to
incorporate the policy direction in
the Municipal Development Plan
(e.g. parcel fragmentation and
subdivision regulations).
Permitted and discretionary uses
in the LUB have not yet been
reviewed, and may not fully align
between the two documents.
The requirement for an agricultural
assessment tool such as a LESA
evaluation would assist the County
in requiring landowners to assess
factors such as climate factors, soil
quality, surface factors, subsurface
factors landscape factors, future
impact of proposed land uses and
suitability of the proposed parcel
size on adjacent farm operations.
The TransAlta mine and the scale and
magnitude of the operation has impacted the
area. The closure of the mine and the
restoration of the mine will increase the future
amount of agricultural land in the area. The
impact of country residential subdivision in
adjacent municipalities not in the EMRB may
have future impacts to fragment land in the
PAAW.
Generally, 8 parcels per quarter
section (option to 10 parcels,
minimum size of 8.0 ha.
LESA and TDC not likely useful as
subdivision is limited
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesLeduc
Small holdings
To promote agricultural diversification and
provide for agricultural activities on smaller
tracts of land
This area has a mix of higher and lower
capability soil and its terrain has limitations
– knob and kettle. It is already fragmented
by numerous country residential parcels. It
falls within the Beaver Hills UNESCO
Biosphere and is in close proximity to a
number of urban centres.
To provide landowners with an opportunity to grow their own
food and be self-sufficient and/or establish specialized
agricultural operations on smaller tracts of land. Minimize
conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses and
minimize land use conflict.
Sub-AreaLeduc
Small holdings
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsImpact on the Beaver Hills UNESCO
Biosphere and wetlands; type of
operation proposed and
compatibility with adjacent land
uses; potential to diversify
agriculture.
Minimizing impact to Environmentally
Significant Areas. Ensuring the lands are used
for agricultural purposes and do not merely a
large country residential parcel.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesParkland
Prime Ag: Small Holdings
The primary objective of the Small Holdings area
is to encourage a range of parcel sizes to
support agriculture value-added businesses and
specialty operations on smaller tracts of land
that are closer to existing urban amenities and
areas. There are other fundamental objectives
for the sub-area that are critical to the long term
viability of land uses in the area: a. Wagner
Recharge Area – the Wagner Fen Recharge Area
falls within the north east corner of Prime
Agriculture Area Small Holdings. The highest and
best use of these lands – given their
environmental sensitivity – will be agriculture,
which will further protect the recharge area and
water source for the Wagner Fen (a provincially
recognized sensitive area); b. Prevention of
urban-sprawl – lands in Prime Agriculture Area
Small Holdings are some of the most productive
agriculture lands in the County. Retaining these
lands for future agricultural purposes and
supporting a greater diversity of agricultural
uses will protect these lands from fragmentation
for non-agricultural purposes.
The continued use of this for a diversity of agricultural operations
intended to support agri-businesses and agricultural specialty
industries. Outcomes include: a. A vibrant agricultural area that
supports the diversity of the County’s agricultural sector by
capitalizing on the County’s strong agriculture land base; b. The
creation of more agriculture related employment opportunities
for residents in the Tri- Region; c. Retention and protection of
prime agricultural lands from non-agricultural fragmentation and
urban expansion, and the minimization of land speculation
practices that encourage non-agricultural type developments;
and, d. The protection of the subsurface Wagner Natural Area
aquifer, and the conservation and enhancement of natural
features such as wetlands and riparian areas for the improved
water quality and quantity, and ecosystem services. trying to
reduce land fragmentation for non-agricultural purposes,
especially for multi-parcel (County Residential) developments.
The areas adjacent to urban municipalities are highly susceptible
to speculative practices including the purchasing of land for
future residential development and fragmentation for non-
agricultural uses.
Sub-AreaParkland
Prime Ag: Small Holdings
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsParkland County’s Land Use Bylaw
has not yet been updated to
incorporate policy directions in
the Municipal Development Plan
(e.g. parcel fragmentation and
subdivision regulations).
Permitted and discretionary uses
in the LUB have not yet been
reviewed to ensure the overall
intent and identified uses in the
MDP for this area have been
captured.
The requirement for an agricultural
assessment tool such as a LESA
evaluation would assist the County
in requiring landowners to assess
factors such as climate factors, soil
quality, surface factors, subsurface
factors landscape factors, future
impact of proposed land uses and
suitability of the proposed parcel
size on adjacent farm operations.
The LESA tool could be used allow
the County to include those lands
that may have been excluded before
for the purposes of better
expanding its agricultural base in
value-added/specialty areas. The
LESA evaluation will also help the
County provide a stronger rationale
for why lands in the Small Holdings
area need to be protected from
future non-agricultural land uses,
speculative land practices and
annexation.
Lands in the area are the most susceptible to
land speculation, and landowner expectations
may not align with County’s goals for this area.
The Small Holdings area is also the area within
the County that may be most susceptible to
future urban annexation. While land uses in this
area have been defined by the County in the
MDP, further refinement is needed to ensure
the area is developed in such a way as to meet
its desired outcomes and minimize its
challenges. The area – due to its proximity to
existing urban communities – may also be
susceptible to future annexations which would
consume some of the Region’s most productive
soils for urban sprawl and impacts on the
Wagner / Big Lake surface and subsurface
drainage and aquifer.
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesSturgeon A Support the existing agricultural production that
includes livestock grazing, mixed farming
operations, hay and forage production and
equestrian facilities while promoting further
agricultural uses such as small parcel agriculture
that are suitable for the neighbourhood's
topography and that co-exist easily with rural
residential.
Equestrian, Upicks, Market Gardens,
Livestock Grazing, Mixed Grain & Cattle
Operations, Hay and Forage Production
Example Agricultural Support Services:
Calahoo Meats, West Sturgeon Ag Society
Sturgeon B Balance gravel extraction activities and crop and
livestock production and ensure that
reclamation efforts result in land that is
conducive to agricultural production.
Gravel Extraction activities a priority in this
area; Reclaimed land is reverted back into
Ag Production. Villeneuve Airport-
technological challenges eg. UAV use
Sturgeon G Ensure that agriculture remains an integrated
part of rural residential development by
promoting agriculture systems that compliment
residential use such as small parcel agriculture
and agri-tourism.
Equestrian, Market Gardens, Dairy
Operations, Silage and Grain Production
Sturgeon H Support agriculture as the primary land use in
this urban and industrial interface area.
Equestrian
Strathcona
Beaver Hills
Primarily for environmenatl conservation, but
allows ag, recreation, tourism, limited
residential, etc.
Envoronmentally sensitive overall Limit fragmentation, reduce impact on environment & adjacent
lands. Residential limited to single dwellings and collective
communal housing.
Sub-AreaSturgeon A
Sturgeon B
Sturgeon G
Sturgeon H
Strathcona
Beaver Hills
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other comments
Urban Interface, Residential Development
creates potential for land-use conflicts, CFB
Edmonton- airport
Urban Interface, Large Traffic Volumes
Limited to one parcel out of
unsubdivided quarter. A quarter
section can be either split in half
or one lot between 0.8 and 2.0
ha may be subdivided out for an
existing dwelling.
LESA and TDC not likely useful as
only one parcel allowed per quarter
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesSturgeon
F: Overlay
Support environmentally sustainable agriculture
initiatives in this area to ensure that water
resources are protected and available should
they be required for irrigation crops.
Irrigated Production (Sod, Potatoes, Market
Gardens)
All Municipalities
Future Development
Other areas which are interim agriculture until
future residential or industrial development etc.
Sturgeon
I: Industrial
Maintain existing agricultural uses and support
services while attracted other industries that
support or compliment agricultural production.
Irrigated Production (Sod, Potatoes, Market
Gardens), Feedlots, Example Agricultural
Support Services: Canola Crushing Facility
(Bunge), Input Suppliers/ Agronomists/
Custom Services, Fertilizer Production
(Agrium/Nutrien),
Sturgeon
J: Industrial
Ensure that agriculture remains a viable land use
in this area and promote the production of
alternative crops that require irrigation, which is
already established in many parts of this
neighbourhood.
Irrigated Production (Sod, Potatoes, Market
Gardens)
Sub-AreaSturgeon
F: Overlay
All Municipalities
Future Development
Sturgeon
I: Industrial
Sturgeon
J: Industrial
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsEnvironmentally sensitive area (Sturgeon
River), ideal location for operations that
prioritize Environmentally Sustainable
Agricultural Practices
Industrial Heartland, Corporate Land Ownership
(many acres of rented land vs Family owned),
Highly Productive Wetlands (Environmentally
Sensitive
Sub-Area 1. Intent 2. Characteristics 3. OutcomesEdmonton
Energy & Technology Park
To provide a location for future industrial
development that includes petrochemical
processing and related industry taking
advantage of the location as part of and in close
proximity to the Alberta’s Industrial Heartland
as well as conventional light, medium and heavy
industrial uses and related businesses including
research and development in this part of
Alberta. Development in this area has significant
infrastructure requirements and until those
investments are made, agriculture remains the
current land use.
agriculture remains the current land use.The
EETP plan area is substantial at over 5200
ha. It is expected that agricultural uses will
continue on these lands as the predominant
uses for decades to come. Build out of this
area for industrial and related uses could be
35 to 50 years which is normal in
petrochemical development and the energy
sector.
Viable agricultural activity, that may include continued general
agricultural (eg. crops, market gardens) or new agricultural
processing or agri-businesses, that are not in conflict with the
development of new industrial development.
Edmonton
Fresh & Community Gardens
Urban agriculture is a permitted land use under
Edmonton’s Zoning Bylaw. Urban agriculture
activities include: community or rooftop
gardens, urban outdoor farms and urban indoor
farms.
A positive outcome is that the City of Edmonton: allows for urban
beekeeping , runs a pilot project for keeping urban hens, partners
with Northlands to increase local food purchasing and educates
the public on urban agriculture activities. Encourage of further
urban agricultural activities, both on public and private lands. It
would be good to see proper maintenance for all of the
community gardens for the future and that no city-owned lands
are taken out of agricultural production.
Sub-AreaEdmonton
Energy & Technology Park
Edmonton
Fresh & Community Gardens
4. Subdivision 5. Tools 6. Other commentsLESA may assist in encouraging
agricultural processing or agri-
businesses within certain parts of
the EETP. The highest capability
agricultural lands including in buffer
areas to heavy industrial sites and as
part of required reclamation plans
for such sites could be identified
with LESA and saved for future
agricultural use. A detailed
reclamation plan is required by the
Alberta Government under the
Environmental Protection and
Enhancement Act (EPEA)(1993 with
amendments to 2018) for an
applicable application for approval
of a heavy industrial project.
Whether to allow interim uses that are not
allowed in the current Agricultural zoning and
that can be supported on interim servicing (eg.
Storage uses, that would be provided through
rezoning to AGI Industrial Reserve Zone).
Agricultural zoning applies to the vast majority
of the Plan Area. Interim uses must be
compatible with the long term vision of an
industrial park.
It’s difficult to determine how LESA
could be used to prioritize urban
agricultural properties. A LESA
score might help if there was a
concern about a loss of some of
these community gardens and a
prioritization had to be made.
Attachment 2:
Sub-Areas as the Basic Planning Tool
Introduction: Sub-Areas for RAMP
The Edmonton Metropolitan Region (EMR) is a large and complex area.
There is a diversity of physical settings: soils vary considerably in their inherent ability to sustain various kinds of agriculture such as large field crops or grazing; they are intermixed with a variety of sensitive environmental areas such as river valleys or the Beaver Hills Moraine; and they may have other natural resources such as coal, gravel or peat.
There is a variety of contextual factors: proximity to urban development; relationship to existing infrastructure such as roads and railways. There is a variety of planning policy objectives: previous commitments for other land uses such as industry or country residential nearby or within agricultural areas.
As such, different parts of the EMR likely require different outcomes. Hence a different regulatory framework from a regional perspective may be needed, as well as the need to consider agriculture in the EMR by looking at the unique challenges and opportunities of sub-areas.
As part of the Regional Agricultural Master Plan (RAMP) process, a first step in considering what might be suitable sub-areas was to have the municipalities define their agricultural planning sub-areas. Each municipality had a slightly different approach to defining sub-areas, but approximately 20 sub-areas were identified. However, this seems to be too many to be addressed at the regional level. Therefore, an attempt was made to identify similarities in planning objectives and characteristics so that three major sub-areas were defined, as follows:
1. Agricultural Small Holdings: These lands are located primarily, partially encirclingmuch of the Edmonton region’s developed area, just outside the boundary of the Metropolitan Area tier of the Regional Growth Plan. They are in the four counties: Strathcona, Leduc, Parkland and Sturgeon. Soil types are generally highly productive, but a key characteristic is the policy intent for generally supporting agricultural value-added businesses and specialty operations on smaller tracts of land closer to urban amenities.
2. Large-Scale Field Crop Areas: These lands are generally the remaining largecontiguous areas of level high quality agricultural land. They are a significant portion ofthe rural area within the EMR. There is some overlap with boundary between theMetropolitan Core and the Metropolitan Area. There is a general desire to avoidfragmentation and conversion in this area in all four counties.
Item 7Attachment 2
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 50 of 66
3. Mixed Livestock/Limited Crop Areas: These lands occur primarily in the western portion of the EMR—in Parkland and Leduc Counties. There tends to be more concern in these areas, because of the natural characteristics, for the protection of major areas for environmental conservation. Perhaps, the Beaver Hills Moraine area in Strathcona should be included in this sub-area.
Other Considerations:
1. It is important to note that the “Natural Living System” of environmentally sensitive areas (such as the North Saskatchewan River Valley, Beaver Hills Moraine, etc.) overlap other sub-areas and needs to be addressed with respect to agriculture. As well, there are more environmental areas identified at the municipal level.
2. There are major areas (coal mining in Parkland and Leduc, peat mining in Parkland,
gravel extraction in Sturgeon) that come into play in determining agricultural policy.
3. Other potential agricultural areas might be identified within urban boundaries.
4. There are lands within both urban and rural municipalities that have been identified for
non-agricultural development (residential, country residential, industrial) that will remain in agriculture for decades.
5. Finally, there may be ‘Special Areas’ defined by soils, climate, slope and/or infrastructure
– for example, Sturgeon County’s Neighbourhood F is identified as supporting environmentally sustainable agricultural initiatives under irrigated production (sod, seed potatoes and market gardens). Strathcona, Parkland, and Leduc Counties also have areas of unique soils that enable the production of potatoes or other high valued crops.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 51 of 66
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID,IGN, and the GIS User Community
RAMP Reference Map 7: Agriculture Sub-Areas
²Coordinate System: 3TM114-83Projection: Transverse Mercator
Datum: North America 1983Central Meridian: -1140 10 20 30 405
km
*Draft* - September 13, 2018
Parkland County
Leduc CountyWarburg
Thorsby
Calmar
Devon
Stony Plain
Spruce Grove
St.Albert
Morinville
Sturgeon County
Legal
Red Water
Bon Accord Gibbons
Fort Saskatchewan
Sherwood Park
Beaumont
Leduc
Strathcona County
Wabamun
Edmonton
Bremner
Agriculture Sub-AreaLarge Holdings
Mixed/LimitedSmall Holdings
Municipal Boundary
Regional RoadsUrban Service Area
First Nations
Agriculture Boundary
Item 7Attachment 3
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 52 of 66
Page 1 of 1
Administration Recommendation to the Regional Agriculture
Master Plan Task Force September 21, 2018
Regional Agriculture Master Plan – RAMP Communications Strategy
Recommended Motion: That the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force approve the Communications Strategy.
Background and Status
• On May 7, 2018, the RAMP landing page went live on the EMRB website. It includes the ProjectTOR, Task Force Members, Meeting Information, FAQs, links to the regional ag studies and plansand an option for comments and questions.
• RAMP webpage continues to update meeting agendas and minutes, and with basic data.• With RAMP vision discussions, it is a good time to begin a more robust – but appropriate for the
process – communications strategy
Proposal
• Strategic Long goal: Value of Agriculture and RAMP to the EMR is understood by regionalresidents and businesses
• Phased approach:
2018 – Context: Regional elected officials, municipal staff and stakeholders are familiar withpurpose and process of RAMP
o Begin changing level of agriculture awareness in the Region:• Basics of Agriculture• Scale, scope and importance of Agriculture in EMR• How RAMP is a link to promoting and preserving agriculture in the Region
o Empower Task Force members to champion RAMP as crucial to future of the sector andits significance as EMRB’s first order of business for GP implementation
2019 – Content: As RAMP unfolds, continue and expand 2018 activities to include more content, educative components (especially the LESA) and materials for larger regional audience
o Election campaigno Prepare for Post-election advocacyo Build up awareness for RAMP conclusions
2020 – Plan completion and delivery: Campaign related to most important RAMP conclusions
Attachment: • DRAFT COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY: EMRB Regional Agriculture Master Plan
Item 8
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 53 of 66
DRAFT
21/09/2018
RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN TASK FORCE
Item 8 Attachment 1
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 54 of 66
Dra�
21/09/2018 RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY 1
RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY
PURPOSE
To use the pla�orm of the RAMP to raise the profile of agriculture in the region and its complexity, and to establish the importance and posi�on of RAMP in long term growth planning
TARGET AUDIENCE
• Primary audience: Board members, alternates, member councils, CAOs, member administrations • Secondary audience: Regional Agriculture (RAMP) stakeholders, Alberta Agriculture, Agriculture and
Agri-Food Canada, Regional provincial elected officials, regional media • Tertiary audience: Regional public
CONTEXT
The regional view of Agriculture is new, and the complexity of agriculture itself is poorly understood. In each county and in the City of Edmonton there have been varied approaches to agriculture. It is the integration of these approaches toward an “Edmonton Metro” perspective in alignment with the regional growth plan that is the purpose of the Regional Agriculture Master Plan.
The Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan was approved by the province on October 26, 2017, after a 30-month comprehensive review and update of the initial 2010 Regional Growth Plan. As the first act of the 2017 Growth Plan implementation, the now designated Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board struck the Regional Agriculture Master Plan Task Force in spring 2018.
The Task Force is composed of seven Board members (three of whom are newly elected) and a technical team of expert regional administrators, plus provincial and federal representation. An EMRB project manager and a consultant team support the Task Force. The RAMP is scheduled to be complete by the spring of 2020.
TO ACHIEVE OUTCOMES
TARGET AUDIENCE NEEDS TO KNOW
The RAMP Task Force is addressing complex issues thoroughly and transparently, with the assistance of all municipalities, key agriculture stakeholders, and regional experts toward the creation of a fully regional plan for a thriving, diverse and internationally renowned agriculture and food sector aligned with the principles of the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan.
TARGET AUDIENCE BELIEVES
The realities of change in modern agriculture are increasingly difficult and are poorly understood by the public, making planning and discussion evermore challenging. The industry is under tremendous change and suffers from misconceptions about what that change means. It is also without a clear unified voice and message about its current position and future potential. Finally, its stakeholders are increasingly fragmented.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 55 of 66
Dra�
21/09/2018 RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY 2
CALL TO ACTION
Primary and secondary audiences use the RAMP process as a means to inform the public of the facts and transform general understanding of what Agriculture is and what RAMP means to this region.
MESSAGES
Draft messaging* requires approval, presented in the following format.
• Headline message: o Why
Proof points
See example messages page 4
MEDIA
The messages will determine the most effective media to employ, e.g.
• Personal contact – As advocacy: RAMP Task Force champion key messages and put a face to the issue for key members of target audiences
• Social media – To inform: Scheduled and consistent drum beat of basic regional agriculture facts as Did You Knows, news as it happens, meeting reporting
• Webpage – To inform: Truth source
• Chair’s blog – To inform, Personalize issues: Telling the stories to frame key messages
• Mainstream Media (MSM) – To extend main messages, news, broaden profile of RAMP, TF members, immediate issues
Regional RAMP meetings and Road Shows underscore RAMP’s importance, transparency, and interest in broadening understanding of agriculture and broad input.
MESSENGERS
While all RAMP Task Force members are the “face” of the issue, it is important to consider who will be the most effective messenger(s) for any message. An important consideration in choosing a messenger is peer-to-peer, as well as:
• Influence. Many audiences have confidence in people with a clear position of influence in the organization.
• Expertise. Other audiences prefer a messenger with demonstrated knowledge and experience in the subject area.
• Relationship. A strong prior relationship with the audience can enhance a messenger’s credibility.
MEASUREMENT
Have the outcomes re: knowledge, beliefs, action been achieved? Options for measurement:
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 56 of 66
Dra�
21/09/2018 RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY 3
• Survey on audience attitudes before and after
• Improvements in traffic to webpage, retweets, MSM coverage
• Soft improvement of “attitudes” amongst audiences
TIMELINE
SEPTEMBER TO DECEMBER 2018
Create social awareness and personalize the RAMP process using inexpensive tools
WEBPAGE Task Force members profiles with “Why I am on the Task Force” added to page
**Chair’s Blog: Called “En Route, Dispatches along a regional journey” to highlight RAMP progress, meeting updates, to personalize insight/voice for the RAMP Task Force… activity posted to reCAP and social media
See example blog page 6
EMRB staff and Task Force members
EMRB staff with Chair
SOCIAL MEDIA Twitter: • ***Create database of “Did you know?” facts about agriculture
generally and about regional agriculture for regular posting. Use webpage copy as further content See example tweets page 7
• Post Chair’s Blog
• Live tweets during RAMP consultations, info sessions, and
personal contacts
• Linked In: Post related agriculture articles/commentary as
appropriate and available, including Chair’s Blog
EMRB staff
EMRB staff
EMRB staff and TF members
EMRB staff and TF members
NOVEMBER 23 TASK FORCE MEETING
Review Communications Strategy measures and course correct as needed
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 57 of 66
Dra�
21/09/2018 RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY 4
JANUARY TO MAY 2019 – DETAILS TBD
AS RAMP UNFOLDS
Continue and expand successful 2018 activities
More content, educative materials and advocacy post provincial election
Build up awareness for RAMP conclusions
Explore options for a launch campaign in 2020
EMRB staff and TF members
OCTOBER 2019
REGIONAL SYMPOSIUM
Showcase Regional Agriculture and RAMP messages
Highlight importance of RAMP as Growth Plan’s first implementation
EMRB staff and TF members
SPRING 2020
RAMP COMPLETION
If approved, develop RAMP Launch Campaign EMRB staff and TF members
EXAMPLES OF MATERIALS
*EXAMPLE DRAFT MESSAGES
1. Key message: Agriculture is changing but clearly a regional priority for long term prosperity
Why - Ag sector is a major economic driver
Proof point #1 Proof point #2 Proof point #3
Second largest region industry
Regional view means effective responsible growth
Diversification is a reality
Higher returns Maximize potential by building on strengths
Fewer, more diverse operations
Growing Ag and food business culture
Align with GP Value-added potential
Identified by Edmonton Global as priority for international investment
Non-renewable resource
2. Key message: RAMP will ensure responsible sustainable growth of agriculture in EMR
Why - Will provide certainty and flexibility for thriving ag sector
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 58 of 66
Dra�
21/09/2018 RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY 5
Proof point #1 Proof point #2 Proof point #3
By identifying ag land use areas
By supporting ag infrastructure
By reducing issues between ag and other industries
Minimize fragmentation Hard and soft infrastructure Collaboration and consultation across sub-sectors
Minimize conversion Align with GP Clear vision, principles and policies
Accommodate compatible and supportive land use
**EXAMPLE DRAFT CHAIR’S BLOG
EN ROUTE: Dispatches along a regional journey ON RAMP: The Regional Agriculture Master Plan for the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Dispatch #1 [(date]
Welcome to the story of RAMP and agriculture in Edmonton Metro.
En route means we’re on our way toward a meaningful Regional Ag Master Plan – a la and in response to our award-winning Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan.
I’m proud to be the Chair of the RAMP Task Force. Along with my elected colleagues and expert advisors, we are tasked with the challenge of creating a made-for-Edmonton-Metro solution to the problems of a rapidly changing agriculture and food sector under siege because of a perceived endless supply of land in the Region.
It’s true – we have a lot of land. But it happens to represent some of the best agricultural soils in the country and even the world. Canada is projected to be one of only a handful of food producers in a fast approaching future, and we are in the “bread basket” of Canada, so protecting and conserving the best of that bountiful land is crucial.
So we are facing a challenge, yes, but there’s also the huge opportunity – how can we accommodate a doubling of the region’s population while maintaining a momentum in our ag sector that sees us doing more with less, differently, but more effectively, than just 30 years ago?
Technology and social awareness are on our side. I’ll be keeping you up to date with our progress as we go. But first let me introduce you to our team:
[…INSERT LIST: Name, day job, RAMP position, what you’re here for, what would success look like, etc.] Till next time,
- Mayor Rod Shaigec, Chair, RAMP Task Force
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 59 of 66
Dra�
21/09/2018 RAMP COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY 6
***TWEETS USED DURING LOCAL FOOD WEEK AUG 19-25, 2018
@yegmetroAg
• Did you know your favourite McDonalds hamburger is locally produced in #yegmetro region? Well done Cargill Canada @CitySpruceGrove #ablocalfoodweek #eatlocal #yegmetroag
• GOOD DIRT! Our region has 35% of Alberta's Class 1 soils! #yegmetroAg #downtoearth #ABlocalfoodweek
• Did you know: As many as 50% of millennial meals are delivered through new market channels eg. @ubereats @skipthedishes@organicbox @amazon #yegmetroAg#ABlocalfoodweek
• No matter how you get your local produce, don't forget to #thankafarmer. #yegmetroAg#ABlocalfoodweek #eatlocal
• In honour of #ablocalfoodweek why not plan a trip and visit the source of Alberta’s agricultural riches? Check out open farm days this weekend. You won’t have far to travel. Enjoy the sites and don’t forget to #thankafarmer! #foodforthought #yegmetroag
• Did you know: #yegmetro livestock population includes 1600 bison, 2200 goats and almost 25,000 colonies of bees #yegmetroAg#madeinalberta
• Building a Regional Agriculture Master Plan (RAMP) will ensure long-term agricultural land base with a clear vision for agriculture and food in the #yegmetro region. #sustainablefuture#ABlocalfoodweek #yegmetroAg
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 60 of 66
URBAN SHADOW, THE IMPERMANENCE SYNDROME AND
URBAN SPRAWL PRESENTED TO: REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MASTER PLAN
TASK FORCE
JERRY BOUMA TOMA & BOUMA MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
SEPTEMBER 21, 2018
Item 12
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 61 of 66
1 of 4| P a g e
Urban Shadow, the Impermanence Syndrome, and Urban Sprawl
A discussion of farmland protection begs the question: what lands are to be protected and why? The answer lies firstly in an understanding of the impacts of urbanization on agriculture. This is also known as the urban shadow effect or the Impermanence Syndrome and commonly results in urban sprawl.
The urban shadow can be defined as the land area that experiences the effects (direct and indirect) of urbanization on adjoining or nearby lands which are typically rural. Conceptually it is straightforward: the urban shadow is simply the direct and indirect influence on rural lands and communities – an effect that would not otherwise exist without the presence of a large and growing urban centre. Farmers reduce their investments in their farms as they perceive the sale of their land for development is inevitable.
Significantly, a review of the literature illustrates that the terms “urban shadow” and “urban sprawl” are directly correlated. It is agreed that the larger the “urban sprawl” due to the urban center in question, the greater the “shadow” and “impermanence” of agriculture it creates. While the two dynamics (and terms) are highly inter-related, it is useful however to draw a distinction. To this end, we provide the following:
Urban Sprawl – the areas on which urban development is actually taking place. Note: the term urban sprawl typically refers to areas that are adjacent to a major urban centre or major transportation corridors and are often characterized as low density. Urban Shadow – the areas that are directly and indirectly influenced by urban development. While ‘lands’ in the shadow may not host any development per se, they are nevertheless impacted by nearby urban development as farmers reduce investments in their farms as they await the sale of their land for development.
The urban shadow effect is particularly evident in Canada and the USA post World War 2 and the establishment of a vastly improved transportation system1. Consequently, many citizens could now consider housing and life style alternatives beyond traditional city living – hence the development of suburbs, country residential acreages and estates with larger lots with much less intensive development compared to the inner city. As cities grew out instead of up both urban sprawl and accordingly the effects of the urban shadow increased. The “urban shadow” will always be larger than those areas that are referred to as “urban sprawl”.
It is our conclusion that the urban shadow effect is directly proportional to the following factors:
1. The growth pressures emanating from the urban centre itself. Thus, the greater the growth (or the prospect of growth), the larger the urban shadow effect and the more farmers will
1 In particular, this as the commitment by the USA to build a comprehensive inter-state multi-lane highway system in early 1950’s. Canada followed suit with the opening of the first four lane highway christened the Queen Elizabeth Way between Toronto and Fort Erie in 1953 which began what is now known as the Golden Horseshoe.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 62 of 66
2 of 4| P a g e
reduce investments in their farms as they perceive the inevitable sale of their land for development.
2. The spatial location and quality of the transportation linkages emanating from the urban centre. For example, the expansion of a two-lane road to a four lane highway or the establishment of a commuter train line will dramatically increase the urban show effect as will sewer lines.
3. The willingness of the neighbouring municipalities (either adjacent or in close proximity) to manage or limit urban growth2. This is expressed by the current municipal by-laws as well as the land re-zoning history.
In addition there is a fourth and a critical influencing factor:
4. The effectiveness of political lobbying for or against urban development. Lobbying and/or political influence is a huge factor. We would argue that the more malleable a municipality is to political influence (namely development interests) the greater the urban shadow effect.
The Stages
The urban shadow effect, hence its size and spatial configuration in any specific urban area typically goes through the several stages. These are listed and detailed as follows: (Note: these are not necessarily sequential; some stages will occur in sequence while other stages develop in parallel).
2 (A two-fold dynamic: the likelihood of the growing municipality such as a City to annex lands from adjoining municipalities; versus the development receptivity of the impacted municipality – some are growth oriented; some will take efforts to defer or deflect growth.
Urban Shadow: The Stages
1. Early stage signals – in response to growth forecasts or simply by virtue of proximity.
2. Speculation – in response to early stage signals and/or new growth forecasts. Land purchases and options to purchase by speculators and developers begin.
3. Development of industrial/commercial uses – particularly those that are difficult to locate in urban settings.
4. Emergence of ‘urban’ oriented agricultural enterprises – market gardens; fruit operations; greenhouses; nurseries; U-Pick; equine operations/horse farms; agri-recreation enterprises. Meanwhile, traditional intensive livestock operations (dairy, beef feedlot, swine and poultry) will increasingly leave the area.
5. Later stage growth signals – statements and/or commitments by the province or municipality to build infrastructure (new or expanded roads, LRT lines, designated urban growth areas). Farmers reduce investments in their farms as they perceived the inevitable sale of their land for development.
6. Major changes in land ownership – as signals become stronger and more certain, developers will start making land purchases or options from local farmers and land owners.
7. Final Transition phase, includes: • More land being farmed on a lease basis as farmers sell to a new generation of land developers and land
owners (mostly crops; little livestock). • The loss of the agricultural community and rural character. • Development – land is rezoned and development begins. Agriculture will be phased out.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 63 of 66
3 of 4| P a g e
Impacts due to the urban shadow effect are both positive and negative. On the positive side, there are
• Market opportunities – being close to a large population creates new markets for crops and livestock, as well as new markets for additional higher value crops such as vegetables and fruit. Also new enterprises such as bed and breakfasts, tours, feature food & harvest events become feasible.
• Access to labour and services (professional, technical) – proximity to large populations provides a source of labour and expertise (technical, financial, research) that are not readily available to rural locations.
• Ability to spread risk – new entrepreneurs wishing to establish rural enterprises are better able to do so if they are able to maintain a source of non-agricultural income (jobs in the city) while they build their businesses.
• Ability to capture and transfer value – the increased land values due to urban development enable some farmers to sell ‘high’ and transfer these assets to purchase much larger areas of agricultural land elsewhere.
The negative impacts include the following:
• Loss of agricultural lands and the associated production - as the area transitions and more lands are farmed on a leased based, land stewardship and agronomic practices declines.
• Increased Nuisance Factors – farmers operating adjacent to or in proximity to non-farm residents face a wide array of potential issues and complaints which simply makes the business of farming more challenging. These include:
a) Conflicts with neighbours who complain about noise, dust, odour, specific operations such as spraying, fertilizing or harvesting. This author knows of one case where a person working on his combine late at night was stopped by the RCMP in response to a local resident complaint. The ‘nuisance’ factor associated with livestock manure is the primary reason why intensive livestock operations exit the urban shadow.
b) Trespassing, vandalism and yield loss, not uncommon in fields that are located near to urban areas. For example, an invasion of all-terrain vehicles (ATV’s) and dirt bikes on farm land is not uncommon.
• Increased Safety Concerns – a major and growing issue with farmers who move large tractors and field equipment. Not only are existing roads limited with respect to ease of movement and the capacity to accommodate wide machinery, the increase in motor vehicle traffic particularly drivers who use rural roads to short cut distances to industrial work places in the area, pose a major safety challenge.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 64 of 66
4 of 4| P a g e
• Increased Operational Costs – associated costs with moving equipment and added time spent maneuvering smaller and non-contiguous fields that tend to be more common in urban shadow areas.
• Increased Air and Water pollution – due mainly to automobile emissions and water runoff. Sewage pollution is also possible depending upon the specific local infrastructure. These pollutants can affect water supplies (ground water or streams) being used by farmers and have deleterious effects on livestock or crop production.
• Loss of farm support business infrastructure – as the area ‘urbanizes’, many rural focused business such as machinery dealers, input suppliers, large animal veterinarians, feed companies exit, leaving local farmers without local services, necessitating the access of services at greater distances.
• Loss of community – the result of exiting farmers and rural businesses. Without question, the community changes socially as well as economically.
At a broader societal level, there are also additional benefits and costs. For example, agriculture is responsible for carbon sequestration, buffering of water ways, acting as ‘water’ reservoirs that decrease the prospect of flooding, the provision of plant and animal habitat. Specific to costs, urban sprawl is associated with four major categories of population health risks: (1) physical inactivity due to higher levels of automobile use; (2) air quality – increased air pollution due to increased emissions such as nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and fine particles; (3) motor vehicle collisions; and (4) mental health risks.3 These are only identified and not discussed further in this paper.
3 Alberta Health Services. “Urban Sprawl and Health.” Healthy Public Policy Information Sheet. October 2009.
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 65 of 66
Clymont Hall: #1, 51423 – Hwy 60 Spruce Grove, AB
https://goo.gl/maps/jaxUSVVGFkF2
Item 13
RAMP Task Force Meeting Agenda Pkg September 21, 2018 66 of 66