Presentation to Spruce Grove City Council on September 24th, 2007
Questions will be submitted last in the presentation but are presented first so bloggers can get an overview.
Questions:
1. Could the city designate the 1908 house as a heritage resource in recognition of Spruce Grove being 100 years in its present location?
2. Could the city postpone demolition of the little church until a strategic plan for the site (rebuilding) is in place?
3. Could the city have sold the south end of the Queen Street property, and returned to their strategic plan for the North end of the property?
4. Would the city consider involving FACTS, other groups and individuals in developing a new communications and strategic planning process that includes long term planning, identifying community values, and ongoing community involvement (Will this be part of the budget – see FACTS submission)?
5. What involvement did the Community Health Council or the Capital Health Board have in developments on the Queen Street School site?
Introduction:
Although Spruce Grove has an excellent Strategic Plan, administrative and development pressure seems to be eroding that plan. Developments at 511 Queen Street are only one instance (see attached page from the Strategic Plan). The public concern for relocation of our tobogganing hill (Town Hall Meeting on September 12th) and demolition of our little Church are other instances.
Currently public involvement in Strategic Planning Process is a three year cycle (see page 6 – Strategic Plan 2005-2007). The plan outlines strategies and basic values of council but comes short with respect to long term planning, community values and ongoing community involvement in the planning and decision making process (see page 4).
· Add to the vision “for people who want ‘City in the Country’ living”.
· Expand on Provincial and Woodhaven Middle School values.
This presentation will illustrate the need for coordination and opportunities for public discussion with respect to Strategic Planning. We will look at the past, present concerns and future possibilities for improvement in the process.
Past:
With respect to the past, we will use central area planning and redevelopment as an illustration.
1. Residents had several concerns with respect to King Street Mall developments. Some of them were addressed, others such as Agrena Parking and population density were not.
2. Developments in Queen and Mohr Avenue (Granny Mohr’s house & the Queen Street School site) have been a concern for several years. The loss of playground and park space is still a major concern.
3. FACTS tried to alert City council of our concerns but we have had limited success, as the City abandoned their strategic plan (see page 21).
a. Medical complex (private deal – option to purchase balance of property).
b. FACTS asked for public involvement in site planning for the North end of property.
c. Doctors purchased and resold the land (Public not aware of resale).
d. Seniors condos being developed instead of supportive living facilities. (Basic decision made before public redistricting hearing - see response to FACTS questions).
Present Concerns:
1. Playground and small sliding hill for Queen Street area.
2. Little Church site (rebuilding – see FACTS presentation to council).
3. Agrena parking and loss of park space (a task force on the parking issue will be struck).
4. Other heritage planning concerns (need a 50 year plan - see FACTS budget presentation)
Future:
1. FACTS, as indicated in their budget presentation, would like to facilitate public involvement in strategic planning not only at the caucus but also through a website and specific groups looking into specific areas of planning, such as heritage and supportive living.
2. Will we see more medium to high density re-development in the central area (duplexes and fourplexes on single home lots and lots being combined for condos and apartments)?
3. Will we move toward a “City in the Country” with distinct values and community or just another city like Edmonton or become part of Edmonton (the mayor said we still want to be a “City in the Country, what does that mean)?
Conclusion:
If we had an opportunity to discuss a 50 year Strategic Plan, we may have playground in “Mohr Heritage House Park”, instead of more condos on Mohr Avenue. We may be building a supportive care centre at 511 Queen Street instead of more condos. On King Street we may have a mall that serves the community, instead of a mall that will serve more condos. FACTS would like the opportunity to facilitate public involvement to preserve our heritage resources (see our budget submission) and to clarify what kind of city we would like to become in the next 50 years, a “City in the Country” or something else.
