In brief, here are five items of public interest that were discussed during the December 2019 City Council meeting. The full agenda can be accessed here.
Landfill Infrastructure Replacement and Recovery Park Site Design Options
The scope of the Recovery Park project has changed since its original inception to integrate with landfill operations and accommodating residents to a population of 500,000. The three main scope changes are related to enhanced storm water retention pond requirements; inclusion of access to Dundonald Avenue, and increased queuing capacity. The Recovery Park site construction is required to complete the east expansion of the current landfill. Without this expansion the current cell at the landfill will fill up in the next few years, forcing the City to look at other options for landfilling items. Additionally the airspace would be lost, shortening the landfill life and changing the current airspace value.
The current budget allocates $16M for the planned construction of landfill-related facilities and $7.4M in costs associated with waste diversion, for a total of $23.4M. The four options provided in this report range from the minimum required site components, with estimated costs within the allocated project budget, to the fully envisioned master plan of Recovery Park, with estimated costs higher than the available funding.
The recommended option was: Option 3: Additional Recovery - Scaled and Non-scaled ($31.1M). This option includes the required components for landfill cell expansion indicated in Option 1, with the addition of a flexible non-scaled diversion area, eleven more roll-off bin locations, a bulk surface storage area for diverting prioritized materials, added bins for mixed recycling to allow for relocation of the Meadowgreen depot, and a paved surface to host Household Hazardous Waste Days. Yard waste drop-off would continue to occur at external sites.
This option provides the most flexibility for material recovery, through increased material storage and a non-scaled entrance, without developing additional infrastructure for programs with many unknowns (namely, the Household Hazardous Waste facility and the leaf and yard waste depot). The design is flexible to expand the facility to the full service Recovery Park at a future date when required.
Corporate Climate Adaptation Strategy
The Corporate Climate Adaptation Strategy presents an opportunity to create a better planned and more effective approach to addressing adaption of climate change for the City of Saskatoon corporation. The Corporate Climate Adaptation Strategy outlines corporate actions and initiatives in four resiliency focus areas:
- Decisions: thinking strategically about tomorrow, today;
- Staff: safe, healthy, and productive;
- Services: prepared for change and ready to serve; and
- Assets: designing and building with the future in mind.
The full report and plan can be found as agenda item 8.3.2 Corporate Climate Adaptation Strategy on pages 122 - 226.
Naming Rights, Sponsorship and Advertising
Several Canadian cities, including Saskatoon, use naming rights, sponsorships and advertising to generate revenues that help pay for facilities, programs and services. City Council had requested further information on expanding our current naming rights, sponsorship and advertising programs.
Based on the findings and the consultant’s recommendations, Administration is currently focusing on the most lucrative opportunity for sustained revenue. This includes pursuing the renewal of existing naming right agreements for Shaw Centre that begin to expire in 2022. Although these require the largest investment of time and effort, the longer-term agreements require minimal servicing to maintain once the term are in place.
Furthermore, the relevant Council Policies, Sponsorship C09-028, Transit Advertising C02-037 and Advertising in Recreation Facilities C10-010, were last updated in 2009, 2012, and 1988 respectively. Therefore, Administration will review all three of the existing policies to ensure they meet modern common practice and industry expectations. If reforms are required, the Administration will prepare the necessary report and proposed policy amendments for Committee and Council approval.
Governance Review – Business Improvement Districts
This is the first phase of the governance review for the Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), where City Council was considering the general governance model. City Council supported Administration's recommendation to proceed with developing a consolidated BID governance approach. There are currently five BIDs in Saskatoon. The BIDs support the consolidate governance approach and have provided valuable feedback for the next phase of reporting.
The full report can be found as agenda item 8.5.1 Governance Review – Business Improvement Districts – Governance Structure and Engagement Results on pages 314 - 343.
Riverbank Development Control Bylaws
This item was discussed as part of the Public Hearing Meeting of City Council. The agenda can be found here, and the item in reference can be found as agenda item 6.1.1 Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 8769 – Riverbank Development Control on pages 16 - 39 and 6.1.2 Zoning Bylaw No. 8770 Text and Map Amendment – Riverbank Development Control on pages 40 - 73.
This report outlines amendments to Bylaw No. 8769, the Official Community Plan (OCP) and Bylaw No 8770, the Zoning Bylaw to provide policy and regulations for development of specific sites adjacent to the South Saskatchewan River. The regulations will provide for an overlay zoning district that contains development standards for development within the defined area while maintaining the integrity of the riverbank.
Slope failure is a natural occurring geological activity. There are three main components that affect slope stability; geology, geometry and groundwater. The
manner of slope failure can vary significantly depending on these three components.
The degree of slope stability is measured using a Factor of Safety (FOS). FOS is the ratio of forces resisting land sliding to the forces causing land sliding. A slope is considered unstable when it has a FOS less than 1.0. The FOS that a slope is classified can vary depending on the ground conditions of the slope, land use and previous instability. A FOS of 1.5 is considered acceptable for a permanent structure constructed on or close to a slope.
Based on review of conditions on the east and west riverbanks, two areas were identified on the east riverbank that are most susceptible to slumping and slope failure where the overlay zoning district would be applied. The first area, referred to as Zone 1 in the overlay zoning district, is an area with recent slope movement affecting private property located between McPherson Avenue and Victoria Avenue. The second area, referred to as Zone 2 in the overlay zoning district, runs from the University Bridge to Victoria Avenue and 8th Street East to just past Hilliard Street. All areas identified to be included within Zone 1 and Zone 2 are located within 30 metres of the top of the natural riverbank.
Summary of Proposed Overlay Zoning District:
Major Development Requirements (includes development such as new dwelling units, attached garages, additions greater than 10m2 and site grading)
| Zone 1 | Zone 2 |
| Geotechnical report required with the development designed to a FOS of 1.5 |
Geotechnical report required with the development designed to a FOS of 1.5 |
| No geotechnical report required for site grading |
Minor Development Requirements (includes development such as detached accessory buildings, decks, additions less than 10m2 and demolitions)
| Zone 1 | Zone 2 |
| Geotechnical report required with the development designed to a FOS of 1.3 OR a letter from a geotechnical engineer |
Geotechnical report with the development designed to a FOS of 1.3 OR a letter from a geotechnical engineer |
| No geotechnical report required for detached accessory buildings, raised patios, or decks < 10 m2 |
Development Not Permitted
| Zone 1 | Zone 2 |
| In ground swimming pools | In ground swimming pools |
An additional recommendation was passed requesting that Administration report back no later than June 2020 with options to consider adding regulations for in-ground swimming pools in the slope overlay district. This will explore further options surrounding in-ground swimming pools in Zones 1 and 2, while allowing the rest of the changes to take place.