CITY COUNCIL MEETING - City of Lethbridge

CITY COUNCIL MEETING 

DATE: MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2009 

TIME: 1:30 P.M. 

PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS 

A G E N D A 

CALL TO ORDER 

1:30 p.m. 

Invocation 

Bouquets 

Announcements 

Consent Agenda 

Adoption of Agenda 

Note: Agenda and all Communications, Bylaws and Reports for Regular Council 

Meetings are available from the City Clerk’s Office prior to the meeting, as well as 

through the City of Lethbridge Website @ http://www.lethbridge.ca

ANNOUNCEMENTS: 

1. CONSENT AGENDA: 

B.A.L. 

1.1 Adoption of Minutes 

1.2 Robert McKay, Community Planner, re Your City Ideas Book 

1.3 Garth Sherwin, City Manager, re S-09-89; Request for Proposal - 

Mechanical Contractors – Protective Plumbing Program 

1.4 Garth Sherwin, City Manager, re Tender Summary Report – 

November, 2009 

1.5 Follow-up Action List 

2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: 

2

3. SUBMISSIONS WITH PRESENTATIONS: 

1:45 P.M. R.K.P. 3.1 Rudy Friesen, General Manager, Exhibition Park, re 

Family Fest 2009 

2:00 P.M. 

2:15 P.M. 

S.G.W 

. 

S.G.W 

. 

3.2 Kevin Kvame, Chair, Lethbridge Sports Bid 

Committee and Mervin Orr, Acting Chairperson for 

the Junior Canadian Championships and Vice- 

President of Little League District #1, re Letter of 

Support and Financial Assistance for a Bid to Host the 

Junior Little League Canadian Championships in 2010 

with an option of two additional years 

3.3 Doug Kaupp, General Manager, Water and 

Wastewater, re Picture Butte Water Pipeline Project 

2:30 P.M. BREAK 

2:45 P.M. K.E.T. 3.4 Neil Evans, Water and Wastewater Engineering 

Manager, re Overland Flooding Report 

3:30 P.M. T.H.W. 3.5 Brian Cornforth, Chief of Fire and Emergency 

Services, re Bylaw 5542; Authorization for the 

Establishment and Operation of a Fire and Emergency 

Services Department 

3:45 P.M. R.D. 3.6 Duane Ens, Regulatory Services Manager, Unsightly 

Property Bylaw Review 

4:00 P.M. 

J.H.C. 3.7 HEARING: Unsightly Property at 513 – 19 Street North 

4:05 P.M. BREAK 

4:20 P.M. 

R.D. 3.8 Ken Ikle, Spokesperson for Committee on 

Government Affairs, re Bylaw 5625 and email 

communications sent to City Council 

4. SUBMISSIONS WITHOUT PRESENTATION: 

3

5. OFFICIAL BUSINESS: 

M.A.S. 5.1 Communications Initiative Committee Communications Plan 

M.A.S. 5.2 Communications Initiative Committee Terms of Reference 

Revisions 

R.D. 5.3 Financial Reporting 

6. BYLAWS: 

6.1 FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING: 

T.H.W. 6.1.1 BYLAW 5542 – Authorization for the Establishment 

and Operation of a Fire and Emergency Services 

Department 

T.H.W. 6.1.2 BYLAW 5610 – Amendment to Bylaw 5544, the Waste 

Services Bylaw 

B.A.L. 6.1.3 BYLAW 5619 – Proposed Road Closure Plan 

0914112, Extra Road Area “A” (Mayor Magrath Drive 

and 3 rd Avenue North) 

B.A.L. 6.1.4 BYLAW 5622 – Designation of the Vendome Hotel at 

110 – 8 Street South as a Municipal Historic Resource 

J.H.C. 6.1.5 BYLAW 5624 – Building Permit Bylaw 

INCAMERA REPORTS: 

� Advice from Officials (FOIP Section 24) 

� Committee Appointments (FOIP Section 23) 

4

City Circles 

IDEAS 

BOOK 

2009

AECOM City of Lethbridge Ideas Book 

0112-318-00 

Executive Summary 

First and foremost we wish to extend a warm thank you on behalf of the Plan 

Your City Development Team to everyone who has made the City Circle 

process such a resounding success. When this phase of the Plan Your City 

Municipal Development Plan / Integrated Community Sustainability Plan 

(MDP/ICSP) was in development the Team had a clear vision of what we 

wanted City Circles to be – a direct dialogue with the residents of Lethbridge. 

The principle was simple, we had to try to convince people throughout the City 

to talk about how to make Lethbridge a better place AND write it down. 

The City Circles process began on May 1, 2009, with the first print run of 200 

pamphlets, and culminated with the Ideas Fair held on October 17, 2009. Over 

the course of five and a half months an estimated five hundred* residents from 

Lethbridge and the surrounding region participated in a City Circle, providing 

their insight into this City and what it would take to make Lethbridge an even 

better place to live into the year 2050. 

This Ideas Book is a collection of that insight. In all there were 48 City Circles 

who made a total of 55 submissions. These submissions have been analysed 

by Urban Planners at both AECOM and the City of Lethbridge and have been 

used to identify and refine Policies and Actions contained within the Potential 

Policy Directions Document, a precursor to the first Draft of the Plan Your City 

MDP/ICSP. 

As the Plan Your City process moves forward, the visions and hopes contained 

in this Ideas Book will become THE point of reference for community direction 

as the Plan evolves into the guiding document for all of Council’s decision 

making for the next 40 years. 

Thank you for all of your hard work and effort. 

Sincerely, 

Robert McKay, MCIP, ACP 

Senior Community Planner, City of Lethbridge 

Plan Your City Project Manager 

Brian Conger, BA 

Planner, Community Infrastructure, AECOM 

City Circles Coordinator 

* Approximately 10 participants per City Circle 

AECOM 

514 Stafford Drive North 403 329 4822 tel 

Lethbridge, AB, Canada T1H 2B2 403 329 1678 fax 

www.aecom.com


Table of Contents 

Executive Summary 

CCID 

London Road Neighbourhood Kicks A**!! Facebook Group City Circle.............................................. 1 

City Circle on Diversity: Celebrating Diversity Group .......................................................................... 2 

Youth Advisory Council City Circle........................................................................................................ 3 

Hey Lethbridge Plan Your City Facebook Group .................................................................................. 4 

Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Lethbridge ................................................................................... 5 

GEOG 2535............................................................................................................................................... 6 

Hamilton Neighbourhood........................................................................................................................ 7 

Seniors Community Forum..................................................................................................................... 8 

SADAT City Circle ................................................................................................................................... 9 

Lethbridge Public Library City Circle................................................................................................ ... 10 

Heart of Our City Revitalization Committee Parts 1 & 2 ...................................................................... 11 

Developing Lethbridge Using Ecological Principles: An Ecosystems Approach............................. 12 

Lethbridge Living Circle........................................................................................................................ 13 

Bikebridge Cycle City Circle................................................................................................................. 14 

Affordable Housing Committee ............................................................................................................ 15 

Sports Council Circle ............................................................................................................................ 16 

AECOM City Circle ................................................................................................................................ 17 

Community Inclusion City Circle.......................................................................................................... 18 

Enhanced Seniors Transit Service....................................................................................................... 19 

City Circle for Business ........................................................................................................................ 20 

Allied Arts Council Board City Circle Parts 1 & 2 ................................................................................ 21 

Allied Arts Council Staff City Circle ..................................................................................................... 22 

UDI City Circle ....................................................................................................................................... 23 

Natural Horsemanship and the Coulees in Lethbridge....................................................................... 24 

Working and Playing in Beautiful Neighbourhoods, Building Meaningful Relationships................ 25 

Kirby’s Coffee Chat Parts 1 & 2............................................................................................................. 26 

Moving Up Lethbridge........................................................................................................................... 27 

Lethbridge Communities in Bloom ...................................................................................................... 28 

6 Avenue A Neighbourhood Society City Circle.................................................................................. 29 

Vox Musica Choral Society................................................................................................................... 30 

Family Village Parts 1 & 2 ...................................................................................................................... 31 

Canadian Home Builder’s Association – Lethbridge Region Parts 1 & 2........................................... 32 

SAGE City Circle Parts 1 & 2 ................................................................................................................. 33 

Kids at Play City Circle Ideas Fair Survey Feedback ............................................................................ 34 

CAL City Circle ...................................................................................................................................... 35 

AAC Membership City Circle ................................................................................................................ 36 

0112-318-00


Siever Family City Circle....................................................................................................................... 37 

5 th on 5 th 

0112-318-00 

Youth Services ....................................................................................................................... 38 

Language Supports for Newcomers in Lethbridge ............................................................................. 39 

Growing Food Security in Lethbridge & Area...................................................................................... 40 

Galt Museum & Archives Board City Circle......................................................................................... 41 

Lethbridge Healthy Communities......................................................................................................... 42 

CMARD City Circle: Building a Welcoming and Inclusive Community.............................................. 43 

Lethbridge Astronomy Society............................................................................................................. 44 

Two Ideas Circle .................................................................................................................................... 45 

(See Attached Disc) Video CCID 

Curbside Recycling in Lethbridge.......................................................................................................... 1 

Community Gardens in Lethbridge........................................................................................................ 2 

Planning Our City .................................................................................................................................... 3 

Appendices 

Appendix A. City Circles Newsletters 

Appendix B. City Circles Pamphlet & Ideas Fair Poster


London Road Neighbourhood Kicks 

A**!! Facebook Group City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 1

London Road Neighbourhood Kicks A**!! Facebook Group 

City Circle 

We Want Lethbridge To Be… 

Sustainable, Healthy and Earth Friendly 

Built up, not out; arrested urban sprawl 

• Farm (food) land preserved, not turned into urban sprawl 

• Limited need for inefficient infrastructure to support sprawl 

• Medium- and high-density housing developers rewarded 

• Stylish, affordable and appealing medium- and high-density 

housing 

Medium density housing can be attractive. 

Predominance of development that supports healthy living 

• Designed to promote non-motorized transportation 

• Ready access to food in all neighbourhoods 

• http://www.centre4activeliving.ca/news/events/2009/creating-healthierenvironments.pdf 

Mixed use developments (mixed residential and commercial) 

• Increased opportunities to improve individual 

health due to walkability and nearby resources 

for health and wellbeing 

• Walkable and self-contained communities 

centred around resources 

• People can walk to the services and resources 

they require instead of driving 

• Revitalized downtown 

• Mixed use neighbourhoods 

London Road Neighbourhood Kicks A**!! Facebook Group—Page 1



Best practice leader in recycling 

• Curbside recycling 

• Plentiful recycling depots 

• Recycling tubs larger than garbage tubs 

• Mandatory recycling for residents and 

businesses 

• Refundable bottles collected by an organized 

group of bottle collectors 

(http://www.unitedwecan.ca/) 

• http://www.ilsr.org/pubs/cuttingwaste.pdf 

• http://www.rcbc.bc.ca/files/u3/PPI_Zero_Waste_and_Local_Govt.pdf 

• http://www.zerowaste.ca/resources.html 

• http://www.zerowaste.co.nz/index.sm 

“The only reason I don’t ride 

my bike in Lethbridge is 

because when I arrive at my 

destination, there is nowhere 

to park it.”—London Road 

resident 

Alternative transportation preferred because it’s easier, 

better, healthier and cheaper 

• Efficient, viable, rapid, attractive, 

and inexpensive public 

transportation 

• Wide sidewalks for pedestrians 

• A walkable city, a bicycle-friendly 

city 

• Extensive cycle routes and 

bicycle lanes 

• Bicycle racks that are solid, 

secure, and ubiquitous 

• Traffic lanes designated for 

bicycles 

• High level pedestrian/cyclist 

bridge from the South side 

to the University 

London Road Neighbourhood Kicks A**!! Facebook Group—Page 2 

“We need to change the way we see the 

automobile. We need to consider that oil is 

a finite resource. What are we doing to 

change the way we live so that our lifestyle 

is sustainable into the future?”—London 

road Resident



Preserved river valley, 

coulees, wild spaces and 

green spaces 

• Non-renewable resources are 

valued as such 

• Coulees are protected as a 

source of beauty and part of a 

vital ecosystem 

• Dog runs with river access are 

preserved 

Parking is not a problem because… 

• Parkades and underground parking is readily 

available, especially downtown and adjacent to 

London Road 

• 2-hour parking limits to residential areas (such 

as London Road) are enforced 

• Permit parking in London Road neighbourhood 

for neighbourhood residents 

• Alternative transportation is attractive and viable 

(walking, cycling, transit) 

Food security 

• Community gardens throughout the city, especially for renters 

• Year-round farmer’s market that is centrally located 

• Downtown grocery store for downtown and London Road residents 

• Backyard husbandry is encouraged and regulated on a small scale. 

Local food feeds the community, saves the planet, and brings people together. 




Ban on outdoor burning 

• Health of all residents (especially children, elderly, and individuals 

with respiratory issues) is protected 

• The environment and air quality is protected 

• Other ways to enjoy being outside are encouraged and promoted 

• http://burningissues.org/car-www/index.html 

• http://www.lung.ca/protect-protegez/pollution-pollution/outdoorexterior/heating-chauffage_e.php 

Community– and Culture–Oriented 

“Lethbridge could be a leader and show 

Calgary and Alberta as a whole a thing or 

two.”—London Road resident and member 

of the vibrant arts community 

Central neighbourhood streets and key 

intersections are safe 

• Flashing pedestrian lights, especially at high 

collision/high traffic intersections 

• Speed deceleration zones enforced, especially in 

London Road 

neighbourhoods which 

typically have high 

pedestrian traffic 

Community celebrations 

• Community celebrations, such as Heritage 

Days, are held centrally (such as in Galt 

Gardens) 

• Participation rewarded with a passport and 

eligibility for prizes 

• Alternative transportation supported to 

events 

“We need to market a new vision of medium- and highdensity 

housing and mixed use development. Other cities 

have done this with great success (such as Yaletown in 

Vancouver). Why not create an Upper East Side Village 

in the Salvation Army area?”—London Road resident 

“We need to stop looking to Calgary for our ideas. We 

need to look beyond Calgary to much more progressive 

cities.”—London Road resident 




Community spirit promoted by the City 

• Formal City support of neighbourhood associations 

• Neighbourhood celebrations supported through 

equipment loans and waived/reduced insurance 

fees for block parties and public gatherings in parks 

• Administrative 

support such as web 

domain hosting, 

provision of 

association mailbox at City Hall, and provision of 

meeting space 

• Enabled procurement of meeting space (such as a 

club house) for Association and neighbourhood club 

meetings 

• http://www.anhgv.org 

A neighbourhood association 

meeting house. 

Artists beautify Lethbridge’s common spaces 

• Poetry in the park, buskers, drum circles 

• Partnerships and collaboration with arts groups 

• Arts Centre that is centrally located 

“The Civic Field is a real 

treasure in the heart of our city 

that I really think deserves to be 

preserved.” 

—London Road resident 

Parks are viable, beautiful and interesting 

• Parks are not developed into parking lots 

• Civic Field 

• Restored and heavily used (lights, unlocked, 

accessible, washrooms during organized events, 

game posts/uprights) 

• Represents the heart of a vital city 

• Relay for Life 

The Civic Field park can once again be full of life. 




Heritage buildings are preserved and 

maintained, not demolished 

• Rewarding restoration 

• Development in historical neighbourhoods (such as London 

Road) is aligned with local architecture 

• Our heritage is valued and helps define us 

• Thoughtful, considerate development and transparent 

processes 

“London Road residents want to steer change, not stop it.” 

—London Road resident 

Socially and Economically Strong 

• Home business supported through low fees 

• Affordable housing abundant 

• Revenue/rental stock not lost to market housing 

• Social housing units increased and dispersed 

throughout Lethbridge in single family home 

model (avoid congregating people with similar 

issues into large complexes) 

• Mixed socioeconomic neighbourhoods 

abound--designed for diversity 

• Big box stores either are 

multiple stories with 

residences above and 

subsidize/support downtown 

or are not permitted at all in 

Lethbridge 

• Small and local businesses are supported by 

residents and the City 

In Lethbridge, we are 

building the future 

together! 

London Road Neighbourhood Kicks A**!! Facebook Group—Page 6 

Social housing should be mixed in with market/ 

regular housing, dispersed throughout the city. 

Home businesses contribute to the economic 

strength of Lethbridge. Music teachers raise the 

next generation of aspiring artists.


City Circle on Diversity: Celebrating 

Diversity Group 

0112-318-00 CCID 2

City Circle on Diversity 

A series of interviews were conducted among different city groups. The 

summaries of the results by question are: 

1. Do you think Lethbridge is a Multicultural city? 

Lethbridge is not as multicultural as bigger cities such as Vancouver and 

Toronto; however, in recent years residents have noticed more people with 

diverse backgrounds living in our city. 

2. Are there any benefits to having different cultures represented in 

our city? Why? 

According to those working directly with immigrants, the benefits of being a 

multicultural city are many, such as: 

- Immigrants are hard working individuals that come to Canada 

looking for better opportunities for them and their families. 

- Many immigrants are highly educated individuals that bring 

experience and professionalism to the workplace. 

- Having people from different backgrounds represented in our city 

brings awareness of global issues, as well as understanding of 

other cultures; this, in turn, enriches the life of all citizens. 

For the community in general, there is not much awareness of the benefits of 

having different cultures in our city aside from the fact that it brings “perks” like 

having ethnic food available. A few residents expressed that multiculturalism 

decreases narrow-mindness and makes society more understanding and tolerant. 

3. What do you thinks needs to be done to make Lethbridge a more 

attractive destination for new immigrants to Canada? 

For those individuals working with immigrants, the needs identified are: 

- Have a more diverse-sensitive police force and other law 

enforcement organizations. 

- Have minorities represented in Government offices / council. 

- More diverse counselors and more culturally aware. There seems to 

be resistance to hiring immigrants for these positions. 

- Interpretation services available at the Hospital and other 

government institutions. Hotline available 24/7 if no one is available 

in person. 911 available in different languages. 

- More efficient public transport, busses available every 15 minutes 

and more routes. 

- City services brochures available in different languages (city maps, 

bus routes, city services / emergency phones, family violence, etc.). 

- Increased number of rental / low income housing.

- Information for new immigrants on the City of Lethbridge website. 

Link to immigrant services’ agencies. 

- Have the City of Lethbridge promote and/or host events that 

celebrate diversity, such as World Refugee Day, Multicultural Day, 

Heritage Day (bigger, more representation, no cost), etc. City 

should take the lead. 

- Make schools and public institutions more culturally-sensitive (more 

ESL funding, train doctors to treat visible minorities). 

- Make English as a Second Language available to working 

immigrants (evening / weekend classes). 

- Emergency services need to be adequate to meet immigrant 

demand (Harbour house, shelter, etc.). Larger facilities, culturally 

sensitive staff, interpreter services, etc. Consider promoting the 

creation of a shelter for men. 

The community in general mentioned the following: 

- Public transportation is a major problem across the board. Short 

running schedules don’t allow for night –shifts, busses don’t run 

often enough (specially rough in the winter time), shelters in poor 

condition. 

- Downtown area needs to be cleaned up; many buildings are 

unoccupied and represent an “eye sore”. 

- Build a multi-faceted leisure centre and provide more attractions for 

families. 

- Lethbridge is very “clicky”, there needs to be more involvement 

from the community in ethnic events. 

- Ethnic groups need to reach out to the community. 

- More ethnic restaurants, since people experience culture through 

food. 

- Get rid of prejudice / racism. Make Lethbridge a more “welcoming” 

place. 

- More employment opportunities. 

- Better certification process for new immigrants. (“Not because they 

come with a degree from their home country means they should be 

allowed to get work without being certified”). 

4. Define in one sentence what you think Lethbridge lacks to be 

considered a final destination for potential immigrants? 

- Good jobs 

- Higher wages 

- More attractive activities for young families. City too focused on 

retirees. 

- More services for young adults.

- Scholarships / grants to promote children’s well-being (sports). 

- More day care spots 

- Fun events throughout the year, especially during wintertime. 

SUMMARY 

A clear need to conduct ongoing research (focus groups, round tables) with 

visible minorities to discover their needs was identified. There seems to be a 

disconnection between the needs of new immigrants and what the community in 

general perceives those to be. 

There should be a closer relationship between the City of Lethbridge and 

organizations that serve immigrants so that once needs are identified they can 

be communicated to City Council and addressed appropriately. 

Lethbridge should have public institutions that truly represent the diversity of the 

community. More opportunities have to be given to new citizens to work in public 

service. 

The City of Lethbridge should promote and create opportunities to increase 

cultural awareness among public servers and the community in general. These 

can take the form of events, public forums and workshops that encourage 

cultural competency. 

If Lethbridge wants to become a more attractive destination for newcomers, 

more (and more efficient) services have to be developed, such as: 

- Leisure centre and other attractions for families 

- Better public transit 

- More rental / low income housing 

- Incentives for high profile organizations and corporations to 

relocate / establish in Lethbridge. 

- Promote events that bring the community together 

In summary, this City Circle identified a clear need for awareness from 

the community towards the benefits of embracing diversity as a means 

of making Lethbridge a better place to live.


Youth Advisory Council City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 3

Youth Advisory Council City Circle 

The Future, Envisioning Our Future Community

Sections for Improvement 

� The Youth involved in YAC have 

highlighted 5 Important sections 

that affect the entire city: 

1. Arts & Culture 

2. Environment 

3. Community 

4. Transportation 

5. Sports

1 Arts & Culture 

- More spaces for performances and creation of 

the arts 

- Vibrant and colourfully designed downtown 

spaces; murals, architecture, etc. 

- More parades, cultural festivals, music festivals, 

and similar cultural events 

- Improved centres for the arts and remodelled 

cultural centres belonging to specific nationalities 

- Greater connection on city’s website to relevant 

news events; i.e. CBC etc.

2 Environment 

- YIMBY or Yes in My Backyard; adoption of this policy 

promotes an effective use of land and resources and 

differs much from our current use of space 

- Green power sources for the whole city; geothermal, 

solar, wind, water and etc. 

- Curb side recycling to be mandatory along with 

composting, low water use plumbing/technology and 

an outlaw of landfills 

- Natural environment styled green spaces within and 

around the city, large trees and rooftop gardens 

- A focus on green cemeteries and more practical 

methods of burials 

- Community gardens

3 Community 

- More public activities that can involve all of the 

city or even just block parties in neighbourhood’s 

- Various forms of public relaxation including 

gardens, centres and town squares 

- Be a community more welcoming to our rotating 

student population from the university and college 

- Provide more industry, business, amenities and 

greater density building plan, to encourage growth 

and how many students remain after education 

- Better system of social safety nets; hospitals, a 

medical detox, ending homelessness, affordable 

housing 

- A youth centre; safe hangout for youth.

4 Transportation 

-The beginnings of either an aboveground or 

belowground train system which would grow as the 

city does 

- Elimination of aboveground parking lots; replaced by 

underground parking basements or multiple story 

parking garages 

- For the existing transit system a more inclusive 

route running at more times and using smaller 

busses during non-peak times will cut down on 

environmental damage 

- Both the train system and existing transit system 

would want to be moved to entirely energy efficient 

power sources

5 Sports 

- There needs to be leisure centre(s) on the west 

side of town. It is one of the fastest growing areas 

and has only school playgrounds/fields for sports 

and recreation. 

- All of the city’s ice rinks should have more 

scheduled time for public skating. The same is true 

of swimming pools and public swims. 

- Existing and new sport centres should be available 

to be rented by anyone for little to no fee 

- A facility able to accommodate numerous activities 

going on at the same time and for just as many 

uses


Hey Lethbridge Plan Your City 

Facebook Group 

0112-318-00 CCID 4

Hey Lethbridge Plan Your City- Facebook Group. 

This city circle started with a very broad view and many topics that came up on the facebook group 

discussion boards. As the group progressed it did not take the focus we had hoped, nor did the online 

forum generate the level of discussion we had hoped for. This is not to say that our city circle did not 

end up generating some good discussion. By holding in person meetings we drew out the already 

informed individuals to spend some time talking and thinking about these questions. This document is 

an outline of what was discussed at these meetings. 

Downtown 

There is a need for more development in the down town, but down town shouldn’t just mean the old 

downtown. 

-The problem with down towns in cities is that over time they lack development because the buildings 

get old and up keep is expensive. With current land use policies it is usually cheaper for a business/ 

developer to move to a new area, and build an entirely new building, instead of revamping old ones. In 

order to get more development *policies should encourage both businesses and residential developers 

to “rebuild” old areas. Perhaps the land could be very inexpensive to make up for the increased building 

cost of working on old foundations. *Taxing structures that would allow the cost of the development to 

be paid back with dollars the city would normally collect on the new space. This would constitute a loss 

in tax revenue for the short term, but once the project debt was paid off, formerly useless space would 

begin generating revenue. * In our opinion downtowns create a hub for the city in which business and 

residential can practically be constructed on top of each other. Traditionally families do not live in 

downtown spaces but a viable down town might help hold onto young professionals (graduates of post 

secondary). At the same time a (for lack of a better concept) “trendy” down town, with plenty of 

businesses, would be a good space within the city for students and a close bus trip to either institution. 

Encouraging this kind of residential development might also move students out of the older surrounding 

suburbs, allowing those spaces to be populated by lower income families. 

- More than one downtown area might also be worth developing. Creative zoning policy (excuse the lack 

of knowledge to define exactly what that would mean) would allow residences built in, on, and 

around businesses here on the west side. A re-visioning of the area from University Dr to MacMaster, 

between Whoop-up and McGill , could create a second downtown. Apartment buildings and condo 

housing already fill much of this area, and an increase in density through a projection upward would be 

a reasonable step. The proximity to the university would provide obvious student housing, again 

drawing them out from the other areas of the west side where more suburban housing should be 

available to families. Theoretically this would also create an area for younger working people as well, 

and encourage graduates to stay in Lethbridge. An ideal outcome of this development would place 

Nicolas Sherian Park as an interactive zone between single and family (younger and older) citizens, while 

also creating a kind of buffer. * We have outlined this area with the understanding that on first read it 

may seem short sighted or misrepresentative of how different groups are dispersed throughout the city. 

However, we present the idea as an example of how development should be focused. The idea is that as 

cities become denser differences in lifestyle between demographics can cause conflict, causing people 

to seek “moving out of the city”. For this reason it might help to develop more demographic specific 

areas, that center around points of interaction such as parks. Development along this line should also 

create more walking traffic because people are closer to the services they need.

Suburbanization 

In the opinion of this city circle the bottom line on suburbanization is that it is not sustainable. Cities like 

Lethbridge could expand outward for a very long time but at what cost. The development of new 

infrastructure outward often seems more efficient at the time but is simply unrealistic in the long term. 

The cost of materials to move up vs. out is debatable, what is not debatable is the effect of 

transportation on people. The overall social cost of single passenger cars is extensive and crushing for 

lower earning brackets, effectively removing their access to involvement in the city (it also pushes 

affluent people further out as they seek the latest quiet neighborhood, this happens partly because, and 

in part causes the pushing of lower income people inward, which devalues inner city areas and 

eventually creates ghettos. In this case you want to encourage gentrification and vibrate density so no 

part of the city is avoided or seen to “house the poor”). Much of the inner city development this group 

has discussed would require incentive to produce. Incentive would be necessary from both ends; which 

means not only encouraging inner development but also discouraging outward development. *Tax 

policy that encourages people to seek housing that is not in new outlying developments seems harsh to 

the consumer (home buyer) but evaporating demand (for new suburbs) is a sure fire disincentive to 

developers. *Though we admittedly lack information on it there are also shifts in some cites to demand 

that developers planning new subdivisions move to more space friendly designs. This can be regulated 

by demanding a move away from the very sprawling design of current developments. Moving away from 

entirely private back yards and overly cul-de-sac dependent areas in favor of small grids with green belts 

containing small back alleys is one suggestion (the old area of the west side around McGill blvd is a good 

example, the change would be no back yards, only the green belt areas with bike paths). 

Campus housing 

As a final note to this city circle we have discussed the need for more students housing on the 

campuses. These projects will likely need help from the city but are more likely to be undertaken by the 

Institutions if municipal property taxes are waived for residence spaces. Housing on campus is a benefit 

to the availability of affordable housing throughout the city, as well as retention issues at the institutions 

themselves. One thing we would like to add about student housing is a mandate on the type of student 

housing. For example, the “New Village” project at the U of L provides a standard of living for residence 

that, although desirable by today’s suburban standards, is a move in the wrong direction. This area of 

residence does not represent an effective use of space or an efficient use of building materials. The 

smaller conjoined town home units are preferable as are condo style apartments that go up more than 

out. 

Un-housing related 

This group would also like to suggest some kind of startup grant incentive to small grocery stores that 

can bring produce and essentials into inner city areas. Encouraging smaller venue stores that house 

essentials is a must for many areas within the city. The availability of produce and quality groceries 

within walking distance of most areas within the city and will be instrumental is creating a healthy city 

by increasing the quality of life (and health) for those you don’t drive and/or living in the heart(s) of the 

city.


Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of 


0112-318-00 CCID 5

Unitarian Universalist 

Fellowship of Lethbridge 

CITY CIRCLE 

PLAN YOUR CITY DISCUSSION NOTES 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2009

Introduction 

The following principles from the Canadian Unitarian 

Council guided our discussion. 

� The inherent worth and dignity of every person 

� Justice, equity and compassion in human relations 

� The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process. 

� Respect for the interdependent web of all existence….

Areas of Focus 

� Environmental Issues and Sustainability 

� Social Issues 

� Transportation 

� Community Engagement

Environment 

� Adhere to “Cautionary Principle”: 

- above all do no harm 

Review current herbicide and pesticide use policies. 

Many cities have gone pesticide free with no ill 

effects 

� Encourage low maintenance landscaping 

� Potable water should not be used for watering lawns 

� Promote clean energy use through solar and wind

Transportation 

� Make walking and cycling easier. Clean sidewalks in 

winter. 

� Promote city transit use by making it more accessible and 

affordable. 

� Use the village model when planning neighbourhoods – 

walkable access to services – i.e. neighbourhood grocery 

stores 

� When planning future growth, consider energy 

consumption – “peak oil”. 

� Plan future developments before planning a new bridge. 

We don’t want a bridge to nowhere. 

� Actively promote walking and bicycling.

Social Needs / Community Engagement 

� Continue to develop affordable housing 

� Do not create ghettos for the rich – mixed 

neighbourhoods promote social inclusion 

� Celebrate diversity 

� Strong neighbourhoods create a sense of security, safety 

and inclusiveness 

� Promoting acceptance and tolerance of all citizens 

regardless of race, religion, disabilities, sexual 

orientation should be a high priority 

� Strengthen community associations 

� Provide opportunities for citizens to engage in open 

discussion regarding community issues.


GEOG 2535 

0112-318-00 CCID 6

City Circle: GEOG 2535 

Interest/Issue: Mass Transit & Transportation 

Current Reality Solutions 

Trip Time 

Coverage 

Easier Access 

Big Empty Buses 

Walkability 

Lethbridge is a good size 

for innovative 

transportation options 

Sensors on traffic lights 

Increase speed limits 

More Direct Bus Routes 

Dial-a-Bus 

Flex Routes 

Rent a Bus: Old People Wagons or Party Buses 

Late night routes 

Smaller Buses 

More Frequent Routes to increase ridership 

Increase Density/ Mixed-use Developments 

Stop approving supercentres on the edge of the City 

Make a level bridge across the coulees 

Remove road controls and signage, (make drivers think for themselves) 

Hydrogen Gas Stations 

Tram/Trolley system


Interest/Issue: West Side Commerce 


Only One Grocery Store 

New Westside residential 

development is far from 

existing commercial 

Entice/Attract Commercial 

Enterprises 

Business can’t survive 

only 8 months of the year 

Smaller Retail 

Opportunities 

Create incentives to bring back a store in the Super Sam location 

Develop a commercial node on the Westside (The Crossings) 

Weekly summer market 

City initiated entrepreneurial fund 

Temporary Servicing 

Incentives/discounts to keep stores profitable during student lull 

Promote smaller business 

Allow food wagons (mobile food) to locate 

Overhaul existing regulations and bylaws to encourage common markets (free them up!)


Interest/Issue: U of L Campus’ Isolation 


4 lane super-collector on 

western edge of campus 

University lacks senior’s 

courses 

Feeling of Isolation “Two- 

Worlds” 

Hard for visitors to find 

their way around 

Bring people in and get 

students out into the 

community 

Pedestrian subway or bridge 

Senior gym memberships or coulees walks would promote integration 

between students and seniors 

Tie into family events @ the Sportsplex 

Students meet the community events 

More signage on campus would help visitors and first years 

Affordable High Quality food to bring in visitors 

Satellite/Downtown campus to get more students in the core 

Better transit connections to Eastside of Lethbridge


Interest/Issue: Reducing our Ecological Footprint 


No door-to-door Recycling 

Reducing our footprint can 

be expensive 

Water Restrictions (we use 

too much) 

We need to live simpler 

lives 

Door-to-door recycling will increase accessibility 

Educate people to the benefits of the program 

Promote 

Municipal green incentive programs 

Free up bylaws to allow for Grey Water Recycling (it’s not a health hazard) 

Swap out for low-flow toilets and fixtures (incentive program) 

“stuff” gets accumulated (we’re all packrats); promote simpler living 

buy local and reduced packaging


Hamilton Neighbourhood 

0112-318-00 CCID 7

Play Your City: City Circle 

Hamilton Neighbourhood 

Hamilton neighbourhood as defined in this City Circle is comprised of a group of 80 to 

100 year old homes (delimited by 13 th and 15 th Streets and 3 rd and 6 th 

Avenues). 

This neighbourhood shares many of same the concerns and pressures as London Road, 

including the redevelopment of existing institutional buildings for other uses; the 

conversion of homes to accommodate businesses with customers; and the removal of old 

trees. 

There are two documents developed by the City of Lethbridge that support our results. 

The Heart of Our City Master Plan supports the preservation of central neighbourhoods 

as a population base to make the downtown core more vibrant. And the Central 

Neighbourhoods Survey provided the following results: 

Development 

- 57% of residents are concerned about homes being converted to businesses, over 90% 

greater than the average of central neighbourhoods. 

- 70% of Hamilton residents give the preservation of historical homes a priority, 50% 

more than the average of other central neighbourhoods.. 

- 42% are concerned about the loss of historical buildings and homes, 27% more than 

average. 

- 40% of residents are concerned about redeveloping schools and churches for 

commercial use, almost 50% more than average. 

- Some of the comments regarding development specifically note the “unplanned 

nature of redevelopment” and that “these neighbourhoods cannot be recreated”. 

Aesthetics 

- 70% of Hamilton residents give architectural style a priority, 50% more than average. 

- 87% of Hamilton residents value tree-lined boulevards, 18% more than average. 

- 62% of Hamilton residents are concerned about boulevard tree removal, 20% greater 

than average, and 47% are concerned about removal of mature trees from private 

property, 25% more than average. 

Traffic 

- 71% have noted an increase in vehicle traffic on local streets, 18% more than average. 

Speed, cutting-through, and running stop signs all exceed central neighbourhood 

averages. 

Quality of Life 

- 96% of the residents are very satisfied or satisfied by the quality of life afforded by 

the neighbourhood, neighbourhood and community relations is a common reason 

making the neighbourhood better.

Issues that are more specific to our neighbourhood include the protection of mature trees, 

the preservation of historical and architectural character, and the promotion of 

community. Most notably, the Hamilton neighbourhood has significant concerns about 

the conversion of institutional buildings and homes to commercial businesses. As this 

irreversible process has already commenced, there is some urgency for the creation of a 

long-term plan for this neighbourhood. The neighbourhood wants development by 

design, not by default. 

John Lorinc, in his book The New City, notes the importance of ‘historic character’ as an 

aspect of civic advantage in the global competition for recognition, and that “muscular 

heritage protection laws play a crucial role in reminding us that cities are aesthetic objects 

and that their appearance is an integral part of our quality of life.” Overwhelmingly, 

residents value the quality of life cultivated within by the Hamilton neighbourhood 

community – it should be our goal to perpetuate this sentiment. 

The following City Circle represents an informal survey independent of the Central 

Neighbourhoods Survey. The comments reflect the results summarized above, and 

provide a clear understanding of the values placed on preserving a vibrant neighbourhood 

community. In the long-term Municipal Development Plan, the Hamilton neighbourhood 

advocates for policies that recognize the specific needs of different areas of the City, and 

the importance of taking more (pro-active) control of redevelopment.

SURVEY RESULTS 

80 Surveys distributed, 23 returned

General Information 

Age of home: 

Based on the information provided by the respondents, the age of homes in this 

neighbourhood ranges from 1905 to 1944. 

Length of time living in the home: 

Respondents have lived in their homes between 1 and 44 years. On average, people have 

lived in their homes for 19 years. 

Neighbourhood demographics: 

Within the neighbourhood, roughly 20% are children, 20% are seniors, and 60% are aged 

17 to 65. 

100 

90 

80 

] 70 

[% 60 

e 

g 50 

ta 

n 40 

30 

e 

r 

c 

e 

P 

20 

10 

0 

Demographics 

Children (65)

7. What do you most value about your home? 

- Mouldings, doors, windows, location. 

- The character of the home. Although we have done some upgrading, we try to 

keep it still in the character it has. 

- The fact that all the rooms are on the ground floor. The spaciousness; the wood 

panelling and the ‘lincrustia’ on the hall walls. The ‘sun-room’. 

- Style, location 

- Close proximity to downtown, close to schools, close to shopping, theatres. 

Mature trees. 

- Location within the city, yard size, mature neighbourhood. 

- Historic character, unique features, treed yard, sense of connection to the past, and 

supporting to preserve for future. 

- Character, proximity to city center. 

- Great location. 

- Our home is in a great family-oriented, quiet neighbourhood. All of the homes are 

old, but well maintained. I love our original floors and mouldings and our huge 

yard. 

- Large lot, large house, porch, old original features (it’s everything I dreamed of 

when I was a child). 

- Its uniqueness. The library with its wood panelling and most floors are original 

wood. The spaces. 

- Our house is unique with its old world architecture and Victorian interior. We also 

enjoy the large yard and privacy of being next to an alley. 

- Three-bedroom house on a double lot. Elm trees provide park like exterior. 

Interior remains as architect designed. 

- Location, mature landscaping, boulevard with mature trees, lane, neighbourhood 

character. 

- ‘Character’ features – sun porch, hardwood floors, private yard, etc. 

- The character of an older home, the mature trees, closeness of downtown and all 

amenities, paved back alley. 

- Older style family bungalow – fits the neighbourhood – comfortable – well built – 

lawn, flower beds, fruit trees. 

- Architecture (doors, windows, mouldings), size and character of rooms, well 

preserved by previous owners, large yard, mature trees and flower gardens. 

- Old house feels like a member of the family, not just wood and nails. Shady 

backyard sanctuary. Historical feeling inside and out. 

- Its unique pseudo-Tudor architecture; its interior design, layout, and construction, 

and our 34 years of raising children here in this home – a home that they continue 

to love and desire to come ‘home’ to as often as possible. We also value the 

generous size of our lot (50 x 125’) and the manner in which we have been albe to 

landscape it to our liking. 

- My home was built by Dr. & Mrs. Fowler. It is an ArtDeco home – a wonderful 

family home. The space for so many people to stay with me: Family and friends 

from all over the country. The beautiful elms and my lovely back garden and 

wonderful neighbours.

8. What do you most value about the neighbourhood? 

- Lot size, trees, variety of home styles. 

- The character which includes the landscaping and trees. 

- The tree-lined boulevards and its quite atmosphere. 

- Close to downtown, bus route near, schools, corner store, road clearance (winter), 

neighbourhood keeps homes in good condition. 

- A lot of our neighbours have lived here for a long time (including us) so everyone 

knows each other pretty well. 

- Healthy mature trees, low traffic. 

- Sense of community, proximity to amenities (walking distance), green spaces 

(school yards), mature trees, quiet streets (evenings, weekends and holidays), 

terrific neighbours. 

- Quiet neighbourhood, older homes. 

- Close enough to walk to all amenities. 

- Friendly, mixed make-up including bigger and smaller homes, people from 

different backgrounds, not too busy, nor too quiet. 

- Its diverseness in architecture that seems to meld together so well. The 

neighbours. The trees and the width of the streets. 

- We enjoy the family atmosphere and that each house has its own style which is 

maintained. We cannot stand modern suburbia. 

- Quiet, residential. Friendly neighbours. Varying character of the houses in the 

neighbourhood. 

- Closeness to downtown, grid system, part of ‘core’ neighbourhoods of original 

Lethbridge. Schools, churches, shopping nearby – hospitals and clinics adjacent. 

- Trees, old homes being renewed. 

- The friendliness, the character and diversity of homes and people who live here. 

- Conveniently central, walking distance to amenities. Very close to school. 

- Friendly and close community of neighbours. Wide streets and boulevards with 

mature trees. Quiet. Close to downtown amenities. 

- Quiet residential area. Green and leafy. Boulevards that give character to the 

streets. No commercial feeling. For the most part, well-kept houses and yards. 

- We feel a great deal of interest and respect for each other, and there is a real sense 

of pride in the neighbourhood. 

- Almost everyone does his/her best to maintain their homes to the best of their 

ability. 

- There is genuine friendliness and concern for neighbours here. 

- Such a wonderful mix of seniors, young families, students.

9. Home Occupation (Small businesses that do not have customers to the home). 

General: 35% indicated that home occupation was acceptable, 

55% indicated that it depends on the type of business, and 

10% were against any home occupation. 

Comments: 

- If it is unobtrusive it may be fine. 

- I would prefer to keep this neighbourhood strictly residential, free from 

commerce. 

- This [Home Occupation] would probably be okay, but it would depend on the 

business, i.e., noise during the hours of business (late at night). Depends on what 

it is. 

- How does business impact neighbours? Handling waste, deliveries? Hazardous 

materials? Storage? Signage? Employees? 

- How often are we going to have to fight the same fight?! 

- These have operated without intrusion. 

- If there were no deliveries, no traffic, or parking, no physical changes to the 

neighbourhood and no permanent change from residential to commercial. Also, if 

it was the primary residence of the business owner. 

- We should be careful about this one. [Note on concern over unlicensed businesses 

operating in the neighbourhood] 

- Must be a business that is ‘invisible’ in terms of sights and sounds. 

- When such businesses do not infringe on the rest of the neighbourhood in any 

way, we would not find them unacceptable. Perhaps there should be some control 

over the total number of such businesses in the neighbourhood, however.

10. Commercial Business (defined as small businesses that do have customers 

regularly coming to the home 

General: 0% indicated that commercial business was acceptable. 

25% indicated that it depended on the type of business, and 

75% were against any type of commercial business. 

Comments: 

- Increased traffic both vehicles and pedestrian at all times. Big gaudy signs. 

Depending on business, maybe, but I don’t want their customers wandering 

through my neighbourhood. 

- Due to the fact we have our share and the parking plus traffic. 

- There is limited parking in the area so this poses a problem. As well, traffic 

coming and going from the Salvation Army Church seems to have increased more 

traffic may pose a problem. 

- This neighbourhood is too near commercial areas and too fragile. Once started, 

where will it end? Downtown is struggling as it is, it makes no sense to develop 

outside of the downtown core. 

- Not a lot of people coming and going. There’s too much traffic already. 

- Business that do not make noise or create pollution or significantly increase traffic 

and parking. 

- If there is a lot of traffic the streets get too busy and the neighbourhood looks like 

a parking lot. 

- Expansion is not necessary. Downtown has space for small business. 

- Services such as convenience store, drycleaners, postal service fine. 

- Extra traffic is undesirable as it is further erosion of the neighbourhood to 

commercial ventures. 

- We are close enough to Third Avenue. 

- Foremost, there is no need for the commercial development of residential 

neighbourhoods. This neighbourhood is already stressed by businesses on third 

avenue and thirteenth street – further stress is not desired. Additional traffic 

(pedestrian and vehicular) is not desired. Finally, the erosion of the 

neighbourhood community is a risk with commercial development. 

- We have commercial and industrial areas zoned for this. Don’t take advantage of 

the residential property prices. 

- Such businesses would be in violation of our neighbourhood’s present zoning 

bylaws, and we would not want to see the bylaws changed or challenged.

100 

90 

80 

] 70 

[% 60 

e 

g 50 

ta 

n 40 

30 

e 

r 

c 

e 

P 

20 

10 

0 

Businesses with Customers 

Acceptable Depends Not Acceptable

11. Preserved or protected by City. 

General: 95% desired some efforts by the City to preserve and protect the 

neighbourhood, and 

5% did not. 

Comments: 

- I am not sure about City support. If there would be involved, does that mean that 

the City can do what they want? But if not the City, who would help support 

preservation? You can’t always depend on the owners. I’m undecided. 

- Because of its historical significance and its architecture. 

- We must work together, as we have our share of businesses, churches, schools, 

etc. 

- I believe this neighbourhood should be a residential area and there have been 

several people applying for business licenses in the last couple of years. 

- Because it is a beautiful neighbourhood, with some unique homes. It is usually 

quiet and family friendly. 

- There are few historic neighbourhoods in Lethbridge. A vibrant residential 

community near downtown is essential to the survival of a vibrant downtown 

core. Should development be allowed in this neighbourhood, how and where will 

it end? 

- In order that we do not become part of the downtown commercialism (read: Rot). 

- Old, well developed, quiet residential area. 

- This part of the south end of Lethbridge is by far one of the best maintained older 

neighbourhoods. The houses, trees, and family-focused life are worth keeping. 

- It depends on what preservation means. We are not in favour of rigorous rules that 

will enforce everyone to live in a cookie-cutter home. General measures to 

prevent increased parking, and things such as traffic-calming devices and rules 

about large business are good. 

- We should like the city both to preserve and protect because it is worth it, quite 

simply. 

- Many of the houses are very old and this creates a characteristic neighbourhood 

that is become rare in the west. 

- This is an ‘original core’ neighbourhood representing the taste of people at a 

certain time. It is therefore a treasure that should be preserved. 

- To preserve one of the last remaining links to the past and to prevent the area 

becoming another ‘cookie-cutter’ neighbourhood (i.e., infill or renovating housing 

not considering the existing streetscape). 

- Preserve sense of ‘community’ – neighbours who know each other, etc. 

- The older homes and neighbourhoods a character and charm. The city should take 

pride in these older areas which represent part of the history and heritage of 

Lethbridge. 

- Tendency for residential bylaws to change and ‘home’ businesses to expand to 

much more than ‘home & office’ types – a kind of creeping larger development 

beyond expectations of a fully residential area.

- It is important for the health of the City to preserve its character and heritage. 

Losing a neighbourhood to commercial business is a loss for the City. There is a 

mutual relationship between community and commerce – the idea of community 

must be preserved, and this is best done in our neighbourhoods. 

- This is a very special neighbourhood that must be preserved. 

] 

[% 

e 

g 

ta 

n 

e 

r 

c 

e 

P 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

Preservation / Protection of Neighbourhood 

Yes No Undecided

Percentage [%] 

12. What should be controlled or regulated by the City? 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Amount of Through-traffic 

Type of Multifamily Homes 

Density of Multifamily Homes 

Supporting Control & Regulation 

Rezoning for DC or Commercial Use 

Noise/Light Pollution 

Architecture of Infill Homes 

Removal of Mature Trees 

Architectural Changes (Exterior) 

Types of Institutions 

Landscaping 

Number of Institutions 

Other

13. Any other comments? 

- Rental property owners should be held accountable for the condition of these 

properties, and is some ways, their tenants. I don’t like being ‘held hostage’ in my 

home because of unsavoury people who rent in the area and make me uneasy 

when I walk or have no consideration for my home and privacy. 

- I think certain renovations should be regulated, i.e., someone extending structure 

upward (2 nd 

story) where it would block someone’s view. Also, multi-family 

homes would mean more vehicles in our area where parking is already a problem. 

- This neighbourhood has be revitalizing in the past 12 years we’ve live here. Many 

families have invested in homes here, renovated them, and raised families – 

turning this small neighbourhood into a strong vibrant community. A shared pride 

in preserving a significant part of Lethbridge’s history has brought many of us 

together and formed lasting friendships. Commercialization in this historic 

neighbourhood is unnecessarily inappropriate. 

- Business should stay downtown. Parking is a problem already an narrow lots and 

lots of vehicles. 

- Our vision for our neighbourhood is a quiet community for single-family 

residential housing where the occupants take pride and keep up their character 

homes. 

- What would in our opinion improve our neighbourhood and increase its 

coherence are: a local public grade school that children can walk to, a 

neighbourhood grocery store, some small parks / playgrounds, traffic calming to 

avoid cars cutting through 4 th Ave/ 14 th St to avoid the 13 th St./3 rd 

Ave 

intersection, better control of overflow parking from First Choice Bank and 

Salvation Army Church, closing off of back lanes to through-traffic, control of 

dogs (the dangerous and loud ones only, of course). 

- Communities such as ours have wonderful histories and people have pride in that. 

Usually it is only when threatened that residents come together and express their 

views. We have problems/concerns at the moment with aggressive dogs. 

- Improvement permits should consider the nearby homes and not occlude 

windows. Permits for extra-large garages should be giveN if they are indeed 

garages – lot sizes should be correct. 

- The establishment of a board to reference, review, and appeal development 

applications in conjunction with the existing planning and development appeal 

structures should be established. The intent of this board is not to stifle 

development, but to ensure that future development reflects the historic character 

of the city core. We feel the Hamilton Neighbourhood boundaries should be 

revised and expanded to include the 3 rd Ave to 8 th 

Ave and from 13 St. to 17St. 

South. 

- Would love to have alley paved to cut down on dust. Would like to see the 

derelict properties in the area cleaned up. 

- The area between 13 th to 16 th St. South of the east/west alley behind the business 

of 3 rd Ave South should be protected from commercial development. If we lived 

in Fairmont Park, Ridgewood, Heritage, etc., we would not have to worry about 

our next door neighbour having their home rezoned commercial property and 

opening a business in their homes. It is discriminatory for us to live under this

threat just because of the location of our property in relation to existing 

commercial ventures and the downtown core. 

- Seemingly interminable meetings at School District 51 office frequently plugs 

parking space on 5 th 

Ave South. [Complaint about noise from unlicensed 

business] 

- Previous rezoning (i.e., Salvation Army Citadel) haS caused substantive changes 

in traffic, parking, noise. All changes should be more strictly monitored and 

regulated.

Hamilton Neighbourhood Association 

(13 th Street to 15 th Street, 3 rd Avenue to 6 th 

Avenue South) 

Vision Survey 

The City of Lethbridge has initiated a process to develop a Municipal Development Plan. 

The Plan Your City process will likely establish the guidelines the City will use for the 

next number of years to direct both residential expansion, and the protection or 

redevelopment of established neighbourhoods. 

As part of this process, we would like to be proactive with the City and provide a vision 

of our neighbourhood for the future – so ask yourself: “What do I want my 

neighbourhood to look like in 10 years? 30 years?” We will compile all of the comments 

in a document, and summarize them as a vision statement to be presented to the City of 

Lethbridge as a City Circle. We will not attach any names to your comments – please be 

candid. 

We hope that you will take a few moments to share your vision. Please do not hesitate to 

attach other comments you might have that are not included in this informal survey. 

1. Name: 

2. Address: 

3. Age of home: ______________ 

4. How long have you lived in this home? ______________ 

5. Owner occupied ___________ or Rental property ______________ 

6. Number of people in each age group living in the home: 

Children (up to 12 years old) ______________ 

Youth (13 to 16 years old) ______________ 

Adults (17 to 65) ______________ 

Seniors (over 65) ______________

7. What do you most value about your home (features, etc.)? 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

8. What do you most value about the neighbourhood? 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

9. What is your opinion about Home Occupations operating in the neighbourhood (small 

businesses that do not have customers to the home)? 

Acceptable Depends on the business Not acceptable 

Comments? ____________________________________________________________ 

____________________________________________________________ 

10. What is your opinion about commercial businesses operating in the neighbourhood 

(small businesses that do have customers regularly coming to the home)? 

Acceptable Depends on the business Not acceptable 

Comments? ____________________________________________________________ 

____________________________________________________________ 

11. Do you think this neighbourhood should be preserved or protected by the City of 

Lethbridge? 

Yes No 

Why?___________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

12. What (if anything) should be regulated? 

� Architectural changes to homes (outside) 

� Landscaping 

� Removal of mature trees 

� Amount of through-traffic 

� Noise and light pollution 

� Types and architecture of infill housing 

� Density of multi-family homes (i.e. the number of multifamily dwellings) 

� Type of multi-family homes (i.e. duplex, threeplex, row housing) 

� Number of institutions (churches, schools) 

� Other types of institutions (senior homes, day care homes) 

� Rezoning for direct control or commercial use. 

� Other(s) __________________________________ 

13. Any other comments? 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________


Seniors Community Forum 

0112-318-00 CCID 8


Shaping Our Community


Started in 2000 by Lethbridge 

agencies dedicated to advocating 

for the needs of seniors in order to 

continually improve their quality of 

life.

What we do 

� Create resources to assist people in 

making the right decisions in 

choosing a 

facility that 

meets their 

needs (ex. 

Supportive 

Housing 

Guide).

What we do 

� Work closely with LA transit to 

improve the accessibility of transit 

through route consultation and the 

purchase of low ride vehicles.

What we do 

� Host community conferences to 

provide education and awareness 

for seniors, caregivers and service 

providers.

What we do 

� Develop partnerships and enhance 

communication with the community 

in order to coordinate services.

What we do 

� Work closely with Community LINKS 

Information Referral Source to 

provide up-to-date information 

regarding available senior’s 

services.

What we see for the 

future of our city

Transportation/Accessibility 

� An accessible city core for seniors 

by monitoring transit routes and 

providing concrete pads, benches 

and shelters for transit users. 

� Improve Access a Ride services. 

� Provide wider parking stalls to 

create ease of mobility in and out of 

vehicles.

Transportation/Accessibility cont. 

� Create a drop-off lane at 

department stores for seniors and 

those with reduced mobility. 

� Develop a Transportation Hub that 

will allow more direct route 

transportation to key locations.


� Work with AMA and other groups to 

develop alternate transportation 

models for seniors no longer able to 

drive. 

� Increase building accessibility for 

people with disabilities (ex. 

uncluttered shopping aisles, seating 

areas, railings, automatic doors and 

ramps).


� A convenient proximity of services 

in all neighbourhoods and the 

development of small retail areas in 

transit areas. 

� Improved public transit to 

recreation facilities (ex. Indian 

Battle Park, sports and cultural 

facilities)

Inclusiveness 

� Embrace diversity by building a 

strong city core – vibrant and 

inviting to all age groups and 

cultures.

Inclusiveness cont. 

� Encourage volunteerism to provide 

support in the aid of seniors and 

caregivers.


� Develop ongoing partnerships with 

schools to further enhance youth 

and senior interaction.


� Utilize facilities after hours for 

community events (ex. Schools, 

community centres) 

� Abundant green spaces and 

gathering areas 

� Plan square grid community 

developments to promote 

pedestrian friendly neighbourhoods.


� Build multi-functional facilities that 

cater to all ages (ex. Talisman 

Centre, Calgary) 

� Combine senior facilities and 

daycares to promote interaction 

among different age groups.

Housing 

� Provide a wide variety of choice in 

housing options so individuals can 

maintain their independence in a 

way that best suits their needs (ex. 

cottages, condos, houses). 

� Redevelop buildings within the city 

rather than expanding to the 

outskirts.

Education 

� Provide alternate forms of learning 

and learning opportunities (ex. 

computers, webinars, etc).

Education 

� Interaction between age groups to 

promote learning (ex. computers, 

cell phones, 

knitting and 

woodworking).

Wellness 

� A holistic wellness approach that 

facilitates quality of life in later years 

through: 

� Opportunities to keep active and healthy. 

� Partnership with community agencies to 

promote healthier living (ex. Building Healthy 

Lifestyles program) 

� Innovative sport and leisure programs to 

engage individuals with a wide range of 

abilities.

Conclusion 

The Senior Community Forum sees 

a continuing need for adjustments 

in society, both in the way we live 

and how our City is planned. 

It is important that each 

neighbourhood contains services 

that all generations require.

The Seniors Community Forum 

advocates strongly as a voice for 

seniors but future planning for the 

City based on the needs of seniors 

is beneficial for everyone in the 

Lethbridge community.


Shaping Our Community


SADAT City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 9

City Circle Name: SADAT City Circle 

City Circle Topic of Interest: Community Inclusion 

CITY CIRCLES FEEDBACK FORM 

What is the current situation regarding your topic? 

• Would like to see people with disabilities be welcomed and included in communities. Address issues of NIMBY and the 

stereotypes that present. The City is trying to address NIMBY but the community is not changing. 

• Need ongoing support to assist those in low income housing to move out of the low income housing and to assist them 

in addressing the issues that arise 

• Citizen engagement – can learn from rural communities as they are a good example of how community rises to help 

each other out. Would like to see that kind of mentality within the community 

• Accessibility and getting around the community – curbs and wheel chair ramps, road construction and accessibility to all 

aspects of the community. 

• Concerned that this initiative is giving “lip service” to those citizens that provide input when decisions and directions 

have already been made or set. Want to ensure voices are heard and given serious consideration 

• Ensure residents feel safe and secure within the community. 

• Believe Lethbridge has a lot to offer and would like the city to succeed in whatever all residents do. Would like to see 

what others in the community to be positive influences in the community 

• Foster community identity and pride, promote the positive aspects of the community and hope that given the anticipated 

growth the positive perception of the community is maintained. 

• Strengthen and revitalize the Downtown – the beautification of the downtown is a start and is promoting the reclamation 

of the Downtown. 

• Need to ensure the transit is affordable – currently seniors, students, youth have access to discounted fairs however 

adults with developmental disabilities or those living with low income do not get the same consideration and most if not all 

adults with developmental disabilities are on a fixed income 

• Who monitors this or polices the results of the Plan Your City engagement processes? 

• Transportation is a big issues for persons with disabilities – access to hockey games, concerts 

• Health care is a glaring issue for persons with developmental disabilities. 

• People with disabilities are seen as de-valued within the population. The general public doesn’t see the individual but 

the disability. Need to start valuing people as people and appreciate all of their abilities – it’s alright to be different! 

• Racism within the housing industry – landlords who are corrupt and take advantage of those in the community who do 

not have a voice. Can the City do anything with landlords – tenant relationships? Landlords are abusive, aggressive and 

sometimes threatening 

• That the field of disability services be recognized and that the community values the work that the service providers do 

and the support provided to the individuals is valued and recognized. Support the initiative to make the disabilities service 

sector to become more of a recognized profession. Community supporting the frontline staff to feel valued for the work 

the do to support persons with disabilities. 

• When promoting inclusiveness everyone has a role. How many of us know our neighbours and encourage the 

neighbourly connection – we don’t have the neighbourhood support system or culture of connecting individuals within the 

neighbourhoods. A neighbourhood connector system that promotes block parties, neighbourhood parties etc


What is the current situation regarding your topic? (Cont.) 

•when neighbours look out for each other. 

• Accessibility and availability of housing for those on fixed incomes. 

• Need to address the elitism that is becoming prevalent in the housing sector of this community. 

• Concerned that the decisions about the future plan of the city have already been made and this process is just lip service. 

• What is the quality of life for individuals living with low income in this community when all activities within the community 

have significant costs associated in terms of transportation, access to the event etc? 

• That the success of Lethbridge is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable and disenfranchised. 

Please share your ideas to improve or implement you topic of interest? 

What one thing do persons with developmental disabilities need? 

All citizens are valued and respected. That the community is educated, gains knowledge, accepts, values and respects 

those who are different. When you talk about inclusion those outside of this sector don’t understand because they live it 

regularly. 

Key messages 

• A community without labels… Want to live without labels 

• Transportation, accessibility and affordability 

• Accessible streets, sidewalks etc 

• Affordable Housing


Lethbridge Public Library City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 10

Lethbridge Public Library City Circle June 11, 2009 

The Lethbridge Public Library Board and Administration met to review key proposals to target over the 

next 30 years. The Board and Administration reviewed the City Circles plan with City Members and 

created some broad approaches to the needs of the Library. Library Administration also spent an 

afternoon looking at the Library’s current situation, what we do well, what we need to improve on, what 

our key priorities are and how the City can assist the Library in meeting some of its goals. 

Below are the issues identified and the needs of the library which the City can support moving forward. 

The library has many items on its agenda including its 25 year strategic plan. Only items where the City 

can assist are outlined: 

Topic 1 - Services to the Community 

• Teen demographic/economic development 

o City wide free library cards - Library administration felt that the library could attract 

more teenagers and public in general if library cards were free to the community. 

• Hard to find physically 

o Signage – access to library – Signage to the library is poor and far too close to be of any 

benefit. The building is not obvious and hidden in its design. Signs located along main 

arteries and along city boulevards would be of greater benefit. 

o The library is not included in the Tourist Information Centre information and brochures. 

Many tourists visiting new cities like to visit the local libraries to find out local 

information and in particular for computer access along with many other services the 

library offers which could benefit visitors. 

• Centre of Community 

o Library needs to be part of the Downtown redevelopment and city square concepts and 

included in a downtown project presence – access to the library, its services, and 

facilities for businesses, organizations as well as individuals. 

Topic 2 - Strategically Locating Library Services 

• Future growth and the location of library services is key to the Library’s ongoing strategic 

development 

• Current library services are short of per capita targets of 0.9 persons/ft 2 

o There is a need for a new library on the North side (possibly Uplands) 

o As well as the far south of the City, (be aware of future 3 rd river crossing bus linkages) 

o Both sites could be integrated into existing commercial zones 

• The Library Bookmobile is 24 years old and needs replacement or alternative services to meet 

the needs of its customers.

o Funding for a replacement in the near term 

• Current Library is a solid concrete building(built in 1974 and upgraded in ‘92), meaning that 

wireless technology is difficult to maintain and service 

o Potential to sell the current building and build a new central library 

o New central library could be integrated into a new multiplex or city centre concept 

• Timeline to modernization/adaptability 

o 1 st -Bookmobile 

o 2 nd north side branch 

o 3 rd south side branch 

o 4 th new central (2030) 

Topic 3 - Transportation to and from Library Services 

• Access to current (downtown) and future (Westside) library services is vital if these services are 

to be utilized fully 

• There will be severely limited access to the new west side library 

o Densification, walkability and new roads need to be taken into account 

o Sidewalks, bicycle paths, and direct access are important 

o City support for book delivery programs (not only volunteers) would be an asset 

• Existing bus routes do not provide proper access to the downtown library 

o The reorganization of routes will increase accessibility 

• Parking lot is full at peak times 

o Increased bicycle parking would be helpful, 

o Potential to create a bicycle locker at the library would be an asset 

o Underground/overflow parking for staff would free up space 

• Too many service points 

o Reducing service points would make the building more secure and would allow for 

better use of staff resources 

o City would need to fund a major redevelopment of the current main library building 

including structural as well as technology changes.


Heart of Our City Revitalization 

Committee 

Part 1 Submission 1 


0112-318-00 CCID 11

MINUTES of a Meeting of the HEART OF OUR CITY REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE, 

held on Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. in the City Hall of the City of 

Lethbridge with the following in attendance: 

CHAIRMAN: Alderman Ken Tratch 

MEMBERS: Mark Bellamy, Citizen-at-large 

Grace Duff, Chamber of Commerce 

Alderman Barbara Lacey 

Suzanne Lint, Allied Arts Council 

Ken Nakagama, Downtown Business Revitalization Zone 

Barry Snowden, Lethbridge Historical Society 

Mayor Robert Tarleck 

OTHERS: Bary Beck, City Manager Designate 

Maureen Gaehring, Senior Community Planner 

George Kuhl, Downtown Revitalization Manager 

David Sarsfield, City Clerk’s Office 

REGRETS: Jennifer Alldred, EDL 

Bev Lanz, Downtown Business Revitalization Zone 

Ted Stilson, Business Revitalization Zone Managing Coordinator 

CALL TO ORDER: 

Ken Tratch, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. 

APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 

ROBERT TARLECK: 

THAT the agenda be approved as presented. 

CITY CIRCLES: 

CARRIED 

Brian Conger, AECOM, and Robert McKay, Senior Planner led the Committee through 

the City Circles exercise. The purpose was to provide input in the Plan Your City 

Municipal Development Plan and Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP). 

Four steps were outlined: 

• Identify Issues/Topics 

• Prioritize Issues 

• Current Reality 

• Solutions

The following issues were identified by the Committee: 

• Parking 

• Accessibility 

• Safety 

• Culture 

• Retail 

• Residential 

• Cleanliness 

• Inclusivity 

• Infill and Occupancy 

• Incorporating Heart of Our City Master Plan 

• Preserving History and Heritage 

• Sustainable Economics 

• Amenities 

The Committee reviewed those issues which were of highest priority in terms of the 

perception, the reality, and possible solutions: 

Safety 

• Perception – not safe 

• Conclusion is perception is most of the issue, rather than reality 

• Risk Avoidance 

• Intimidation is a factor 

• Media hyperbole may create the perception 

Solutions 

• Bring more people downtown 

• What is the reality – get the facts on crime 

• Marketing campaign 

• Beat patrols 

• Street cleanup 

• Eliminate high risk areas 

• Cultural awareness 

• Need a diversity of entertainment opportunities 

• Avoid large rowdy establishments in the downtown area 

• Study areas that work 

• Eyes on the street 

• Design of the environment is critical (second generation – CPTED) 

• Dealing with interconnections outside of downtown 

Incorporating Heart of Our City Master Plan 

• Centrality of downtown 

• Reason to come downtown (banking, county office, entertainment) 

• Downtown is not a transportation corridor; it is a destination 

• Synchronicity of Plan and timelines with Municipal Development Plan, Land Use 

Bylaw, and Downtown Area Redevelopment Plan 

• Need to develop policy with teeth that incorporates the pillars of the Heart of Our 

City Master Plan 

• Provide incentives for multi-family developers to build downtown 

• Downtown is the primary hub for Lethbridge (“Downtown Primacy”) 

Page 2 of 4 Heart of Our City Revitalization Committee Minutes

Infill and Occupancy 

• Holes in the downtown core 

• 85% occupancy in existing buildings 

• Empty lots could be used for complimentary interim uses 

o For instance turn 1 st 

Avenue lots into community garden 

• Vacant stores – Art Gallery using Singers 

• Streetscaping such as murals 

• Encouraging urban design guidelines 

• Storage sites (poor use of space) 

o Grandfathering allows continuation of use 

• Low lease rates 

• Out of town or absentee landlords 

• “Hammer or big stick” zoning to penalize landlords that do not maintain their 

property 

• minimum maintenance bylaw 

• financial incentives to develop vacant lots and/or buildings 

Parking 

• currently conducting a parking strategy 

• sufficient parking in total, but not distributed 

• existing parkades being used by surrounding businesses 

• requirement to pay for parking may dissuade some customers 

• question if parking is an issue because individuals will park a fair distance from 

big box stores 

• employees take up prime parking spaces 

• transit connectivity 

• every ground level parking lot is a potential site for development 

• future developments may require underground parking 

• should it be a private or public responsibility to provide parking 

• importance of having the Performing Arts Centre downtown 

Culture 

• Downtown is the logical spot 

• Cultural hub needs to be located in the downtown as it will spur retail and other 

development 

• Artistic community prefers the downtown 

• Public realm component is key 

• Targeting infrastructure investment in the downtown 

• Sports complex may be too large for downtown because insufficient land space 

o Can be a disincentive for retail and residential development to be nearby 

• Existing facilities such as museum, art gallery, community art centre, and library 

are critical to the success of the downtown 

• Native cultural centre that is an attraction may be an appropriate downtown use 

o A native activity centre may require open space and therefore not 

appropriate 

o Should be tourism oriented to be in the downtown area 

o Possibility of bringing the Friendship Centre downtown 

• Public art needs to be downtown 

o New kinetic piece 

o Encouraged in community services bylaw 

o Sites for public art that is designed for a specific site 

o Private developers stipulated to provide public art (bonusing) 


o Bring artists into civic projects at the beginning 

Brian Conger described the process for the City Circles. The deadline for submissions is 

September 8, 2009. There will be a Plan Your City Idea Fair to be held October 17, 

2009 in City Hall. It was questioned if the Heart of Our City would be able to set up an 

exhibit at the Fair. 

The Committee decided to have another City Circle meeting on Wednesday, August 19, 

2009 to continue with review of the following issues: residential, retail, mixed uses, and 

sustainable economics. Members were asked to read the Market Analysis Overview 

contained in the Heart of Our City Master Plan (Part 2, Section 4.0, pages 21 – 31). 

Comments for the two meetings will then be forwarded. 

ACTION: Committee Members to review marketing study contained in the 

Heart of Our City Master Plan (Part 2, Section 4.0, pages 21-31) 

Committee to discuss residential, retail, mixed uses, and 

sustainable economics at August 19 th 

Meeting 

David Sarsfield to forward comments from the meetings 

ADJOURNMENT: 

SUZANNE LINT: 

THAT the meeting adjourn. 

The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m. 

Page 4 of 4 Heart of Our City Revitalization Committee Minutes 

CARRIED 

CHAIRMAN 

CLERK

NOTES of a Meeting of the HEART OF OUR CITY REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE, 

held on Wednesday, August 19, 2009, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. in the City Hall of the City of 

Lethbridge with the following in attendance: 

CHAIRMAN: Alderman Ken Tratch 

MEMBERS: Mark Bellamy, Citizen-at-large 

Grace Duff, Chamber of Commerce 

OTHERS: Bary Beck, City Manager Designate 

George Kuhl, Downtown Revitalization Manager 

Ted Stilson, Business Revitalization Zone Managing Coordinator 

REGRETS: Jennifer Alldred, EDL 

Alderman Barbara Lacey 

Bev Lanz, Downtown Business Revitalization Zone 

Suzanne Lint, Allied Arts Council 

Ken Nakagama, Downtown Business Revitalization Zone 

Barry Snowden, Lethbridge Historical Society 

CALL TO ORDER: 

Ken Tratch, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Quorum was not 

established. 

CITY CIRCLES: 

Brian Conger and Phil Dack, AECOM, and Robert McKay, Senior Planner, continued to 

lead the Committee through the City Circles exercise. The purpose was to provide input 

in the Plan Your City Municipal Development Plan and Integrated Community 

Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP). 

The Committee continued to consider the high priority issues in terms of the perception, 

the reality, and possible solutions: 

• Currently 800 to1,000 55 plus contained on the west side of downtown 

Residential 

o Scenic Drive is a pedestrian barrier 

o Provide shuttle throughout downtown 

o Pedestrian subway or overpass 

• Currently 250 residents contained in Assisted Living accommodation 

• Currently less than 50 non-seniors located in second floor conversions 

o Market strategy is a “complete” environment 

o Concentrate high density around Galt Gardens 

• Currently approximately 40 to 50 people in affordable housing 

o Anyone downtown is a bonus 

• Currently approximately 100 to 150 mixed (including students) 

o How do we get more students downtown 

• Opportunity to develop more second and third floor uses – “adaptive reuse” for 

vacant buildings 

o Discussion about who and how to get people to live downtown 

• Need downtown supermarket 

o threshold number needs to be established

• Need a mix of housing and income types 

o NIMBY issues 

o Find out what it would take from developer’s perspective to build housing 

downtown 

• Need downtown to be busy after the banks close 

o Viability threshold 

• Public support of adaptive reuse 

o Upgrading of existing non-retail space 

o Paramount is a good idea 

o “empty nester” cohort 

o City-owned empty sites and competing uses 

o Who can we attract – Medican 

• Need to develop complementary services (such as doctors) 

• Should City be more facilitative for condominium developers 

• Hotels 

Retail 

o Boutique hotels 

o New development outside core 

• Land is changing hands at an accelerating rate in the past 4 to 5 years 

o Higher percentage of business owners now own the land (generational 

change) 

� Great because it creates a commitment 

� Low storefront vacancy 

• City open to facilitate ownership 

o Strata title 

• Back Alley concept 

o Open up the lanes to intensify retail 

• No Big Box downtown 

• May have too many Shopping Malls downtown (2 in 3 blocks) 

o Downtown has gotten stronger since WalMart came to Town 

� Downtown shopping malls do compete with WalMart 

o Important role 

o Public/private dialogue 

� Establish dialogue on how the City interacts with the mall 

• How can the City support the Downtown malls 

o What is the long-term vision of the malls 

• Toys “R” Us – adaptive reuse 

• Retail spaces in disrepair 

o Unsightly premises 

o No minimum maintenance bylaw 

o Tax incremental financing bylaw 

• Work with strategic partners as part of communication strategy 

o Create a new, exciting downtown group 

o Our MLAs 

� Provincial building opportunities 

o Our municipal politicians talk to MLAs annually regarding new 

infrastructure investment 

o Our senior staff (Bary Beck) follow up 

• Performing Arts Centre 

o Professional lobbying 

• Target specific retail 

• Conference Centre 


• Parking strategy 

o Reduced parking as an incentive 

• Mixed Use 

ACTION: David Sarsfield to forward comments from the meetings 

The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. 

Page 3 of 3 Heart of Our City Revitalization Committee Minutes 

CHAIRMAN 

CLERK


Developing Lethbridge Using 

Ecological Principles: An Ecosystems 

Approach 

0112-318-00 CCID 12

Developing Lethbridge Using Ecological Principles: 

An Ecosystems Approach 

City Circle Summary 

2-4 pm, June 23, 2009 at Helen Schuler Nature Centre 

Attendees: Lori Goater, Coreen Putman, Tom Hopkins, Linda Cerney, Cheryl Bradley, 

Laura Piersol, Shannon Frank, Andrea Vaxvick, Heather Gowland, Dana 

Blouin, John Nightingale, Reg Ernst, Rob McKay 

Facilitator: Brian Conger 

INTRODUCTION 

As the City’s population grows, we recognize that development is important and 

necessary. How will this development happen? How will our natural areas be valued and 

managed in the strategic directions that will guide future development? Settled 

landscapes can either enhance and contribute to, or have a significantly detrimental effect 

on biodiversity. The City of Lethbridge, like most cities, is concentrated near a 

waterbody, the Oldman River. As a result, our city includes one of the richest 

ecosystems, in terms of biodiversity, in our region. It is the hope of this city circle to see 

integration and celebration of our unique, local, natural environment into city policy and 

city council decisions at all levels. Such ecological consideration requires long term 

thinking and a visionary approach. 

BACKGROUND 

The desire to create an environmental policy and plan was articulated in the 2007-2010 

city council strategic plan: “Towards A Sustainable Future”. As part of the “Plan Your 

City” process, a city circle was formed to explore environmental issues and opportunities 

related to the natural areas within the river valley. As the City of Lethbridge does not 

currently have a management plan specific to the river valley, there is a desire to seek 

clarity on the current situation as well as the possible implications of population growth 

on ecological integrity, biodiversity, and connectivity. 

Lethbridge is home to various ecologically significant features including large strands of 

cottonwood forest, coulees and natural wetlands, all within an urban setting. These 

provide critical habitat for hundreds of bird, plant and other species, including 

populations that are “sensitive” or may be “at risk” if human impact on the river valley is 

improperly managed. These natural areas also provide a unique, rich wilderness 

experience for residents and visitors alike. The benefits of these parks can be experienced 

daily; a rare opportunity for many people living within urban areas. The Lethbridge river 

valley has and will continue to play a significant role in this city’s development. 

CURRENT STRENGTHS 

A small population coupled with the large parks footprint (much of which includes a 

large floodplain and steep sloped coulees) has so far resulted in limited development 

within the river valley. That being said, high impact, recreational use parks (which 

provide opportunities such as golfing, biking, camping and manicured park space) are 

included in the river valley. In contrast, there are also natural areas which have limited

infrastructure and provide space for low impact opportunities (such as hiking, bird 

watching, photography, and outdoor classrooms). A group of committed and visionary 

individuals has championed the strategic development of this river valley park system. As 

a result, the river valley boasts a wide range of parks, pathways and cultural centres 

which are used daily. Other strengths listed by city circle participants include: a strong 

regional scientific community, a city staff and city council who are seen as cooperative 

and receptive to sustainability, consistent park visitation, and an increasing culture of 

environmental awareness. 

CURRENT WEAKNESSES 

However, a lack of environmental policy to guide the process of future planning and 

development within the City has led to the weakening of the ecological integrity of the 

river valley. Specific policies, for example wetland policy and floodplain policy have 

been adopted by other Alberta communities which provide clear and transparent 

expectations for future growth and development. Within Lethbridge there has been a lack 

of clear and well defined guiding principles to assess and monitor the ecological integrity 

of the river valley. As a result, there is insufficient data to guide city planners and 

developers in making ecologically considerate decisions. A lack of accountability and 

coordination within the City of Lethbridge has compounded this problem. Some of the 

resulting issues that were discussed in the city circle include: 

• increased housing development which has encroached on sensitive natural 

areas and species 

• the suppression of natural disturbances and processes (such as fire and 

grazing) which have resulted in a loss of biodiversity 

• the lack of a system to define critical natural areas which has resulted in 

the fragmentation of habitat 

• outdated management practices which have led to the degradation of 

natural areas by invasive plant species 

• inadequate by-law enforcement within natural areas 

• the lack of implementation of past environmental plans 

• none of the river valley parks are classified as “Preservation Areas” 

within the current Parks Master Plan 

• the lack of protected space for prairie species 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

To build on past strengths, and to emphasize the important role that these natural areas 

(and the biodiversity contained within them) play in the overall quality of life within the 

city, we wish to make the following recommendations: 

1. Development strategies and planning policy should include biodiversity in 

their stated objectives. A broad vision or aim of the plan would state that 

planning, construction, development and regeneration should have minimal 

impacts on biodiversity and enhance it where ever possible. Objectives that 

fit with this vision may include:

• To promote sustainable development by ensuring that biological diversity 

is conserved and enhanced as an integral part of social, environmental and 

economic development. 

• To conserve, enhance and restore the diversity of Lethbridge and area’s 

wildlife by sustaining and where possible improving the quality and extent 

of natural habitat and natural physical processes. 

• To contribute to urban renewal by enhancing biodiversity in green spaces 

and in development so that they are used by wildlife and valued by people, 

recognizing that healthy functioning ecosystems contribute to a better 

quality of life and to people’s sense of well-being. 

2. The ecological integrity of the river valley and natural areas are recognized 

as an important part of a healthy and vibrant City of Lethbridge. 

i. REQUIRED ACTIVITIES 

• Develop an ecological inventory 

• Identify and map boundaries of critical areas for preservation. 

• Define thresholds, subsequent monitoring programs and the creation of 

action plans for when thresholds (regarding ecological integrity) are 

comprised 

• Create a baseline for performance measures and indicators of success. 

• Identify clear roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for the city. 

• Identify opportunities for the city to set precedent and demonstrate, for 

example North-side Regional Park could be a demonstration project. 

• Promote and demonstrate water conservation through drought resistant 

landscaping practices (planting of native species), incentives and 

continued public education. 

• Draw on best practices from other communities. 

• Development of formal policy that addresses the building of new 

parkland infrastructure. 

3. The dedication of resources to a City administrator accountable to 

sustainability. 

• Assist the community in working within the newly created conservation plan 

and policy. 

• Cross collaboration of the City of Lethbridge, nature organizations and 

advocacy groups is essential to address environmental concerns. 

• To celebrate and communicate success in terms of environmental initiatives. 

• To create more opportunities for groups to advise and address city council on 

issues related to biodiversity and the environment.


Lethbridge Living Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 13

Put in a bridge path in the coulees. It got blown out during a flood about 15 years ago and they 

never replaced it. Now, hikers, bikers, joggers can no longer go from the path near Tudor with 

the stairway up the coulee to the Helen Schuler Coulee Centre paths. You just hit a dead end. 

Indoor Tennis. All major cities and many cities our size have an indoor tennis court facility. We 

used to have 1 court behind the skating rink at the Enmax centre. We now have nothing. There 

are many tennis players in all age brackets who would steadly use and contribute to the facility. 

You could purchase or rent an empty building such as the empty "Linen and Things" building 

and put in a carpet/tile flooring. It would allow the seniors to keep playing all year. It would 

allow the Junior players to compete with Edmonton and Calgary kids. 

Parking downtown is terrible. There needs to be more free parking, more meter parking, and 

more parking lot space - either that or less ferocious parking service attendants. Plus, with all the 

businesses for sale or rent downtown, a new apartment building downtown might not be all that's 

needed to revitalize the core. 

An alternate road from the West side of town, over to the Costco area - is still needed. It's been 

talked about for years, but we need it now more than ever. 

Come wintertime, the city should really do something about its street plowing services - at the 

very least, close down certain roads for a period, in order to clear the snow, so that residents of 

this city can actually park within metres of their own homes. 

Speaking of roads, it seems that the same stretch of highway gets repaired every year, causing 

inconvenience and bottleneck traffic for everybody. Why not fix other roads too? Or other parts 

of the highway at least. Or at the very least, make it well-publicized and clearly marked that 

construction will be ongoing for _____ period of time - marked clearly before turning on to the 

highway. 

The Sanitation services seem to have a policy that garbage truck drivers do not get out of their 

trucks for any reason. This means, and I have witnessed this recently again, that if trash falls out 

of the dumpster onto the ground while being picked up, or if there is overflowing garbage around 

the dumpster beforehand, it all remains left behind around the dumpster as the truck rolls away. 

Can't we supply some gloves and ask for 60 seconds of consideration to pick up the mess? 

The loitering habits of certain street kids on a certain downtown street corner is a concern. 

A recycling initiative like in Calgary would be nice. 

Transit service stopping at 6 pm on Sundays can be incredibly inconvenient. 

There should be some investing into the youth of our city with brand new recreation facilities 

that house double ice facilities with attached pool, gymnasium, etc. that most other areas, even 

those smaller than Lethbridge seem to have. This can also bring tourism into the city by enabling 

these venues to host varied tournaments, provinicials, and national level competitions.

For a city with a university that has a Fine Arts program, Lethbridge has a lackluster arts 

community. Good venues need to be made available to artists for theatre, dance, music, etc. If 

they are available, they need to be advertised more. Bring back Shakespeare in the Park or look 

to create a festival (fringe, busker, or even a large, Southern Alberta Arts Festival which could 

include visual and performance-based) in order to support and nurture the local community and 

also draw in tourists. 

I would like to see Lethbridge operate more as part of the 'region' in terms of economic 

development, tourism and education. I think that the tourist initiatives in the region would benefit 

enormously from building on our place in confederation (only place in Canada founded by a 

Father of Confederation) and our relationship to both the Red Coat Trail (Macleod etc.) I would 

like to see errors on the city website and tourist literature corrected. For example: Sir Alexander 

Galt did not buy "Nicholas Sheran's mine". He and Elliott made a trip out here (Elliott met his 

father on the way as he was already stationed here by the federal government in his work with 

the Indian Commissioner. This work incidentally is a great way of introducing the region's links 

to the original treaties. Elliott's job was to meet with First Nations and he travelled extensively 

with the NWMP..) Back to the founding of Lethbridge. The two Galt's toured the Northwest 

Territories District of Alberta and staked out five claims, which were granted over the winter by 

Macdonald's government. The next year, they chose to set up on a claim near the east side of the 

River. (Nicholas Sheran and Elliott knew each other, but Sheran downed the year before the Galt 

mine set up.) I really think getting rid of the myths would help the region develop a marketing 

plan that would bring researchers, tourists and historians to the regions from all parts of the 

Commonwealth. The founding of Lethbridge was very much part of the original vision Sir 

Alexander had for the both British North American and the transformation of the British Empire 

into the a federation of Nations. In essence, foreswaw the creation of the Commonwealth a good 

80 years before it happened. If Macleod gets tourists from the UK , Australia, Europe, Japan -- 

all seeking to gobble up their history of the British Empire, why can't Lethbridge? (Why don't we 

embrace our heritage? Francophone Canadians would be thrilled to know that the MP from 

Sherbrooke founded Lethbridge and that in the 1880s, the city had several Quebec families 

(French and English speaking) running businesses. The founding of towns like Raymond, 

Magrath, Cardston all ties in to this. Charles Magrath was a major figure in the creation of Water 

treaties between Canada and the US. (He also became Elliott's brother in law). 

Forgot to mention that Guelph (Wellington and Dufferin counties) in Ontario are directly tied to 

the settlement of Lethbridge. Lots of potential visitors from both Guelph and Aryshire, Scotland. 

Guelph, founded by the poet John Galt,father of Sir Alexander Galt, of Aryshire (Town of 

Irving.) Scotland. Galt was a great friend of Mohawk Chief, John Brant (son of Joseph). He 

helped both white and First Nations Canadians get their promised lands and money from the 

British Treasury after the War of 1812. (Sir Alexander was a published writer at fourteen.) 

Lethbridge and Sherbrooke streetplans are modelled on Guelph. Many colonial 

settlers (including my ancestors) of Wellington and Dufferin Counties, came from Aryshire 

to Guelph (probably through family contacts.) And many pioneers in Lethbridge, including J.D, 

Higgenbotham, came from Guelph and Wellington Counties. (My Galt book was recently 

reviewed in two Wellington County newspapers and since then I've noticed a teeny spike in 

sales.) I noticed a great deal of interest in Alberta history.

Lethbridge would be wise to gain ground in the 'green' evolution for our health and that of the 

planet: encourage wildflower growth in the boulevards, incentives for xerioscaping, innovative 

control of water consumption...most especially that used for watering lawns ( perhaps this needs 

to be banned), incentives for household composting. And Lethbridge needs to hang on to its 

'small town(city)' appeal through more downtown events and gatherings. Wouldn't it be great to 

see the Galt Gardens used each weekend of the warm season for outdoor plays, music,etc. And I 

want to congratulate the city for placing the water park there as it is a delight to sit under a tree 

and watch as generational and cross cultural mixes enjoy it. 

Our city really lacks in the ‘green’ area. The recycling centres around the city are ridiculously 

over-used. Why not embrace a program such as that in Kelowna. They pay lower taxes than we 

do and still seem to have better services. They have three bins – black for regular garbage, blue 

for recycling and green for yard waste. This would eliminate people from having to drive gasguzzling 

trucks to the recycling centres to unload. And it might encourage people to recycle 

more. Kelowna also provides its citizens with a yearly wall-type calendar listing area garbage 

pick-up days and other city service information including what can/cannot be recycled, listings 

for local bottle depots, and city service phone numbers. 

Sometimes it feels like the city planners have forgotten how hard others in the older communities 

have worked for and on their homes and neighbourhoods. I’ve seen a few instances where a 

well-taken care of low-density neighbourhood has had a duplex or fourplex dropped right into 

the middle of it and that property stops being taken care of because it’s now become a rental 

property, but the city has approved the zoning for it. This lowers the property values for all the 

homes in the neighbourhood. If the city feels it can do this, then they also need to reassess all the 

taxes for the homes in that area and lower those taxes. I also question the city’s gung-ho push on 

low-income/rental properties in Lethbridge. One look at the Herald shows you tones of rental 

properties are available!


Bikebridge Cycle City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 14

Bikebridge Cycle City Circle 

Recommendations to Encourage Bicycle Use in Lethbridge 

For: submission to the City of Lethbridge, City Circles 

Topic of Interest: planning considerations for encouraging cycling as a relevant urban 

transportation choice in Lethbridge. The identification of what are perceived to be barriers to the 

expanded use of bicycles as a means of transportation; and some suggestions for inclusion in a 

Lethbridge Municipal Development Plan that might aid in removing those barriers. 

By: The Bikebridge Cycle City Circle 

bikebridge@shaw.ca 

Submitted: August 23, 2009 

This report is also available on the internet, comments and suggestions are welcomed there: 

http://sites.google.com/site/bikebridgecc/

Introduction 

The primary purpose of the Bikebridge Cycle City Circle 1 (Bikebridge) is to encourage more use 

of bicycles in Lethbridge. To do this, Bikebridge has identified what are believed to be at least 

some of the reasons why bicycles are not more in use within our city. With these reasons in 

mind, we captured some ideas that might aid in countering these barriers and encourage more 

citizens to become cyclists. Bikebridge has combined many of these ideas into a set of 

recommendations. This review is undertaken with the hope that the recommendations, in some 

form, might be included in a Lethbridge Municipal Development Plan. 2 

It should be noted that, although Bikebridge would not discourage any bicycle use, our view is 

focused on the bicycle as a means of urban transportation, a vehicular alternative to the 

automobile. This would include the use of a bicycle for utilitarian purposes as a supplement to 

the private automobile or to public transit. It is the use of a bicycle, at least some of the time, for 

commuting to and from one's place of employment or learning, running errands, attending 

events, or visiting with friends and family. 

Within the context of this review a bicycle is defined as: a self powered ridden vehicle including 

two-wheeled cycles, tricycles, quad-wheeled cycles and trailers attachable to any of these. Issues 

and recommendations may also be relevant for E-bikes 3 and even inline skate users but 

Bikebridge has not looked specifically at issues or offered recommendations for these. 

Within the Barriers to Cycling section (Part 2), Bikebridge provides a list or a "brainstorm” 4 of 

what are considered barriers to bicycle use in Lethbridge. This list is provided within the context 

of what are believed to be the primary barriers at issue: safety, security and physical. 

Within the Removing Barriers to Cycling section (Part 3), Bikebridge provides a list of ideas that 

form the basis for its recommendations the essence of which might, in some form, be 

incorporated into a longer-term Municipal Plan. As with the barriers, these ideas (and resulting 

recommendations) may well address a combination of issues: from safety, to security to the 

physical. 

The Summary Report (Part 1) which follows is Bikebridge Cycle City Circle recommendations 

for potentially lessening barriers to cycling and encouraging bicycle use. These are actions we 

believe, if adopted, can facilitate the use of bicycles for utilitarian purposes in Lethbridge. 

Bikebridge Cycle City Circle September - 2009 Page | 3

Part 1: Summary Report 

The Bikebridge Cycle City Circle wants to encourage more bicycle use in Lethbridge. Why? 

Simply put, the bicycle offers us all opportunities at improved wellbeing. Riding a bike can be 

exhilarating; it slows us down and awakes our awareness to our connection to the earth and each 

other. From a bicycle's more human scale we see, smell, hear and feel the neighbourhood's real 

beauty. Cycling builds and maintains fitness, for the cyclist and the community. 

Bikebridge holds the premise that if, as a community, we can reduce or remove barriers that keep 

us from first exploring the use of a bicycle and then actually using one, we can improve our lives 

and those of our neighbours. We think that is what community is all about. 

The Bikebridge Cycle City Circle has identified what are considered barriers to bicycle use and a 

list of ideas that might serve to remove or at least reduce those barriers. Based on our list of 

ideas we have created recommendations that we hope, at least in their essence, can be integrated 

into a City of Lethbridge Municipal Development Plan. 

We believe the barriers to using bicycles in Lethbridge have mostly to do with our safety, our 

security and demands on fitness. When we consider making a trip on a bike our first 

consideration might be whether or not there is a safe route to and from our destination. Our 

attention might then shift to our ability to physically make the trip, the difficulty of the route. 

And we wonder, once we arrive, will there be a place to secure our bike and the things we will 

take with us or acquire en route. How will I feel, how will I look when I get there? 

At the outset, Bikebridge recognizes that the community has limited ability to apply resources to 

any public activity, whether for infrastructure or services, but we also believe that significant 

investments are almost always necessary if real improvement, actual change can be expected. 

Put another way, Bikebridge believes once the essence of our recommendations are given 

consideration, their merits will be evident. 

Here are our recommendations: 

1. Create a Bicycle Advisory Group 

Facilitate the creation and ongoing operation of a community bicycling advisory group that 

would provide input and advice to City administrators, City Council, businesses and 

individuals. The primary roll of the group would be to provide the cyclist’s perspective on City 

infrastructure projects including bikeway 5 , bike route 6 , bike lane location 7 and standards. It 

would have input into the development and maintenance of bicycling security standards, and 

cycling related bylaws. Input provided by the group would be on an advisory basis only. The 

group could provide suggestions to businesses wishing to offer better services to cyclists as well 

as directly to cyclists. 


Bikebridge believes that the need to reduce barriers to cycling in Lethbridge will be ongoing. 

New ideas to mitigate barriers will evolve both as a result of changes to the way the community 

approaches developments and by the growth in the number of people cycling as a transportation 

alternative. The bicycle users’ perspective is essential to the elimination of barriers to cycling 

and the growth of bicycle use in our community. More thoughts on a Bicycle Advisory Group 

(BAG) are explored in the notes 8 . 

In the context of Municipal Planning, the Bicycle Advisory Group could provide a key link 

between planners and cyclists ensuring that municipal projects and programs contain the 

elements that will continue the growth of bicycle use in Lethbridge. 

2. Establish Cycling Route criteria 

Establish criteria for selecting a network of recommended cycling routes throughout the city. 

Criteria would be developed and maintained in the context of established safety, security and 

physical standards and would provide a means for the selection of the best overall routes for 

cyclists to get about the city. Considerable input from cyclists would be required on an ongoing 

basis to ensure the network of routes provides city wide coverage. 

In the context of Municipal Planning, the cycling route criteria should be an important element in 

planning roadways, development areas and the placement of public facilities. Routing criteria 

would form the basis for determining the location of bikeways 5 and bike lanes 7 . 

3. Establish Bicycle Security Standards 

Establish a set of requirements for providing parking facilities for bicycles and minimum 

standards for bike racks. Undertake to establish both by-law requirements for the provision of 

adequate parking for cyclists and an ongoing public awareness initiative emphasizing the need to 

provide and use bike racks. A program of replacing all existing sub-standard bike rack 

installations at all public facilities should be undertaken with immediacy. 25 

In the context of Municipal Planning, the security of bicycles, cyclists and their possessions 

should be included as an important element of any new public facility and should form part of 

the approval mechanism for private developments. 

4. Establish Cycling Information Program 

Implement ongoing public awareness programs explaining the rights and responsibilities of 

both cyclists and motorists as vehicle operators. The program should include periodic 

campaigns on the value of using a bicycle, using bicycle routes and bicycle security. Programs 

could be extended to include in-school education and public workshops on bicycle operating and 

maintenance skills. 


In the context of Municipal Planning, the impact on the value to cyclists should be included 

when soliciting public input for proposed developments or projects. Announcements and public 

information (websites, mail-outs) with respect to new developments should include reference to 

considerations included to encourage use of bicycles. 

5. Build an East-West Connector Bikeway 

Construct a minimum grade bikeway providing a direct cycling link between the University of 

Lethbridge and Downtown Lethbridge. The bikeway could make use of the existing bikepedestrian 

causeway and make the climb on either side of the valley based on either switchback 

construction or a long gradual accent to the east side of the University and to downtown access 

point west of Galt Gardens. 

Existing grades on all routes through the river valley offer the cyclist a considerable challenge in 

terms of the overall grade and there are some very steep sections which are a direct barrier to 

making full use of a bicycle in Lethbridge. 29 

In the context of Municipal Planning, the East-West Connector should be addressed early on, as 

a high priority. A close second priority would be for a North Lethbridge-Downtown bikeway 

connector and a North Lethbridge-Southeast Lethbridge connector. 

Bikebridge believes that this project would serve to assemble and bring to light all the elements 

necessary to bring about a reduction to the barriers keeping us from making the bicycle a serious 

transportation choice in Lethbridge. 9 

1 David Cieslewicz, Mayor, Madison, Wisconsin 

“A city that’s good to bike in 

is a city that’s good to live in” 1 


Part 2: Barriers to Cycling 

For this review, the reasons individuals do not choose the bicycle for at least some of their 

transportation requirements are referred to as barriers to cycling. 

Of course the primary barrier to cycling, for most citizens of Lethbridge, is simply that the 

private automobile is synonymous with transportation. Lethbridge has abundant efficient 

roadways, "free" parking and until recently cheap fuel, making the car the obvious choice. And 

relative to other urban areas, Lethbridge is widely dispersed 10 making services, recreation 

facilities, shopping and employment areas, for the most part, far removed from where we live. 

Frequent daily auto trips are the prevailing strategy of many if not most. 

It is not the intent of this review to discredit the automobile, but it is important to recognize that 

there is an emerging awareness of the negatives of the overuse of the car, both for individuals 

and the community. These negatives include reduced overall personal health and obesity, traffic 

congestion, noise, reduced personal safety, air and water pollution, greenhouse gases, and a 

spiralling personal and community indebtedness. 11 An awareness of these externalities points to 

a need to find the means to reduce car use. 

The negatives of automobile use will eventually become a reality for many. That is, more and 

more we will seek alternatives for at least some of our transportation requirements. But even in 

that reality, what might continue to keep people from choosing the bicycle? 

Assuming that use of a bicycle is an option (sufficient physical and mental capacity) Bikebridge 

believes there are three main reasons why Lethbridge citizens would not (or do not now) choose 

a bicycle for at least some of their typical transportation requirements. Safety (cycling in this 

city is unsafe), security (bikes are always being stolen), and physical fitness (it is just too 

demanding to use a bicycle). More experienced cyclists might consider some of the issues 

expressed around these main barriers more "urban legends" then actual barriers, but Bikebridge 

believes they are nevertheless substantial enough to discourage bicycle use. That is to say, once 

an individual becomes a "cyclist" some of what was previously considered barriers dissipates-some 

does not. 

A. Safety Barriers 

In the context of this review, safety refers to the perception (or reality) that riding a bicycle is a 

more dangerous way to get about in the city then the alternatives: the private auto, public 

transportation, or walking. In the extreme, use of a bicycle is believed dangerous. Bikebridge 

agrees that there are aspects of cycling within Lethbridge considered unsafe, but all that made 

our list result from either a lack of understanding about bicycle use or inadequate roadway and 

bikeway design and maintenance. 


1. Awareness of traffic rules as they relate to the bicycle 

Bikebridge believes much of what may be considered unsafe stems largely from a lack of 

awareness of how the bicycle fits within the context of our transportation infrastructure. This 

lack of awareness is evident both by cyclists and other roadway users. 

a. Bicycle as Vehicle - Many cyclists seem to be unaware that the bicycle is considered a 

vehicle under the Alberta Traffic Safety Act 12 or if aware, choose to operate outside the 

established rules. Cyclists are often observed riding on walkways 13 or, if on the roadway, 

against the traffic on the wrong side. 

b. Cyclists at Intersections - Roadway cyclists appear most at odds with the correct (legal) 

procedures at roadway intersections including where to position the bicycle when turning or 

proceeding through the intersection. This is likely equally true of motorists (relative to the 

bicycle). 

c. Motorists equate cyclists with pedestrians - Motorists also appear unaware of the status of 

the bicycle operator. Bikebridge has observed many instances of motorists yielding to cyclists 

waiting to cross at controlled intersections (as if they were pedestrians). 22 

d. Bikeway intersection with roadway - Perhaps an area least understood by both cyclists and 

motorists, is the rules and roles of each at points where designated bikeways intersect with or 

converge into roadways. 14 

e. Off Limits to Cyclist Roadways - Bikebridge believes that designating some specific 

roadways as off-limits to bicycle may serve to reinforce the view that the bicycle and 

automobiles do not mix - creating unsafe conditions (mainly for the cyclist) and encouraging 

cyclists to ride sidewalks elsewhere. 15 

2. Roadway and Bikeway design 

Much of what contributes to safety as a barrier to bicycle use is a direct result of roadway and 

bikeway design. All major or arterial roadways and indeed most new residential areas in 

Lethbridge are designed to accommodate motorized vehicles. From turning lanes, to parking, 

to traffic signals, the use of a bicycle as a vehicle has received little consideration. 16 

a. Traffic Signal Activation - Many signalized intersections in Lethbridge are activated by the 

presence of a vehicle through roadway sensors. Many of these sensors do not detect the 

presence of a bicycle which leaves the cyclists to: wait for a larger vehicle to approach and 

activate the signal, dismount and attempt to activate a pedestrian signal (if one is provided), 

ride on the sidewalk in order to access the pedestrian signal or ride through the red light. The 

later two result in potentially unsafe solutions. 


. Traffic Signal Timing - Many traffic signals, particularly for crossings at major roadways, 

once activated provide insufficient time for many cyclists to clear the intersection before 

traffic resumes. 

c. Stop signs - On many roadways which could be considered desirable cycling routes 17 , stop 

signs are often placed such that cyclists must make frequent stops. From the perspective of 

many cyclists, momentum is valued and many are tempted to either avoid using the otherwise 

desirable route or not always adhering to the required complete stop. 

d. Narrow or non-existent cycling space - Roadways without sufficient cycling space (right 

shoulder area remaining after space for parked vehicles) which are otherwise the better or 

effectively the only cycling route, are a considerable safety challenge to the bicycle rider. 

This unsafe condition is worsened where an otherwise sufficient shoulder disappears as a 

result of the placement of a right turn lane, traffic island, construction barrier, surface damage 

or parked vehicles. 18 

h. Speed limits - Vehicle maximum speed limits on many desirable non-arterial road cycling 

routes, particularly where the roadway is narrow, can result in an unsafe cycling condition. 

Narrow residential roadways require the cyclist to take more to the road's centre in order to 

avoid the car "door zone" which can result in conflicts with motorists traveling at or over 50 

kilometres per hour. 

i. Bikeway intersections - Most, if not all, provided bikeways 19 run parallel to major or arterial 

roadways and are therefore frequently intersected with access roads. Neither the cyclist nor 

the motorist is advised of their responsibility at these crossings resulting in a guessing game as 

to who has the right of way. Also, location of bikeways so as to intersect at major roadway 

intersections often requires the cyclist to cross right and left turn lanes as well as through 

lanes. A particularly unsafe condition results from right turn lanes when the cyclist is 

traveling in the same direction as a turning vehicle. 

j. Bikeway curb cuts – On most bikeways, concrete curb cuts (bikeway crossing roadways) 

with a 2 to 5 cm concrete lip can be slippery for bicycles with narrower tires, particular when 

ice forms in the low spots resulting from this type of contraction. An example of this can be 

found all along Mayor Magrath Drive South. 

k. Bikeway ending (convergence) - Virtually all bikeways terminate in ways that encourage 

cyclists to make unsafe choices. The cyclist often finds herself on the opposite side of a major 

roadway or at a major signalized intersection with no continuation of the bikeway beyond that 

point. Upon reaching the top of Whoop Up Drive at Scenic Drive, the cyclist is first ushered 

onto a sidewalk and then left at the signalized intersection at 5 th Avenue South. 

l. Motor vehicle parking - Bikebridge recognizes the requirement for vehicle parking but the 

type of parking provided can greatly increase (or decrease) risks for cyclists. Angle parking 

provides an unsafe condition in locations where roadway width does not afford the cyclist a 


view of backing vehicles (or the motorist a view of an approaching cyclist). Cyclist safety is 

also jeopardized where parallel parking on narrow roads results in inadequate space to avoid 

car doors (door zone). Parking of any type where there are also driveways, such as residential 

areas with front facing garages, can result in particularly unsafe cycling conditions. 

3. Roadway and Bikeway Maintenance 

Irrespective of road or bikeway design, the surface condition of the area available to the 

cyclist has a considerable impact on safety particularly when combined with rider 

inexperience with obstacle avoidance. These surface conditions, on roadways (shoulders) and 

bikeways, results in unsafe conditions mostly because the cyclist’s attention is diverted from 

traffic considerations. 

a. Debris - The presence of broken glass, sand, gravel from adjacent laneways, oil and auto 

parts within the cycling zone. 

b. Surface conditions - Pavement breaks, potholes, storm catch basins, water valves and 

manhole covers within cycling zones. 

c. Ice and snow - Ice and snow result in unsafe cycling conditions when left unplowed and an 

even more unsafe condition where snow is plowed into the available cycling zone. 

4. Other 

There are likely many more situations and conditions that can result in unsafe (apparent or 

real) conditions for cyclists including those directly related to the cyclist. 

a. Cycling equipment - Many cyclists choose not to use equipment that may improve the 

cycling safety experience including: mirrors, bells, reflectors, lights, fenders and an adequate 

means to carry items (baskets, panniers, carriers or backpacks). 

b. Mechanical condition - The condition of the cyclist’s vehicle can have a significant bearing 

on the degree of safety. Adequate brakes, sound tires, secure and unworn components are 

essential. 

c. Physical conditioning - Having a level of conditioning adequate to maintain a reasonable 

cycling pace can have considerable bearing on creating safe cycling experiences. A cyclist's 

ability to navigate within traffic situations is at times the greatest safety asset. Reaction and 

avoidance are key. 

B. Security Barriers 

Security in the context of this review refers to the view that using a bicycle does not afford an 

acceptable level of defence against theft or safeguards to wellbeing. “Security Barriers”, 


primarily relate to issues of theft (and vandalism) of the bicycle itself and the cyclist's 

possessions, as well as issues of personal security. 

1. Security of the Bicycle and Possessions 

Bikebridge believes that the threat of theft and vandalism of the bicycle (and possessions) 

presents a considerable barrier to cycling in Lethbridge. This is believed so because there are 

very few adequate security facilities. The absence of these facilities also misses an 

opportunity to signal that using a bicycle to come "here" is an option. 

a. Absence of Adequate Bike Racks - Perhaps the most obvious security issue is the almost 

complete lack of bicycle racks (for relatively short term lockup) throughout the city. This is 

the case at most businesses but there is an almost complete absence of adequate lockup 

security at public facilities including: the library, police station, city hall, pools, arenas, parks, 

concert halls, court house, provincial and federal buildings, hospital and public schools. 20 

b. Absence of security at events - The provision of secure bicycle parking, such as "coat 

check" compounds, at major public events including: annual fairs, farmers' markets, concerts, 

air shows is rare to none-existent. 

c. No Backpack Policy - There are several, particularly retail, Lethbridge businesses that do 

not allow their customers to carry a bag, bike panniers or backpacks within their store. This is 

a considerable issue for the cyclist with no viably secure alternative but to carry possessions 

(including items purchased elsewhere) with them. Leaving possessions with a clerk does not, 

in most cases, improve the cyclist’s perception of security. 

d. Bicycle Recovery Program - Bikebridge believes the City of Lethbridge (Police) does not 

offer an adequate program for reporting and tracking bicycle theft, or for the return of 

recovered bicycles. 

2. Security of Self (personal wellbeing) 

Bikebridge believes that one of the major attractions of the private automobile is that it offers 

an enclosed, climate controlled space. Occupants of the car tend to extend this to include 

security from other externalities including the unwanted advances of others. As the bicycle by 

design is an "open" vehicle, this type of security is not possible; but there are other barriers to 

cycling security that could be at least partially mitigated. 

a. Bikeway locations and lighting - There are bikeway sections located within fairly heavily 

wooded and relative remote locations 21 . Other sections are located where there is a significant 

exposure to wind gusts and drifted snow. There are also sections of bikeways that are 

inadequately illuminated. 


C. Physical (Fitness) Barriers 

The Bikebridge review of the physical barriers to cycling focuses on the perception that there is a 

relatively high level of personal fitness necessary to use a bicycle. For some this translates into 

any bicycle use while for others it is related to more specific cycling routes. There is also a 

prevailing view that using a bicycle lends one less attractive, sometimes referred to as the 

"helmet hair" syndrome, but extends to perceptions about required dress and gear. 

1. Physical fitness barriers 

While it is accurate to suggest riding a bicycle does require a degree of fitness, and although 

the level of that fitness is generally overestimated particularly by non-cyclists, there is 

geography in Lethbridge that can require a significant effort. 

a. River Valley grades - Traversing the river valley by bicycle requires a relatively high 

degree of fitness, particularly for the occasional cyclist. The river valley likely represents the 

single most relevant direct barrier to accommodate cycling universally throughout the city. 

b. Chinook winds - Gusting west winds, particular from late fall through spring can create a 

barrier for cycling east to west anywhere within the city but in combination with the river 

valley can be a deterrent to all but the best conditioned cyclist. 

2. Personal appearance barriers 

The physical requirements of some cycling routes, and the desire to improve ones security by 

wearing a bike helmet, have the potential to affect perceptions around physical appearance 

and result in barriers to cycling. 

a.. Change facilities - Most employers do not offer employees, who may commute by bicycle, 

sufficient facilities in which to change clothing or shower. Most public buildings do not offer 

the cyclist sufficient facilities to change from weather-protective clothing or to tidy up after 

riding to the facility. 


Part 3: Removing Barriers to Cycling 

Bikebridge Cycle City Circle has developed some ideas we believe may contribute toward 

offsetting or even eliminating barriers to increased bicycle use in Lethbridge. Bikebridge has 

formed this "list of ideas" relative to what we developed in Part 2, Barriers to Cycling. This list 

of ideas is the grounding or basis for the formation of the recommendations offered by 

Bikebridge as outlined in the Summary Report, Part 1. 

A. Safety Ideas 

1. Awareness of traffic rules as relative to the bicycle 

Reducing barriers to cycling through improved awareness and understanding of the bicycle as 

a rightful and legal vehicle on community roadways is an essential and ongoing process. 

Bikebridge has some ideas on how this might be undertaken: 

a. Implement an ongoing public awareness (advertising) campaign that communicates that 

bicycles (operated by adults) are valid roadway vehicles both from a legal and pragmatic 

perspective. This could include messaging aimed specifically at cyclists and messaging aimed 

specifically at motorists. 

b. Installation of roadway signs in key locations reminding cyclists to use the road (also 

reminding motorists that cyclists use the road). Some communities have implemented "share 

the road" signage in key locations. Apply bike icon markings on turn lanes (and through 

lanes) indicating the correct position for cyclists at various key intersections. 

c. Encourage the inclusion of bicycle traffic rule education within Lethbridge schools. 

d. Develop and offer bicycle riding and roadway operating courses or camps for both children 

and adults. 

e. Develop a series of Lethbridge unique and recognizable bikeway signs. Erecting signs 

where bikeways intersect with roadways would serve to both designate the location of 

bikeways and highlight the rules and responsibilities of both cyclists and motorists. Further 

improvements would include the addition of bicycle icons within crossing points to develop 

and maintain an awareness of the purpose of these crossings. 

f. Review the rationale for designating specific roadways as off-limits to cyclists. Consider 

adding bike lanes; share the road signs and roadway markings instead of separated bikeways 

particularly where cyclists also require access to businesses and services along both sides of 

that roadway. 


2. Roadway and Bikeway design 

The provision of adequate infrastructure for cycling is likely the single most effective way of 

removing barriers and encouraging the use of bicycles. Improvements to existing roadways 

and bikeways as well as the creation and maintenance of high standards will improve safety 

for both motorists and cyclists and encourage many more citizens to use a bicycle. 

a. Ensure that all road surface traffic signal activation systems are sufficiently sensitive to be 

activated by a bicycle and/or add specific activation loops or push buttons for cyclists. Add 

bicycle icons in locations where the cyclist should place her bike in order to activate the 

signal. 22 

b. Ensure that the crossing phase at signalized intersections provide a sufficient interval to 

allow a cyclist to cross from a stopped position. 

c. At locations where bikeways terminate or cross at major roadways, install a specific bike 

crossing phase initiated by the cyclist (similar to pedestrian crossing phase). 

d. Where designated bike routes and bike lanes cross major roadways at un-signalized 

locations, install cyclist activated crossing lights (similar to pedestrian crossing corridors). 

Include appropriate signage to warn motorists of the designated bicycle crossing. 23 

e. Limit the number of stop and yield signs along designated bike routes and roadways with 

bike lanes. 

f. On roadways that provide the best or the only route for cyclists, ensure there is adequate 

roadway shoulder space (bike lanes). Reduce motor vehicle lane widths, expand total road 

width or remove vehicle parking as necessary. In conjunction, develop a standard for new 

roadways that includes a specified cycling travel area. 

g. Relocate traffic islands (right and left turn bays) to provide sufficient space for through 

cyclists or design (reconstruct existing) islands such that they do not form a cycling barrier. 

h. Where temporary traffic barriers are installed for purposes of roadway maintenance and 

repair and motorized traffic is still permitted, provision should also be made to allow cyclists 

to traverse the area without conflicting with motorized traffic. 

i. On non-arterial roadways designated as bike routes, particularly where the roadway is 

narrow, reduce the speed limit to 30 kilometres per hour or less. 

f. Develop criteria for establishing a series of designated bike routes throughout the city. 

Develop maps, brochures and websites informing cyclists of these routes. 


g. Develop criteria for establishing a series of bike lanes along main or arterial roads 

throughout the city. Develop maps, brochures and websites informing cyclists of the location 

of these lanes. 

h. Designate school zones also as children bicycle zones with interesting signs and roadway 

markings. 

3. Roadway and Bikeway maintenance 

Improved standards for the maintenance of both bikeways and the cycling areas on roadways 

could have a considerable impact both on improving safety and on removing barriers to 

bicycle use. 

a. Develop and implement a standard for sweeping, cleaning, removing snow and repairing 

the surfaces of bikeways and roadway shoulders on designated bike routes and bike lanes. 

b. Consider the location of manholes, water valves and storm grates within the criteria for 

selecting designated bike routes and bike lanes. 

c. Include within design standards for new roadways, a cycling zone that is free of utility 

access points and storm drainage devices. 

d. Update roadway snow ploughing and removal procedures to ensure that snow is not 

ploughed onto designated bike route shoulders or bike lanes. 

4. Other Ideas 

Some other ideas for reducing the cycling safety barriers are: 

a. Implement a campaign and programs aimed at creating awareness on the proper use of 

bicycle equipment. 

b. In conjunction with local bicycle shops, develop a City of Lethbridge Safe Cycling Pack 

which could include a bike bell, mirror and reflectors as well as route maps, cycling rules 

book, etc. The pack could sell at a nominal price or be part of a sponsor/city partnership giveaway. 

c. Encourage the development of bicycle maintenance and repair workshops through local 

High Schools, Lethbridge College and the University of Lethbridge. Students could be 

encouraged to volunteer their skills to teach others basic bicycle maintenance. 

d. Encourage and support development of a bike maintenance and repair cooperative where 

members can rent shop space, bike repair stands and tools, as well as receive onsite guidance 

from co-op volunteers. The co-op could also help young people gain bicycle repairs skills 


and experience by reconditioning older donated bicycles for redistribution in the city or 

overseas. 

B. Security Ideas 

1. Security of Bicycle and Possessions 

Bikebridge ideas for reducing security risks to the cyclist in terms of their bicycle and 

possessions are: 

a. Establish a bylaw outlining a minimum standard for bicycle parking devices (bike racks). 

This bylaw should apply whether or not a business or facility is required to provide parking 

for cyclists. That is, if a business provides bicycle parking, whether or not it is required to do 

so under bylaw, it must be to the minimum standard. 

b. Establish a recommended standard, including build ready specifications, for bicycle parking 

(bike racks) that could be installed by a business wishing to attract customers on bicycles. 24 

c. Require the removal and replacement of any currently installed bike rack (public and 

private) that does not meet the minimum standard. 25 

d. Establish a minimum bicycle parking provision standard applicable to all public facilities 

and private businesses licensed within the City. Where a business or facility is required to 

provide a minimum number of motor vehicle parking stalls, that business should also be 

required to provide a minimum number of bicycle rack stalls based on a determined formula 

(for example, one bicycle parking rack for every ten car stalls, or at lease one bicycle rack if 

any other parking is required). This same standard could apply to all businesses and public 

facilities that provide car parking regardless of whether or not that parking is a requirement. 

e. Encourage organizations holding major events within the city, typically in temporary 

locations, to provide secure compounds for patrons who cycle to that event. Where the event 

requires a permit or license from the City of Lethbridge, provision of bicycle security should 

be an included condition. 

f. Require, under a bylaw, that any business or establishment that maintains a policy 

disallowing patrons from carrying bags, panniers, backpacks or similar containers on their 

premises, must provide suitable lockers to secure carried possessions. 

g. Establish a bicycle registration system or participate in a national bike registration 

program. 26 

h. Establish a fine for damaging a bike rack or a bicycle or for taking a bicycle unlawfully that 

is at least as substantial as the City of Lethbridge fine for applying graffiti 27 . Post signs on or 

near publicly provided bike racks warning of the fine. Possibly provide a portion of the 


proceeds of fines to citizens observing and reporting bike damage or theft. Possibly create a 

fund to help defer the cost of replacing stolen and damaged bicycles and damaged bike racks. 

2. Security of Self 

Ideas for lessening barriers resulting from remote or dark cycling locations are: 

a. As part of broader bike lane and bike route standards and initiatives, provide adequate (safe 

and direct) alternatives to bikeways that are less secure due to their remoteness or exposure to 

wind and drifting. 

b. Establish bike route, bikeway and bike lane lighting standards relative to their location to 

existing roadway lighting (or the lack thereof). Where the illumination of a cycling area falls 

below the established standard, additional or separate lighting should be added. 

C. Physical Barrier Ideas 

1. Physical fitness 

Ideas for managing fitness barriers to cycling are essentially the elimination of other barriers 

to using a bicycle. Improved fitness is one of primary benefits of cycling. 

a. Promote cycling fitness by encouraging citizens to make use of a bicycle instead of a car as 

often as possible. 

b. Encourage cycling fitness by undertaking to eliminate barriers to using a bicycle in 


c. Partner with schools to actively encourage children to ride a bicycle to school. 28 

d. Create bikeway, bike route and bike lane standards that include utilizing the existing shelter 

from west winds provided from trees and structures. Develop a program of planting 

windbreaks adjacent to exposed bikeways. 

e. Create bikeway, bike route and bike lane standards that include maximum allowable total 

and short-run grades. 29 

f. Establish public transit access at the low points of the river valley to allow cyclists to utilize 

bus racks for the uphill portion of a river valley traverse. 

2. Personal appearance 

Some ideas that may diminish barriers to cycling resulting from concerns about one’s personal 

appearance are: 


a. Encourage employers to consider providing their employees with a change room and 

showering facilities. 

b. Establish within standards for new public buildings (and recreation facilities) locations for 

cyclists to change from and to cycling apparel. Consider including lockers as a part of this 

standard. 

c. Consider adding cyclist change and locker locations in existing public buildings and 

recreation facilities. 


Notes 

1 One means to involve Lethbridge citizens in creation of a Municipal Development Plan /Integrated 

Community Sustainability Plan is for citizens to create an ad hoc group or a "City Circle". Bikebridge 

Cycle City Circle is one such group formed to provide some insight into the barriers to using bicycles as 

utilitarian vehicles within Lethbridge along with some suggestions that might ultimately be incorporated 

into the Municipal Development Plan. 

2 The City of Lethbridge, Alberta is undertaking the creation of the ‘Plan Your City’ Municipal 

Development Plan /Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP) which will become the 

primary planning document that maps out the future of our city. The final Plan will address such things 

as: How and where should the City grow, environmental issues and sustainability, new development – 

height, density, architecture, social issues and needs, economic development, transportation, parks and 

recreation and culture. 

3 An E-bike in the review refers to a 2 or 3 wheeled vehicle manufactured to operate only on electric 

power and does not refer to a bicycle with a supplemental electric assist device. 

4 Brainstorming refers to a group creativity technique designed to generate a number of ideas toward the 

solution of a problem. Bikebridge has also used this technique to generate a list of issues (barriers). 

5 Bikeways are taken to mean designated paved pathways that are physically separated from roadways 

and do not necessarily run parallel to a roadway. Although typically shared with pedestrians, bikeways 

are constructed to standards that allow use by cyclists of average fitness primarily in terms of grades and 

exposure to weather elements. Bikeways have control and warning signage and surface markings for 

cyclists as well as considerations to facilitate road crossings. 

6 Bike Routes refers to established desirable routes providing the cyclist relatively direct access from one 

point in the city to another. Routes are desirable in terms of offering the cyclist directness with emphasis 

on and consideration for safety, security and fitness requirements. Bike routes would include 

considerations in terms of the placement of stop signs, traffic lights, vehicle parking and speed limits. 

Bike routes would incorporate existing (residential and arterial) roadways, bikeways and bike lanes. Bike 

routes would be designated by signs, pavement markings or both and would be identified in published 

maps and on websites. 

7 Bike Lanes refers to areas on roadways reserved for use by cyclists. Bike lanes would be identified by 

pavement lane markings, cycling icons and signage. Bike lanes would typically be included on major and 

arterial roadways (higher vehicle speeds and traffic volumes) where use of these roadways is necessary in 

order to provide an adequate bike route. Traffic signal activation by cyclists, left turn requirements and 

placement of traffic islands would be included in bike lane design requirements. Bikebridge believes 

that, good bike route standards and the development and use of quality and direct bikeways could limit 

the number of roadways with bike lanes. 

8 Bicycle Advisory Group (BAG) might have the following aspects: 

� A complement of between 8 and 12 members with finite and staggered terms 

� A chairperson and, or spokesperson elected by groups members 

� Group would be independent of City (select its own members) 


� City would provide financial assistance (budget) to conduct meetings and maintain a website 

� City would provide logistics for such activities as placing advertisements (recruiting members) 

� Group would provide written suggestions on any (all) infrastructure projects 

� Group would provide written reviews on bicycle related standards (could be asked to initiate 

some aspects) 

9 Bikebridge believes that establishing a high quality bikeway with minimized grades (under 2 – 3 %) on 

both sides of the river would serve to greatly enhance use of the bicycle in Lethbridge. It would connect 

West Lethbridge Citizens to downtown services by bicycle. It would serve to improve access to the 

University from East Lethbridge for students and provide access by all citizens to shared recreational and 

cultural facilities (University field house, sports field, theatre, art galleries, and guest lecturers). It would 

build on the Heart of Our City ideals. 

10 According to Wikipedia, Lethbridge has a population to area density of 607 people per square 

kilometre. For comparison Calgary has a density of 1,360, Red Deer 1,196, Great Falls, MT 2,909, 

Vancouver 5,335, Victoria 4,197, and Manhattan, NY 71,201. 

11 The direct cost of automobile ownership and operation will continue to be a relatively large portion of 

the family budget. Direct public costs for providing and maintaining roadway infrastructure will likely 

increase exponentially as infrastructure ages and the demands for concrete, asphalt and other primary 

materials rise. Indirect costs including noise abatement, loss of productive land, added expenditures to 

deal with air and water contamination, reduced public transit revenues are all expected without some 

corresponding reduction in auto use. 

12 

Alberta Traffic Safety Act: Generally, a person operating a bicycle on a highway has all the rights and 

is 

subject to all the duties that any vehicle operator has. 

Regulation 322/20002 

“bicycle” means a cycle propelled solely by human power on which a person may ride that has 2 

wheels, and includes a bicycle with training wheels; 

No person who is less than 18 years old shall operate or ride as a passenger on a bicycle unless 

that person is properly wearing a safety helmet. 

A person shall not ride a bicycle at night time unless the bicycle has the following: 

(a) at least one headlamp but not more than 2 headlamps; 

(b) at least one red tail lamp; 

(c) at least one red reflector mounted on the rear. 

A person shall not ride a bicycle unless the bicycle has a brake 

Regulation 304/2002 

Cyclists are required to keep both hands on the handlebars of the cycle, except when making a 

signal. 

Cyclists are not to use the cycle to carry more persons at one time than the number for which the 

cycle is designed and equipped. 

Cyclists are required to ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway unless 

that person is in the process of making a left turn with the cycle. On a one-way highway in an 


urban area ride as near as practicable to either curb or edge of the roadway unless crossing from 

one curb or edge of the roadway to the other. 

On a highway that has paved shoulders cyclists are to ride on the right shoulder, or if there is no 

paved shoulders ride as far to the right of the roadway as practicable unless making a left turn. 

Cyclists are not to ride adjacent to another cycle traveling in the same direction except when 

overtaking and passing another cycle. 

When a cyclist is travelling in the near vicinity of and in the same direction as another cycle, he 

or she is to ride directly in line with and to the rear or front of the other cycle. 

13 

The current City of Lethbridge Bicycle By-law is #3515 (1986) 

Part 4: No person shall ride or use a bicycle: 

(1) on any sidewalk or boulevard unless signs permit its use; 

(2) in a cemetery; 

(3) on a roadway, park or other public place where signs prohibit its use; 

(4) on the main roadway of Mayor Magrath Drive between 3rd and 24 th Avenues South 

(5) on a highway or public place when the roadway is icy, slippery or dangerous for travel 

(6) on the Crowsnest Trail from 28th Street South to a point 400 metres West of Scenic Drive. 

14 An example of this can be seen at the end of the Scenic Drive South bikeway at 4 th Street South. 

15 Cyclists are barred from using Mayor Magrath Drive South from around 3 rd Avenue South to 24 th 

Avenue South. 

16 The inclusion of a separated pathway for pedestrians and cyclists with the reconstruction of Mayor 

Magrath Drive, South of Scenic Drive was part of the roadway design. Given that the pathway is located 

on just one side of the roadway and that each intersection presents safety challenges, it offers the cyclist 

(and the pedestrian) little in the way of value or convenience. 

17 Desirable cycling routes would be those that provided the cyclist a relatively direct, safe and secure 

means to travel from one location in the city to another within at least a reasonable level of fitness. 

18 Stafford Drive North on the north end of the Stafford Drive overpass is a good example of the roadway 

becoming narrow and increasing the risks to cyclists. The south bound side is particularly risky as 

cyclists are also required to cycle up a relatively steep incline. Many cyclists have been observed 

reverting to the sidewalk on both sides of the overpass. The Stafford Drive overpass is a required route 

for many cyclists (unless they choose to take a much longer route by using the 13 th Street underpass, 

which is not a particularly better cycling experience). 

19 Examples of bikeways with frequent intersecting access roads include Scenic Drive South, Mayor 

Magrath Drive South, University Drive West, and if it could be considered a bikeway, the pathway 

adjacent to 28 th Street North. 

20 Although the adequacy of bike racks is somewhat arbitrary, at a minimum a rack should allow the 

cyclist to lock the frame of the bicycle not just one wheel, which is the most common style of rack 

provided locally. A bicycle is easily stolen from such a rack by simple removing the wheel, made even 


easier with the more modern “quick-release” hub. Some other basic minimums for bike racks include: 

anchoring the rack to a hard surface, locating the rack where it is in public view and providing sufficient 

clearance (from building and motor vehicles) on all sides to allow access by cyclists. 

21 An example is the trail system through the river valley that is used extensively by cyclists as a route 

between Southeast Lethbridge and West Lethbridge. 

22 The location of traffic activation loops is not always visible and the cyclists may inadvertently not be 

located in the correct position to activate. 

23 There is a prevailing view that cyclists should dismount and walk the bicycle across at controlled 

intersections (some would argue at any intersection). And although this might be considered a reasonable 

suggestion in some circumstances, doing so generally reduces the value of using a bicycle and is therefore 

a barrier to its use. 

24 Higher standards for bicycle parking facilities might include locating bike racks in an area where the 

bicycles are protected from rain and snow, racks are located close to building accesses, where the bike 

rack is included as part of any video surveillance systems or security guard routes, and there is direct 

lighting. Providing quality facilities to cyclists could give a business a significant advantage over those 

that do not, particularly as more people look for ways to use their bicycle to do at least some of their 

shopping. 

25 Poorly installed or designed bike racks may provide less security then providing no bike rack as it may 

leave a bicycle virtually unsecured. The cyclist could have gained better security from locking their 

bicycle to some other permanent object. 

26 Bike Registry Canada and the National Bike Registry (US based) both offer bicycle registration 

services for a small fee. These services offer access to policing services to trace the owner of registered 

bicycles and a national location for a bicycle owner to report their bike as stolen. 

27 City of Lethbridge bylaw 5529 establishes a fine of $2,500 for applying graffiti to a premises without 

the consent of the owner. 

28 A ride to school campaign could be combined with teaching proper bicycle use and rules. It could also 

include installation of adequate bike racks and even the provision of locks to students. Children could be 

helped in selecting a good biking route from home to the school. 

29 Grades on existing bikeways through the river valley can exceed 15% and regularly exceed 5%. The 

grade that a bicyclist can be expected to negotiate depends on the length of the grade, wind velocity, and 

surface condition. Generally speaking, the amount of energy required to use a bicycle route will affect 

the usage of the route, and bicyclists will tend to avoid routes that have steep hills. Some bicyclists will 

find themselves walking on long, steep uphill grades. On downhill grades, bicyclists may exceed the 

speed at which they can safely control their bicycles. Therefore, grades should be kept to a minimum, 

even at the expense of providing added curvature or travel distance, within the practical limits for the site. 

The maximum grade recommended** for shared-use paths is 5 percent and sustained grades should be 

limited to a maximum of 3 percent. 

**Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (1999), In the American Association of State Highway 

and Transportation Officials. Recommend that grades on shared use paths should be kept to a minimum, 


especially on long inclines. Grades greater than 5 percent are undesirable because the ascents are difficult 

for many bicyclists to climb and the descents cause some bicyclists to exceed the speeds at which they are 

competent or comfortable. On some shared use paths, where terrain dictates, designers may need to 

exceed the 5 percent grade recommended for bicycles for some short sections and that distance should not 

exceed 240 meters. 

General References: 

Mapes, Jeff. Pedaling Revolution, How Cyclists are Changing American Cities. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, 2009. 

Sloman, Lynn. Car Sick, Solutions for our Car-addicted Culture. Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 

White River Junction, Vermont, 2006. 

Hurst, Robert. The Art of Urban Cycling, Lessons from the Street. Falcon Publishing, Helena MT, 2004. 

Barrantine, Richard. City Cycling. Snowbooks, London, 2007. 

Momentum Magazine, Suite 214-425 Carrall Street, Vancouver, BC, V6B 6E3 

Bicycle Times, Dirt Rag LTD, 3483 Saxonburg Blvd, Pittsburgh, PA 15238 



Affordable Housing Committee 

0112-318-00 CCID 15

October 17 th , 2009

Our Vision 

Bringing Lethbridge Home….Permanent 

Housing for all people living in Lethbridge

The Current Reality 

� Shortage of Affordable Housing (rental and home ownership) 

� Low vacancy Rates 

� Difficult to find Affordable Housing to purchase (Getting into the housing 

market) 

� Condo conversion is becoming more prevalent. Results in higher rental 

rates 

� Development of large sub-communities start out to not be affordable by 

the way they are designed 

� Neighborhoods seem to be Developer Driven 

� Gentrification is resulting in a negative Impact and reduces availability of 

affordable housing stock 

� Extremely low density in Lethbridge (Affordability Impeded) 

� Difficult/long waits in the process to get permits and rezoning etc. (Viewed 

as Red tape) 

� It is difficult to create affordable housing in a short period of time

The Current Reality 

� Current .08% Vacancy Rate 

� Shortage of rentals around University and 

College (rent costs high). 

� Tendency to segregate people based on a 

commonality ( Age, Race, Income Levels) 

� Where is NIMBY coming from; Why is it still 

around?

Recommendations for the Future

Solutions 

� Affordable Housing Committee of Council (AHCC) (Overcome “Red Tape”) 

� SHIA Affordable Housing and Affordable Housing Committee of Council come together 

to meet more often 

� Build trust and open communication surrounding community issues 

� There can be too much consultation with many committees 

� Increasing Affordable Housing must be goal driven with responsibilities 

� People given more authority to act : simplification of processes and identification of 

the barriers 

� Clearly define Policy, Rules and Processes for affordable housing (what can and cannot 

be done) 

� Policies need to be continually reviewed to streamline system for developers 

� Have designated land ready for building when developers are ready to build 

� Communicate the vision for affordable housing in Lethbridge with citizens and City 

Council members to create a “Shared Vision” 

� People need to trust that their best interests will be looked after 

� Create higher density dwellings near university and college may reduce cost and 

increase living space that is more affordable

Affordable Home Ownership 

� Requires different options to move towards 

homeownership (lending options) 

� Higher density housing creates affordability 

for rental and affordable home ownership 

� Need to develop housing for a mixture of 

incomes in a neighborhood

Neighbourhoods 

� Paths and walkways to promote 

pedestrian traffic 

� Community gathering areas to promote 

inclusion 

� Corner stores to promote interaction 

with neighbors

Welcoming Neighborhoods 

� More Neighborhood Associations can create 

improved neighborhood relations and involvement 

� Neighborhood/Community Association influence 

� Neighborhoods working together to create a sense 

of bringing people together and develop stronger 

community 

� Neighborhood Tea Wagon – to discuss 

neighborhood issues and create conversation

Welcome to my Backyard 

� Education & awareness (cultural differences & similarities, living with lower 

incomes, working poor and everyone’s need to participate in community 

life) 

� Empowering people to feel important and have the ability to change 

� Integration of high and low income housing throughout communities: 

Inclusionary zoning 

� Education and Research through SHIA should continue (U of L Research project) 

� Help and support one another: Build positive neighborhood relations 

� Build alternative high density housing i.e. Housing Cooperatives and 

educating investors (integration of all income levels) 

� Identify opportunities and options (information sessions)

Condo Conversion 

� Condo conversion policies (e.g. Ontario): No 

condo conversion if the vacancy rate is less 

than 5 % 

� Large permit price for Condo Conversions 

� Incentive programs to keep rental properties 

� Incentives for up-keep of rental properties 

� Exceptions for heritage buildings 

� Incentives for builders to build affordable units

Gentrification 

� Trendy 

� Individual led change 

� More expensive development Permits for 

projects that are deemed gentrification 

issues

Increased Density Housing 

� Redevelopment of downtown core for increased 

density & affordable housing 

� Incentives/subsidies for people to invest in bringing 

buildings up to code for housing 

� Flexible/creative housing Ideas – Housing above strip 

malls 

� Inclusionary Zoning and mixed use policies 

� Takes more money to maintain low density housing 

(Property taxes) 

� Encourage higher density options in all neighborhoods

Thank you


Sports Council Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 16

• Involvement 

• Barrier to entry for Sport opportunities 

• Sport Facilities 

• Athlete Development (Long Term) 

• Sports Delivery Model 

• Sport Recognition 

• The “Place of Sport” in our culture 

• Lack of Political clout 

Sports Council Circle

Education precedence over sport 

• Promotion through grade school 

• Long term athletic development 

• Sport is a continuum 

Participation in Sport takes away from education 

• ibit 

Communicating Sport 

Money – Time costs 


• Right messaging 

• Sport Council 

• Unified voice 

• Marketing the benefits of sports 

• Marketing impact of sport tourism 

• Adequate number of facilities 

• Multi-sport 

Religion (Sunday sport) 

Parent’s Commitment 

Coaching 

• Discount/free for kids in sport 

• Solutions marketing around Sunday 

• Population growth will influence this 

• Address coaches approach 

• Physical 

• literacy 

• Bring coaching courses to Lethbridge 

• Level of accreditation 

Barriers/Involvement

Multifunctional 

Facilities 

• How we can integrate other activities in existing facilities 

• “Service place” 

• Talisman Centre 

• Promote potential of development 

• Winter Games 

Agglomerating Activity 

Pools 

• Security to know 

• Identifying compatible sports 

• Impact of emerging sports 

• YMCA, Fritz, Civic, Sheran, University 

Aging Facilities/Population 

Population Threshold 

Needs Assessment 

• Senior Recreation 

• All ages recreation – multi use 

• Updating the facility – Master Plan – every 5 years 

• Identify what is lacking 

• Age 

Green Building Leed 

• What is coming on line 

• All weather fields

Hit and Miss 

• We do have phys ed 

Long-term Athlete Development (LTAD) 

• Promote LTAD through phys ed 

• Phys ed to identify strengths 

• Identify sports groups to provide opportunities for kids 

Each sport encourages development (for some it’s easier) 

• Sports are fun!! 

• Sport Council needs to get this message out 

• Active at all ages 

• Accessibility 

• Opportunities in all sports until kids hit a certain age 

• Support 2 sport organizations 

Enrollment numbers dependant on sport 

Multi Sport Athletes 

• Getting more kids involved 

• Demonstrations 

• Multisport registration 

• Multisport camps 

• Increase education 

• Complementary sports

Visibility of Sport 

• Sports is recognized as important 

• Lack of presence for sport 

• Sport is neglected today 

Sports Culture 

• A civic sport – Lethbridge to encourage a sport 

• Advocacy 

• Accolades 

• Recognition 

• “Sport Day” 

Fragmentation of Sport Groups 

• Sports Council 

• Inclusion 

• Organization 

Sports Council is the first step.


AECOM City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 17

AECOM City Circle July 24, 2009 

Attendance: Bill McMillan, Amanda Hjelmeland, Marnie Ewankiw, Cindy Desjarlais, Colin Haugan, Robert 

Teetaert, Carol Smith, Trevor Loomer, Glenn Lofthouse, Tim Armstrong 

Topic 1 – Leisure Centre 

• There isn’t one! 

• Waterslide at the Ramada 

• University facilities isolated 

• Scale = Go Big 

• Examples of successful Leisure Centres: 

o Regina – Sandra Schmirler Leisure Centre 

o Medicine Hat – Family Leisure Centre 

o Red Deer – GH Dawn / Collicutt Centre 

• Amenities a new Leisure Centre should incorporate: 

o Wave pool, Waterslide, Courts, Tracks, Ice rink, Lounge, Canteen 

• Location: 

o Anywhere is 20 minutes away –Sherring Park/ North Side/County 

Topic 2 – Pathways 

• There is no continuity in the current system, new connections could include: 

o L.C. to west of Country Club (bypass) 

o North-South route 

o Downtown along 4 th street 

• There are no cycling lanes 

• Wider pathways / demarcation 

o A dedicated pathway along Stafford Drive Bridge is needed 

• Existing bike routes are poorly identified (e.g. 7 th ave) 

o Advertise the routes 

o Painted laneways 

o Signage 

o Community map 

• 13 th Street is dangerous for cyclists 

o We need a crossing at 7 th 

• The intersection of Whoop-up Drive & University Drive is still dangerous 

o move the button back 

• Bicycle storage would promote cycling 

o Bike racks (good ones) 

o At all major nodes 

o Storefront racks should be mandatory 

• More frequent coulee path maintenance would be great

Topic 3 – Transit 

• Our Transit system is currently underutilized/not utilized, we understand that this is partially 

cultural(people want cars), however a more effective system would boost ridership 

o Student program with direct high school routes to get students comfortable with transit 

o Routes that run later in the day 

• Many routes are convoluted 

o Make routes more direct 

o Centralize routes so that they move to and from a hub – less routes that circle around 

the City before heading downtown 

• There is no bus Terminal – a centralized and secure terminal would boost ridership and tackle 

perceptions over safety 

o 6st in-between 4 th and 5 th ave. 

• Encourage other forms of transportation 

o SOV’s convenient – make it less so 

o Better mix of uses on west side so that people no longer drive the “great horseshoe” 

(i.e. from the south part of the west side up to Whoop-up and down to the retail in the 

South of the City) 

Topic 4 – Development Patterns 

• Sprawl in endemic in this City 

o 6 persons/Acre 

o Promote Brownfield/Infill Development through incentives 

o Promote home occupations (review bylaws) 

• There is an acute lack of residential housing in the downtown 

o Mitigate the NIMBYism from downtown shops that are stopping development 

o Combat the image that downtown is only good for affordable housing (i.e. promote the 

establishment of quality downtown condominiums) 

o Foster the development of a better night life (might help with keeping students after 

graduation) 

o We need more people downtown 

• The impact of Big Boxes impact: 

o Killing small business 

o Peripheral location killing downtown 

• Establish Constraints to curb Big Boxes: 

o E.g. Big Boxes have to be an anchor to pedestrian mall 

• Promote mixed-use commercial within policy (over Big Box format)


Community Inclusion City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 18

Submitted to Brian Conger 

AECOM representative and City Circle organizer 

Submitted by Natalie Ashbee 

Community Advisory Group member and Community Inclusion City Circle organizer 

Dear 

City Council, 

Community Advisory Group, 

City Planners, 

and Lethbridge residents, 


City Circle Report 

7 September 2009 

Individuals with disabilities are an active and vibrant part of this city. Understanding the importance of 

an accessible and inclusive community, where everyone’s values are heard and valued, the Community 

Inclusion City Circles were organized. 

The Community Inclusion City Circles were composed of 48 community members, comprised of 

individuals with disabilities, their staff, and their family members. The city circles were held through a 

combination of questionnaire, in home visits and group meetings. The largest meeting took place at the 

Ability Resource Center (formerly the Rehabilitation Society of Southwestern Alberta), and was hosted 

by the Toastmasters group. 

Participants were asked two main questions; 

1. What do you like about living in Lethbridge? 

Among the aspects that participants liked about life in Lethbridge were; 

• Dragon boat festival 

• The size of Lethbridge is just right, Lethbridge has all the amenities of a larger city but without 

the long drive times 

• Lethbridge has a small town feeling with lots of friendly people 

• Going for walks in the nice parks 

• We have a safe community 

• History, buildings with character 

• Lethbridge is quiet 

• There are lots of recreation activities such as golfing, bowling, and hockey games 

• Lots of volunteers and volunteer opportunities 

• Lethbridge is an inclusive community 

• We are close to other large cities 

• We have clean air 

2. How could Lethbridge be better? 

1


City Circle Report 

7 September 2009 

• There needs to be better access to buildings, especially older buildings, which are currently 

inaccessible to wheelchairs or people with walkers. 

• The Lethbridge transit system has introduced several wheelchair accessible buses, however, 

many individuals with disabilities cannot secure their own wheelchairs safely and drivers are 

sometimes unable to help (do not have the knowledge of how to help). 

• Lethbridge requires much more frequent bus service. Many individuals are quite limited to how 

they can access the community based of the transit service, which is often their only means of 

transportation. 

• The network of bus stops needs expansion. Many individuals in wheelchair or with limited 

mobility must travel farther than they are able to access transit service. 

• Encourage the development of more routes that do not require a trip downtown. 

• Improvements to Access-a-ride could include... 

1. Better coordination of access-a-ride to be more efficient in making trips to pick up 

individuals. As of right now individuals who leave the same destination at the same 

time and who are going to the same place, are picked up by different busses. A 

husband and wife, one of whom was in attendance, gave this personal example. 

2. An access-a-ride taxi for after hours service. Individuals with disabilities go on living 

past 6pm, however, those who require this service cannot access their community 

after 6pm as the Access-a-ride service ends at this time. This is a huge hindrance to 

community inclusion and to them enjoying a normal quality of life in Lethbridge. 

3. Better training for access-a-ride drivers. Proper training for helping individuals is 

essential to the safety of the users of this service. 

• More playgrounds on the south side 

• We need community meeting places around Lethbridge. These community meeting places could 

facilitate greater community inclusion. Community centers and neighbourhood associations can 

promote a sense of community. 

• Encourage block parties and community fairs 

• Develop more housing closer to amenities (not as spread out) so that individuals who cannot 

drive can access necessary services and amenities. 

• More new apartments in all parts of town. Affordable housing is limiting factor for individuals 

with a fixed income. Housing is hard to find and is often substandard. 

• The downtown residents need a grocery store. Likewise the west side of town requires another 

grocery store. 

• Better snow removal in the winter. For individuals with limited mobility at the best of times, 

snow removal for transportation access is very important. 

• More / better connected pathways throughout town. 

• Better and more seniors housing and services. With an aging population, meeting the needs of 

seniors is very important. Having meeting places and affordable/ quality housing options is very 

important. 

2


Enhanced Seniors Transit Service 

0112-318-00 CCID 19


City Circle for Business 

0112-318-00 CCID 20

September 8, 2009 

Robert McKay, Senior Planner 

Development Services, City of Lethbridge 

910 4 th Ave S, Lethbridge, AB, T1J 0P6 

RE: City Circles for Business 

Dear Robert; 

Please find enclosed a summary of our ideas as generated by our City Circle for Business held on 

August 27, 2009, facilitated jointly by the Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce and Economic 

Development Lethbridge. 

We have prepared this summary of the event as well as a transcript of the notes from the meeting, 

attached as Appendix 1. The input from the Lethbridge business community was centered around the 

discussion topics of infrastructure, policy and services and included ideas on how Lethbridge 

businesses feel the city should grow and operate over the next forty years. 

We look forward to seeing all the ideas published in the “Plan Your City Ideas Book”. 

If you have any questions on the report or the process used, please contact Bruce West at 

403.331.0022. 

Thank you for providing the Lethbridge business community an opportunity to participate in the 

planning of the city’s future. 

Sincerely; 

_ (Signed Copy on File)_____ ____(Signed Copy on File) ____ 

Jody Nilsson, Cheryl Dick, APR, MBA 

General Manager Chief Executive Officer 

Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Lethbridge 

200 Commerce House 529 6 th St S 308 Stafford Drive S 

Lethbridge, AB, T1J 2E1 Lethbridge, AB, T1J 2L1 

(403) 327-1586 (403) 331-0022

City Circles for Business – Summary Report 

Meeting Information and Participants 

The City Circles for Business, facilitated jointly by the Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce and Economic 

Development Lethbridge, was held on August 27, 2009 as a “Lunch & Learn” session at the Lethbridge 

Centre Conference Facilities from 11:30 AM to 1:00 PM. 

Sixteen business representatives participated including the discussion facilitators, with Bruce West, 

Vice President, Business Development and Operations, Economic Development Lethbridge (EDL), 

facilitating the event. Participants were members of the Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce and 

represented a cross-section of the Lethbridge business community, with participants from both the 

public and private sector. Industry representation included Lethbridge professionals in the health & 

wellness, education, hospitality, property management, financial services, professional services, 

broadcasting, and construction sectors. 

Event Details 

� Bruce West welcomed the attendees and introduced himself along with the organizers and 

sponsors of the event. The Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce representatives were Jody Nilsson, 

General Manager, Grace Duff, Governmental Affairs Committee Member, Paul Pharo, President, 

Tom Ackerman, Chairperson Governmental Affairs Committee, and Heather Scotland, 

Administrative Assistant. Assisting Bruce West from EDL was Heather McIntosh-Rivera, Research 

and Operations Officer. 

� Bruce outlined the Municipal Development Plan (MDP) and the Integrated Community Sustainability 

Plan (ICSP) as encompassed under the City of Lethbridge “Plan Your City” Project, as well as 

reviewing the timeline of the MDP/ICSP and the process for gathering public input. 

� The process and the format for the collection of ideas from the discussion were explained and the 

working groups were asked to choose a recorder and reporter to assist with the information 

collection and dissemination. Discussion topics for business were introduced and explained as 

follows:”Infrastructure” (including the transportation network, lands, utilities, and communications), 

“Policy” (City policy direction and impact on business) and “Services” (City services that should be 

provided to the business community as well as the level, or type, of service). 

� Participants were asked to provide realistic comments using a “solution based” approach and to 

focus ideas and comments on how the business environment in Lethbridge could be improved in 

the future. After forty-five minutes each group reported their ideas which provided the attendees an 

opportunity to connect with other like-minded business professionals to further discuss an idea, and 

possibly form another city circle on that specific item. 

� Attendees were thanked for their attendance and advised to contact Bruce West or Jody Nilsson for 

any further information or Brian Conger, the City Circles primary contact at the City of Lethbridge. 

2

Summary of Ideas Presented 

Ideas on Infrastructure 

Transportation Specific Elements 

� A complete bypass of the City, as proposed with the Canamex Trade Corridor, may be 

detrimental to commercial activity as well as impacting emergency services. A more in-depth 

evaluation of the potential economic impact on the City of Lethbridge and the surrounding 

area is recommended. 

� Businesses and residents would benefit from the completion of 43 rd Street loop (as 

previously proposed) to alleviate traffic concerns and to allow for expanded commercial 

operations. Creating an overpass/underpass to allow for uninhibited rail traffic would be 

beneficial for the larger transport vehicles exiting from the Industrial Park. 

� Widen the junction of Highway 25 and the Highway 3 overpass to allow for enhance on/off 

ramps from Highway 3 to University Drive to address traffic congestions and traffic safety. 

� Mayor Magrath Drive requires a comprehensive review of all signage as there are areas 

where signage and road markings are unclear, inconsistent and inaccurate. There are 

areas of inaccessibility from the main thoroughfare, such as the vehicular access to the 

Fairmont area, which need to be addressed and updated. Commercial operations will 

continue to grow in this area and a proactive traffic management plan would be beneficial to 

all businesses and residents in the area. 

� The development of a third bridge connecting West Lethbridge to the other portions of the 

city would better benefit the city by choosing a design which utilizes unique elements and 

multi-levels that allow for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic, as well as retail outlets 

(i.e. the Provencher Bridge in Winnipeg with suspended restaurant). This type of bridge, not 

only alleviates traffic congestion, but also becomes another unique feature which is an 

added attraction to our city and also provided a unique experience for conference and event 

visitors. 

� The Airport would benefit from the City of Lethbridge having a more participatory role in its 

operations and assisting with enhancement which would facilitate expansion of services to 

better meet users’ needs. 

� Standardize traffic flow, speed limits and signage throughout the city, as well as enhanced 

exits and entrances from downtown parking areas, would allow for easier driving and 

shopping. A downtown parkade with easy vehicular access and multiple user time-options 

would allow for expanded retail and commercial opportunities in the downtown core. 

� The creation of monthly/annual parking permit, which would allow commercial purchasers 

the benefit of multi-use meter parking, would assist businesses that require multiple shortstops 

city-wide on a daily or weekly basis. 

3

Health & Wellness Elements 

� The citizens of the city would benefit from a multi-sport recreational facility designed to meet 

the needs of the growing population using a “Lethbridge YMCA” model with the addition of a 

flexible space design. 

� The geographical feature of the coulees, the bridge and the river bottom provide a unique 

development opportunity to create an attractive and interesting destination for locals and 

tourists alike. 

� Bicycle paths, with storage facilities, connecting all regions and areas of the city, would 

enhance the fitness level of cyclists in Lethbridge by providing them more opportunities to 

ride-to-work and would better meet recreational and functional needs of the population. 

“Ribbon parks” facilitate the connecting bike paths very well and would be preferred in the 

new housing developments in replacement of the single “park-with-pond” design which is 

being currently created in new developments. 

Lethbridge Enhancement Elements 

� Promote renewable power use by businesses and create and/or leverage possible 

incentives to business for solar panel installation and/or other sources of renewable energy 

such as wind or geothermal power. 

� There is a need for a convention centre and conference facility of a larger capacity to draw 

larger external events as well as facilitate local business needs. 

� The entrance to the City of Lethbridge from the West needs some esthetic enhancements to 

the area surrounding Highway 3. More professional signage and landscaping to cover 

unsightly elements such as the landfill site would help to foster a clean city image and 

potentially entice travelers to stop for a closer look. 

� A long-term development plan is needed of the South East side of the city around the 43 rd 

Street area. 

� Construct a performing arts centre. 

� Affordable and Social housing developments need to be distributed across multiple areas of 

the city to not overburden businesses in one particular area or create an environment which 

is potentially detrimental to individual’s future prospects. 

� Use innovative solutions to all areas of design and implementation of infrastructure to keep 

Lethbridge on the “cutting edge”. 

4

Ideas on Policy 

Development & Zoning Elements 

� Land use and land development policy needs to be reviewed and revised to assist and 

encourage growth in all sectors. 

� Encourage downtown developments with an open, approachable and innovative outlook, 

focus on revitalization and expansion, along with incentives for downtown high-density 

housing development projects. 

� The City of Lethbridge is a land developer, as well as a regulator of land developers, which 

causes conflict of interest concerns and leads to the questions of, “Are they in business to 

do business?” 

� There is a need for the City and County of Lethbridge to cooperate in a significant and 

meaningful way in planning land use and development of the lands adjacent to, or even 

farther South than, the current airport site. 

� All the current procedures for zoning, inspection and renovation of secondary (illegal) suites, 

building inspection procedures, zoning codes, and deviation from approved development 

plans require a close review and updating. 

Facilities & Utilities Elements 

� The designation of an industrial committee to have input into the distribution of water to 

businesses and industrial parks outside of city limits and consultation with city businesses to 

project and manage future water needs 

Doing Business Elements 

� Be open and transparent about policies and their justification and review policies in a timely 

manner. 

� Review and update out-of-date restrictive by-laws that are not economic development 

friendly. 

� Review the breakdown and classifications of business license types and the fees associated 

with each. Review the higher licensing costs for home based business and provide 

incentives for those businesses which may lead to future store-front operations, provide job 

opportunities or which have other elements that foster local economic growth. 

Sustainability Elements 

� Create and publish a sustainability action plan for the city of Lethbridge. 

� Adopt policies and procedures which encourage new concepts and innovation as it applies 

to the City of Lethbridge. 

� Encourage a vision for the City of Lethbridge without weighing it down through overregulation. 

� Encourage policies which support and encourage good business and new business 

opportunities, which in turn create Lethbridge employment opportunities. 

� Create specifications for reserve funds with parameters and explicit restrictions on fund 

usage; with the funds to be managed and/or audited by a third party. 

5

Ideas on Services 

Web Based Elements 

� A comprehensive and current web based listing of licensed businesses needs to be 

available to the public to assist with new business planning and surveys. 

� The City of Lethbridge requires a cohesive communication strategy with positive city 

branding and marketing opportunities utilizing inter-departmental and public information 

sharing with a strong focus on web based communication. 

� Create Web based access to development permitting, licensing processes and forms. 

� Apply innovation and enhanced use of the available technology to all services provided by 

the City of Lethbridge. 

� Provide parking and recreational passes and parking permits for online purchase. 

� Create and maintain a virtual payment centre for all City of Lethbridge invoices. 

Hands-on Elements 

� Improve inspection services. 

� Improve the long-term planning and strategy for snow removal, street cleaning and 

vegetation management. 

Community Specific Elements 

� Provide a true recycling program comparable, or more advanced than, other centers, to help 

Lethbridge become a “Green City” and provide businesses with an opportunity to operate 

more environmentally friendly. 

� Security presence in downtown parks needs to be reviewed and enhanced to encourage the 

use of parks and the retail establishments around them. 

6

Appendix 1: City Circle for Business Ideas (Transcript) 

Discussion Topic: Policy 

� Airport – more coordination and cooperation between the City and the County on 

issues/development of the airport 

� Consultation with businesses on needs/volumes of water for future needs (before providing to 

other communities) 

� Policy for land use/development 

� Create a multi facility to use for various government facilities (fitness centers) e.g. College, U of L, 

etc. 

� Make restrictions on the use of reserved funds 

� Annual parking pass for meters (available on-line) 

� Online payment for parking tickets 

� Stick to development plans – too often, changes made after people purchase land/property based 

on original plan 

� Have a plan specifying individual areas i.e. residential, business, and commercial – clarify 

boundaries i.e. What area is considered “downtown”? 

� Encourage a program in partnership with the Federal & Provincial Governments (funding) to 

facilitate solar panels, etc. 

� Consider the City looking at communications strategy, branding, etc. with an eye for cohesive 

image that presents the City in a good light and appropriate for the times 

� Look at City signage – particularly at the entrance points of the City 

� Consistent speed zones for City to Highway access – e.g. Airport Trail, Westside to Highway 3 

� Improved policy on 2 nd suites (cost prohibitive) 

� Improved inspection process 

� Zoning codes for multi-use (2 nd suites) 

� City should not compete with private sector 

� City should not control water use to hinder growth 

� Rules need to apply to all developers not just City owned land 

� Rules to encourage new concepts/ideas (zoning) 

� Innovation 

� Don’t let policy get in the way of doing good business 

� Downtown area needs to be approachable for new business/development ideas 

� Encourage vision but don’t discourage thru regulations 

� Business license fees (out of town business in local trading areas) – keeping open focus on 

trading area (Mayors/Reeves partner area) 

� Cost of home business license too high (restrictions are not realistic) 

� Encourage business/employment in the City 

� As businesses move out of downtown area to other areas (South/West), implement policies to 

keep businesses in the downtown area/news businesses more housing 

� Be “open” about policies 

� Conflict of interest on the City’s part they are the developer and they compete with the private 

sector is this right? 

� Lots of “restrictive” by-law policies that are old and should be reviewed 

� Concrete Sustainability Policy & Action Plan 

� Downtown Revitalization & High Density Housing Plan 

7

Discussion Topic: Infrastructure 

� Bike paths and storage (at location) – Functional & recreation use 

� Downtown parkade (needed for residents, businesses and visitors) 

� Downtown Convention Centre 

� Annual parking pass for parking meters 

� Use/development of land in the coulees for recreation, etc. – tourism attraction 

� Promotion of solar i.e., solar panels on buildings 

� “Eyesore” property on rural just outside city limits entering Westside 

� Policy for land use/development 

� Full completion of projects i.e., “Back Alley Project” complete, not just plan 

� Walking/bike trails connection all of City (i.e. North/South) 

� Ribbon Parks 

� 3 rd Bridge Westside 

� Multi Level Bridge (walking, traffic, businesses) 

� Coulee recreation/destination 

� Multi-sport recreation facility (ice rink, pool, basketball, etc) and/or part of Convention Centre; 

flexible space to convert to different activities 

� Convention Centre needed for the City 

� Mayor Magrath Drive/ Fairmount traffic issues 

� Area structure plan for Southside of City 

� Finish 43 rd then continue with self development 

� Province bypass of City (highway should go thru City) 

� Highway ramp from Picture Butte to Highway 3 

� Highway between City and Coalhurst/Coaldale – no water to business/industrial development 

(open process) Committee members should include industry as well as City 

� Performing Arts Centre 

� Be open to innovation and new ways of doing things 

� Airport development and expansion of services 

� Overpass/underpass for trains on 43 rd 

� Good/better flow of traffic out parking areas throughout the City 

� Location of “social” housing – tends to be grouped in one area –signs should be placed in a better 

location 

� Bigger conference facilities/tied in with other programs 

� Look at airport services/ better transportation to our City. Why do we only fly in and out with 8 – 

12 seater planes? 

8

Discussion Topic: Services 

� Comprehensive list of businesses available for no charge 

� Increased communications and better coordination of communications for all departments (should 

be more transparent then they are) 

� Performing Arts Centre 

� On-line permit process and service needs improvement i.e. development approvals 

� Improved inspection process 

� Be open to “innovation” and new ways of doing things 

� Downtown housing 

� Recycling program 

� What essential services should the City provide “Conflict of interest” 

� More security in parks (Henderson/Galt) 

� Budget for snow removal; don’t rely on Chinooks 

� Budget for spraying weeds 

� Cleaning of the City streets – not very coordinated 

9


Allied Arts Council Board City Circle 



0112-318-00 CCID 21

City Circles Meeting June 22, 2009 

The Heart of our City, Master Plan should be used as a reference during 

this whole City Circle exercise. The Heart of our City, Master Plan Report 

and process has been successful and should not be shelved. Some ideas 

from the Heart of our City document (ie. Best Practises) should be 

maintained. This City Circle is slightly repetition as there was really good 

creative thinking from that. Don’t re-do it. It was a concrete plan. 

Positive points towards improving the Arts in Lethbridge: 

- Art is an integral part of most people’s lives. 

- The Arts brings the community together and has core importance. 

- If you create things that are attractive to people, then eventually it will 

be a great place to live. 

General points to improve the Arts in Lethbridge: 

- Bringing the arts in to a close proximity (downtown). Then that dynamic 

will spread throughout the rest of the city. 

- Consciously building our community so it attracts people that support 

the arts. 

- Building the city’s Arts scene so that it is recognized far beyond the 

town limits and would become identified as a premier arts centre. It not 

only has the facilities but also the people (artists, performers, patrons 

and audience). 

- Continuing to bring about a consciousness towards arts, a sense of 

value for the arts. 

- Making it a priority to retain and attract arts people? Eventually others 

will want to move in. 

- Raising the aesthetic sensibility of the city. Improving the community 

through small meaningful projects 

Specific idea to improve the Arts in Lethbridge:

- Work with the University to secure a facility for the U of L Art 

Collection so that average citizens can have access to it. 

- Urban gardens. Lots of green and natural areas full of public art, 

sculpture parks. 

- Cultural corridors that encourage walking and biking rather than 

vehicles. 

- Vibrant cities tend to have Downtown campuses(UofL or College). 

Problems/Solutions regarding Arts Facilities in Lethbridge: 

- The Allied Arts Council’s Arts Re:Building standard should be met. That 

being the retrofit of the SAAG, creation of a new community arts centre 

and the building of a new performing arts centre. 

- There is not enough adequate Arts Facilities. Lethbridge needs facilities 

and spaces that easily accommodate the arts, facilities that allow for 

artistic growth and creativity. 

- Alleviate or allow flexibility with some requirements to open a space 

(parking, bathrooms) 

- Manage access to spaces. Unused buildings used by the Arts 

Community. The existing regulations don’t push for that activity. The 

Community should be aesthetically pleasing. If there is no incentive to 

beautify than it won’t happen. 

- If you don’t allow for buildings to become unsightly than you allow for 

the public to help in beautifying it. 

- Linking/connecting buildings of different purposes. The more you can 

bring and build pieces into the downtown, a better city it will be. 

- Developing main facilities will encourage smaller businesses to grow. 

- Provide a City of Lethbridge tax break to businesses that maintain 

spaces for artists. Whether its rehearsal, studio, display space. 

- Dedicate a certain amount designated to low cost housing as work/live 

space for artists and compelling private businesses to do the same. 

- Regulations to penalize Downtown building owners whose buildings sit 

empty.

Identifying the Cities role in the Arts in Lethbridge: 

- Artists should be included on all city planning committees. From the get 

go! This is something that has been used in the past with other cities. 

- The Attitudes within the leadership in the city needs to open up. They 

try to see the importance of the arts, but some aren’t quite there. If it 

isn’t within the city, you have to pull in the creative thinking to balance 

that thinking. 

- The City has to take a leadership role and invest and manipulate the 

regulatory framework for success. 

- More vision in the way that projects unfold in the city. See them as 

they unfold, not hidden. 

- The city needs to become more flexible, offering creative solutions, 

when it comes to bylaws regarding artists. 

Other: 

- Density. Lethbridge is a nice size. Vibrant cities tend to be denser. The 

City should concentrate on the core area (downtown), preferred density, 

curbing the urban sprawl. 

- The city needs to start planning for mass transit. Street car lines, tie 

the city together. Buses will never do it. Street Cars will. We have wide 

enough streets to do it. 

- Gondola connecting downtown to the U of L apart of the transit system. 

Having room for bikes and adequate parking so people could drive to that 

spot. 

- Monorail connecting West to East.

AAC Board City Circle #2 

1. In 40 years the City of Lethbridge should be a gateway to arts in Southern 

Alberta. Right now Lethbridge is lacking an identity and reputation. Think of 

Vulcan, they had nothing and created something. What can culture be built on 

when the vibrancy of our arts community is not recognized? The existing culture 

doesn’t allow for experimentation or uniqueness. The City has to improve their 

marketing and communication, as well as develop a philosophy of 

accommodation and creativity. Once that communication is established the public 

will become more aware and understand the importance of the arts. 

It boils down to the will of the people (at the city) to work with arts people. 

Policies need to be implemented that facilitate and encourage creative activity 

and participation. Tidy, neat, organized cities are boring. More Arts and culture 

persons should be hired in community services and courses on how to deal with 

people should be implemented. The Arts should be a part of all planning for the 

city. Often some elements that go along with entertainment are overlooked. 

Everyone should be welcome. 

2. City Facilities & venues should be full and used all the time. There needs to be 

better access to City facilities and venues for arts events. If an individual/group 

wants to hold an event in Galt Gardens it is difficult to execute. There is too 

much Bureaucracy and red tape, middle management is not easy to deal with. 

The city needs to be more cooperative in assisting those that would like to hold 

an art event. Young people don’t know how to put on an event, they need help 

facilitating. This information should be published and accessible. (How do you 

book something? Where do you go?) 

3. The Arts facilities in Lethbridge need improvement. When the city builds 

buildings they need to go out of their way to make it strong structurally- 

Architecture matters. We must maintain history while developing the 

contemporary. The exterior of the Cigar Store is Pho-historic and doesn’t match 

the rest of downtown historically. Buildings should be evaluated and declared a 

historic site. The City controls the development and permits and can control the 

number of big boxes allowed in our city. This kind of decision attracts a certain 

kind of person to our city. 

There needs to be standards around legislation on empty spaces. Certain older 

buildings that are sitting empty should be dealt with; there should be a policy to 

stop this from occurring. Low cost housing should include artist work spaces. 

4. Early engagement and exposure of the arts to children is vital to their 

development. The city should deliberately earmark funds for arts related 

activities in institutions like schools. Education cutbacks are a hindrance. 

Because each school’s arts programming varies, outside arts activities should be

made more available. Arts Alive and Well in the schools is a great example of 

engaging a broader demographic in the arts by getting school age children 

involved. 

5. The Heart of our City plan remains relevant still. The Arts in Lethbridge need 

to be centralized at the moment its spread out and difficult to access. 

6. The regulations on sidewalk patios need to be loosened up, these encourage 

more public interaction on the sidewalk level. (Ie. Esquires only has a couple of 

seats on the sidewalk and they are always full.) If you want people to sit down 

and enjoy you need places to sit. Benches should not be removed, but added. 

There is not enough downtown pedestrian traffic. By keeping the downtown alive 

with choice, variety and more support for independent businesses this problem 

could be solved. Policies need to be created that encourage creative independent 

businesses in the downtown core. 

Specific recommendations: 

- Ticket centre should run out of the old paramount coffee show, more of a 

downtown presence. 

- Do not pave over the track on 6 th ave. at the civic centre 

- Make a community like Mackenzie Town in Calgary - Westside by new schoo 

– Satellite cities – avoid this kind of development 

- Public restrooms in more green spaces 

- A tree should be on every lot. 

- Roof top gardens/ Green Roof programs encouraged. 

- Draw the mayor contest; city helps coordinate kids and arts activities


Allied Arts Council Staff City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 22

Issues: 

AAC Staff City Circle, July 29, 2009 

1. Lack of production space for artists of all disciplines. 

2. Lethbridge has no acoustically sound performing arts centre that 

adequately represents our population currently and in the future. 

3. Not enough exhibition space for local artists 

4. Business licenses for the arts community. Artists and visiting artists should 

not be lumped in with commercial business licenses. 

5. Not enough support and opportunity for University/College arts students 

during the off season and upon completion of programs. Losing an age group 

of artists that could invest back into the community and the arts. 

6. Living spaces for artists within the downtown core. 

7. Adequate space for arts organizations to grow. 

8. Continue to promote the arts so that the generations coming up are 

exposed to a more diverse art experience. There is a lack of understanding 

within the general public in regards to the needs of the arts 

9. More festivals relating to the arts. Street Performers Festival. 

10. The arts don’t have high visibility within the centre of the city. 

Solutions: 

1. More affordable/accessible studio space for artists. 

2. Build a performing arts centre that provides adequate capacity and 

functionality for all performing arts. 

3. Build a big new gallery specifically for local artists. 

4. Artist licensing regulations encouraging local and external artists to 

practise and instruct their art. Many artists live under ground because of 

inconsistent licensing. Artists practising license should be charged zero. The 

license gives them credibility. 

5. Something to allow spaces for the students when University is out. This 

would encourage the retention of people. 

6. All public housing projects should have dedicated appropriate live/work 

spaces for artists. If space is provided they will continue to produce things 

that will continue to build audiences. Programs need to be established to 

simplify access to empty buildings. Tax incentives for landlords to rent 2 nd 

storey spaces to artists should be implemented. Also those landlords that 

have empty street level spaces for long periods of time should be penalized. 

7. We need a community arts centre for all Medias to have adequate space to 

share, create and learn. 

8. Schools are losing their art programs. The city should step in to show what 

is available by communicating to the students. The City needs to demonstrate

leadership in stating the value of the arts then the community will follow. 

More information sharing and community links so that all of the community 

knows the opportunities for art learning out there. There should be Civic 

recognition of arts and artists. (ie. Key to the City) The city should also 

encourage more fiscal incentive between business and arts. 

9. Dedicated civic funding available for arts programming. Ie. Festivals, artists 

in residents 

10. The city needs to designate an arts corridor in the downtown core, a 

pedestrian street or pedestrian mall outside. Make Lethbridge an arts 

destination by providing more public art in more green spaces. 

The AAC still needs to be recognized as the leader of the arts community and 

still promoting and enhancing the arts and provided with sustainable funding.


UDI City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 23

UDI City Circle August 13, 2009 

• Current Situation 

o Solutions/Comments 

Topic 1 – Dialogue with the City and Approvals 

• It is difficult to innovate based on current guidelines 

o Allow professional consultants to innovate 

o Consultant design could be based on servicing constraints 

o These are guidelines not rules, allowing innovation will create a better built 

environment 

• Talent/Skill at private firms is not utilized as the City disregards professional private work 

o Developers often scale back innovation to satisfy City 

o A change of mindset is needed – acknowledge quality private work 

o Design by Approver vs. Design by Designer 

• Current focus on details as opposed to big picture, as a result many projects are stalled at 

Approvals Stage 

o Acknowledge that detailed design occurs after Approvals 

o Developers hire consultant to provide details within the site 

• Top Heavy Prescriptive 

o Dialogue not Dictating would be more constructive for everybody 

o “Download” responsibility to the developer/ focus on the big picture 

o Provide performance objectives 

• UDI wants meaningful review and consideration of issues raised to City 

o Council set example – try to get raw info to City 

o City should be steward of master plan for City 

Topic 2 – Infill Development 

• Vacant Sites Downtown and within the Industrial Area 

o Stimulus to compensate additional costs would promote the densification of the core 

beyond parking lots 

• Industrial lots – city controls supply 

o City inventory of available lots and post the database online 

• City is supportive of infill in talk but action is not effective or adequate 

o Existing incentives are more paperwork than they’re worth 

• City should take a look at Medicine Hat re. infill development downtown 

o Building at zero cost 

o City leaving 2 floors

Topic 3 – Community Development 

• Cookie Cutter Communities 

o An Approval Authority that is more receptive to innovation would allow for increasingly 

creative design 

• Different Ideas/ Concepts are currently stifled or ignored by Approval Authority 

o Allow: One Way Streets, Green Communities, Stormwater Reuse, Tree Box Filters 

o Look around to other jurisdictions that have successfully innovated e.g. Garrison Woods 

• Currently a lack of Choice 

o Give developers the flexibility to create different products for different markets 

• There are different views on Affordable Housing 

o Approve Flag Lots 

• Stormwater storage requirements continue to increase yet they are still seen as a utility 

o Credit for ponds as community amenity and not just utility 

• Difficult to bring new stormwater management strategies to fruition 

o Allow non-conventional approaches e.g. watering your lawn with reused stormwater 

Topic 4 – Growth 

• New constraints are arising on the West Side 

o Establish a commercial node – create Westside jobs 

o City should show leadership to sponsor an ASP for a commercial node (identified in 

current MDP) 

o City needs to be clear where development can proceed - 

• Infrastructure/ Utilities Constraints Directing Growth 

o City needs to focus on constraints and fix them rather than develop around them 

o Available funding not being used for required infrastructure 

o We need a coordinated approach to infrastructure development 

• City should be focused on assessing and fixing bigger problems rather than putting constraints 

on developments 

o Not all major infrastructure investments can be subsidized by new lot development - 

$300,000 lots 

Topic 5 – Sustainable Communities 

• Heavy reliance on automobiles creates disconnected neighborhoods 

o Improved transit to get people out of their cars: Park and ride, Shorter routes, Network 

of hubs / focus higher frequency routes 

o Create mandatory transit passes for UofL and LC students (covered in tuition)– if they 

have it they will use may use – Same for City Employees 

• Poor use of Stormwater as a resource 

o Support adaptive reuse of stromwater

o Water barrel Giveaway 

• Generating business from local resources 

o Adding value locally 

o Development of specialized knowledge base 

o Developing minds at College and University – self perpetuated continual source for an 

educated workforce 

• Low impact development 

o Think about big picture for process 

o Integrate commercial / business and retail land uses in neighborhood 

• Lack of a Performing Arts Centre 

o A Performing arts centre would greatly contribute to Cultural Sustainability as well as 

prevent entertainment money from flowing out of town 

• Lack of an active transportation strategy 

o Maintain area to encourage active transportation 

o Integrate trail system / network 

• NIMBYism is stifling development 

o Council mandate to listen to all but only accommodate reasonable requests 

o Council needs to “stick with the plan” 

Topic 6 – Cost Effective Development 

• Developers are paying to fix City problems through offsite levies, master planning, and 

developing solutions for problems as a result the cost of lots has doubled in 10 years 

• Many City Construction Standards are unnecessary and expensive: Road Design, Stormwater, 

Lane width. Gravel Under Sidewalks alone costs more to build and replace in 20 years 

o Rationalize these standards 

Topic 7 – Mixed-Use (Multi-layered) Development 

• Little mixed-use currently 

o City should embrace and promote the adoption of mixed-use “Town Squares” in new 

developments 

• There is a recognized need for mixed-use in more locations 

o 40 th and 20 th , 24 th on south side 

• Promote mixed use development especially downtown 

o Performing arts centre 

o Heart of our city – revive 

o Can’t respond to all NIMBY 

• Mixed-use is a good platform for Affordable Housing 

o Freeing up levies will promote affordable housing

Topic 7 – The Role of the City as a Developer 

• City portrayal of creating a different product 

o SunRidge is Environmentally Innovative – however no longer affordable 

o RiverStone is indistinguishable from other developments – in direct competition with 

developers 

o Private developers could compete if there were incentives in place 

• Water and electric utilities are currently lumped together 

o Separation would boost confidence in costs/management of services 

• Lack of fiscal accountability to public 

o Increased transparency/disclosure as this is taxpayers money


Natural Horsemanship and the 

Coulees in Lethbridge Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 24

Plan Your City: Lethbridge City Circle, 2009 

Topic: Natural Horsemanship and the Coulees, IN Lethbridge 

Contact: Sherri Umeris Bohnert, sherri@sayee,ca, (403) 381-0805 

Topic of Interest Current Situation: 

Currently in North Lethbridge, Serenity Equestrian provides an unique opportunity to 

Better Know Our Place and Ourselves, Building Respectful Relationship through the 

practice of Natural Horsemanship being in the Coulees. Twenty-two people, with a 

seventy year age range between them participated in the City Circle on June 14, in 

conjunction with a clean-up and pot-luck fire roast. 

The participants voiced that Serenity Equestrian provides an unique opportunity for 

people in Lethbridge and area, of various ages and ability, enjoy within our City (on 

route) the benefits of building respectful relationship through experiences in the coulees 

and with the horses, individually and in groups: including family gatherings; youth inservice; 

boarding horses; children's and youth lessons and camps; new immigrants, 

kindergarten, preschool and other school group educational visits; mental health and 

other health and wellness services, including special needs, ladies, ‘mom and daughter’ 

classes; alternate forms of payment... A nine year participant of a recent horse and nature 

camp commented that being at Serenity Equestrian ‘feels like being with family’. 

Currently, the area that Serenity Equestrian leases will be developed for houses, as early 

as summer 2010, pending on the housing market. Please refer to the three letters of 

support below. 

Serenity Equestrian has evolved over the past five years to meet the needs of a wide 

variety of people in Lethbridge, and since 2008 has successfully introduced a naturestewardship 

component to the horse classes and camps, and educational visits by various 

groups. Please refer to the three sample letters of support below. 

Ideas to Improve or Implement our Topic: 

We hope that the information shared through our City Circle efforts will help increase the 

awareness and appreciation of valuable community building opportunity that Serenity 

Equestrian affords. We hope that the experience to Better Know Our Place and 

Ourselves, Building Respectful Relationship through the unique combination of Natural 

Horsemanship and the Coulees, IN Lethbridge will continue to be available, in 

Lethbridge. Please refer to three sample support letters included below. 

Hi Lori 

I wanted to thank you for another wonderful fieldtrip experience. The children talked about that 

day until the end of the school year. It is such a unique opportunity for our students. For most of 

them it is the first time they have ever come in to contact with such beautiful creatures. Our 

urban students need programs like yours. Because of the close proximity they can have a rural 

experience not otherwise accessible to them and their families. Our students come away from 

the experience with an empathy and excitement for nature and animals. We hope that we will be

able to come and have such a great time, year after year. Many thanks to you and your team. 

Sincerely Kellie Pierzchala, Jumpstart Preschool Program Manager, July 2009 

To Whom It May Concern: 

"When we first moved to Lethbridge two years ago I was surprised to see that with all the 

beautiful landscape there is such a small amount utilized and maintained as natural public 

recreation area. It wasn't until this summer that I found Serenity Equestrain, a landscape who's 

views are indescribably beautiful and within city limits!! What an amazing place and a great 

location. Our family, along with many others, enjoy the area and the people who are on the 

property for not only the horse riding lessons that are offered there, but the life lessons of 

empathy and understanding. Lori Chell, the owner of Serenity, has made a huge and positive 

impact on the lives of children and their families. She not only provides children with the 

opportunity to interact with nature but encourages them to express themselves freely. In today’s, 

hustle and bustle society this safe and therapeutic atmosphere is something to be treasured and 

protected. She not only provides this opportunity for those who can afford it but also 

makes exceptions for those who can not. Its not about the money for her, its about humanity. A 

safe place for both humans and animals. I would even go so far to say that funding for the area 

is well deserved! 

From an economic City's perspective, keeping the Serenity area as a natural landscape would be 

a great benefit. The north side of Lethbridge has had at times a less than positive reputation. 

Perhaps keeping this natural area on that side of town might help draw people into the area, 

releasing some of that negative stigmatism. If all else it will off set the unsightly power area 

immediately before the Serenity location! 

Letter submitted, August 2009, by Jamie Vesey, involved with Ladies classes at Serenity 

Equestrian 

August 13, 2009 

City Council 

Lethbridge, AB 

Dear Sir or Madam; 

Situated at the top of the coulees near the entrance to Alexander Wilderness Park, therein 

lies a hidden jewel of Northern Lethbridge. Serenity Equestrian is a place where horse 

people gather, and is in danger of needing to move. 

I was appalled when I heard that their lease is nearing its end, without the possibility of 

renewal. The property is to be put up for sale, rezoned to residential, and redeveloped to 

build 30 houses. While the property has an amazing view, and I could understand living 

there, this is not an ideal solution for use of the land. 

Serenity Equestrian offers lessons in horseback riding and horsemanship. The employees 

on the ranch are amazing, knowledgeable people who help people understand horses, and 

through understanding horses, understand themselves. The ranch is home to horses, 

llamas, cats and dogs. They offer horseback riding lessons to children, run camps for 

children, and help adults get in touch with themselves.

The fact that the ranch gives something for kids to do besides watch TV or play video 

games is proof enough that it shouldn’t be relocated. The Enmax centre recently received 

funding from the City of Lethbridge in the amount of $4.3 million to finish its 

renovations and create a twin ice arena. This is good news, especially for the kids out 

there who play ice hockey or skate. The city dumps all kinds of money into recreation, 

ostensibly to combat the lack of outdoor activity that children are involved in nowadays. I 

can attest to this – being a Brownie and Beaver leader, I know firsthand that our numbers 

have dropped substantially in the last four years. Serenity Equestrian offers kids another 

choice – they can go horseback riding, which have been proven time and time again to 

give a great workout. The therapeutic benefits of horseback riding (or even just being 

with a horse) are well documented, and it seems a shame to deprive kids of these benefits. 

The ranch is located within city limits, which offers ease of accessibility to those who 

can’t leave the city for whatever reason. Additionally, given the reputation of the North 

side of the city, the location is perfect. It’s nice to have a sanctuary in the part of town 

that is known mostly for its crime and drug abuse problems. Once you enter Serenity, you 

are pretty much safe from the outside world. 

The ranch is located directly beside a set of transformers. The buzzing is audible from the 

gates of the ranch, which I noticed on my last visit there. Potential residents will notice 

this. Additionally, they aren’t the prettiest things to look at, which is a stark contrast to 

the twilight view over the coulees. 

Given the reasons I have outlined above, I implore you to act in the best interests of the 

ranch. Development for 30 houses can take place anywhere in the city; but Serenity 

Equestrian is at its home. It offers recreation for children who would otherwise not be 

able to enjoy what the ranch has to offer, and its benefits far outweigh any of its 

downfalls. Please take these reasons into consideration, and reconsider your past 

decisions. 

Sincerely, 

Tanis Driedger 

Better Knowing Our Place and Ourselves: an Opportunity to Build Respectful 

Relationship through the unique combination of Natural Horsemanship and the Coulees, 

IN Lethbridge 

Sherri Umeris Bohnert 

sherri@sayee,ca, (403) 381-0805 

Serenity Equestrian and SACEE (Southern Alberta Community of Environmental 

Educators) 

We started with an initial 'circle' June 14 with potluck, and continue to gather information 

to share. 

The opportunity for people in Lethbridge and area, of various ages and ability, enjoy

within our City (on route) the benefits of building respectful relationship through 

experiences in the coulees and with the horses, individually and in groups: including 

family gatherings, youth in-service, children's and youth lessons and camps, new 

immigrants, kindergarten, preschool and other school group visits, mental health and 

other health and wellness services, including and special needs, ladies, mom and 

daughter, alternate forms of payment... 

Written with pictures


Working and Playing in Beautiful 

Neighbourhoods, Building Meaningful 

Relationships 

0112-318-00 CCID 25

City Circle: 

Working and Playing in Beautiful Neighbourhoods, 

Building Meaningful Relationship 

Westminster Community Center 

Wednesday, September, 2, 2009, 7:15 - 9 pm 

Welcome and Introduction: 

We are thankful for the opportunity to have gathered, and to be able to 

share our thoughts with the City of Lethbridge through the City Circle, 

Plan Your City Initiative. 

Participants (13) present, representing various communities: 

Natalie Ashbee, student of Lethbridge College; Sherri and Paul 

Bohnert, (Paradise) Canyon, Nature Club; Brian Conger, Resident; 

Rohan Crown, Westminster Community, Pastor; Alvin Fritz, Architect 

for Free Grace church (2 nd 

A Ave. N.); Julie Klok, Ten Thousand 

Villages; Rita Medve, Westminster Teacher, Taiko Drummer of 

Lethbridge Community Taiko Association; Kevin Powell, Lutheran 

Church of the Good Shepherd, Pastor; Audrey Procee, Coaldale; Mary 

and Kim Seiver, London Road; Bill Zwartbol, Pastor of Free Grace 

Shelly Ryan Gray, Community Renewal International of Shreveport, 

Louisiana shared information via email. 

NOTE: Rohan and Sherri co-hosted our City Circle; Paul recorded; 

Sherri compiled report.

SUMMARY 

Name: Working and Playing IN Beautiful Neighbourhoods, Building 

Meaningful Relationships 

Contact: Sherri Umeris Bohnert, sherri@sayee.ca 

Current Situation: Thirteen people, representing various communities 

in and around Lethbridge, were invited to share what they know, from 

experience, on the topic of “Working and playing IN our 

neighbourhoods, building meaningful relationships”: first defining a 

beautiful neighbourhood, and then sharing success stories, challenges 

and hopes for Lethbridge in the future. As the understanding of “What a 

beautiful neighbourhood is?” was being voiced, we noticed that each 

person added an unique piece to create the picture, and there seemed 

unanimous agreement and support from the group as a whole on all 

parts. The opportunity to build meaningful relationships while 

interacting in our neighbourhood, where all people feel safe and 

respected summarizes the comments shared. For more detail please see 

notes below, and Appendix B. 

Our ideas for City Administration to use to improve and implement 

our topic: The stories, challenges and hopes for Lethbridge in the 

future, as recorded in our City Circle and outlined below we hope 

provide a good reference for City planning and policy making. Please 

ask with each decision/policy made: Are we supporting or taking away 

from the opportunity for neighbours to live IN their neighbourhoods, and 

build meaningful, respectful relationship? We recommend working 

toward having in neighbourhoods: a central gathering place(s), 

ways/reasons to walk within the neighbourhood, as well as increased 

time and various reasons to gather with neighbours regularly. Having 

grocery stores, with local food options, throughout the city, will afford 

more opportunity to build relationship, walk, save energy and reduce

pollution. We hope there are plans to have community gardens, and 

native plants and ecosystem areas throughout the city, in addition to 

sheltered areas in ‘parks’ and developing family friendly niche’s for 

each neighbourhood, for example Westminster Pool and Centre and 

Spray Parks of Galt and Nicolas Sheran. Supporting 

home/neighbourhood businesses, and ways for children/youth to enjoy 

gathering cooperatively, learning good citizenship, where the adults are 

involved as witnesses and assistants, mentoring, sharing talents, for 

example Neighbourhood Stewardship ‘Clubs’; sports and activity day 

camps; potlucks with music or other artistic-educational focus. Please 

consider the importance of being environmentally responsible in 

restoring old buildings beautifully to best meet the needs of the people, 

neighbourhood. The more we can live IN our neighbourhoods, greater is 

the opportunity to better know each other, interact, and better understand 

each others needs and strengths. Schools, shopping, sports, and other 

activities that keep us driving OUT of our neighbourhoods, may be 

decreasing the potential to build meaningful relationship with our 

neighbours. Could we work towards having self-sufficient areas in 

Lethbridge, 7000 people or less, which are represented by a Council 

Member. Council Members would then have both talent/experience 

specialization as well as more intimate ‘area’ representation-voice to 

offer, keeping our life in the city more personable. Please refer to 

comments recorded at the meeting outlined below in Parts 2 and 3. 

Thank you for your consideration. We hope our comments help make 

Lethbridge a great place to live. 

NOTES recorded from our City Circle: 

Part 1: What makes a beautiful neighbourhood? 

10 000 Villages: How to Build Community poster; see Appendix B

Rita 

– where children can play in the evening 

- where families can get together and enjoy each others company 

- a place where there are recreational spaces that are safe 

- a community that is open to drumming (other ideas) 

- with experiences that make my heart feel good 

Bill 

- a neighbourhood has to be safe for children, women, families, 

- a society where we know our neighbours, full of relationships 

Al 

- Promotes and creates a palette for meaningful, loving and caring relationships between the 

members of a community 

- Be able to walk all around the neighbourhood 

Natalie 

- be able to experience other cultures 

- appreciate the diversity of religion, culture, thoughts 

Audrey 

- a neighbourhood of trust, assisting each other, take care of yards, watch homes during holidays. 

- work to benefit each other, learn about what they need and how to assist each other 

Julie 

- respect between neighbours, and safe in who they are 

- a neighbourhood that says hello, share meals, talk over the fence, share produce from the 

gardens, celebrating each others events 

Mary & Kim 

- knowing that my children are safe in the neighbourhood and with our neighbours. 

- love to see gardens and share 

- a community/house that you do not want to leave 

Brian 

- ethnic diversity within the community 

- rental properties that are safe and respectful 

- make eye contact to say hello even though there is a language barrier 

- contribute to the conversation face to face rather than electronically 

Kevin 

- currently, most neighbourhoods are not conducive to meeting your neighbours, 

- walking helps get to know people 

Paul 

- a need for a central gathering place in each community 

Sherri 

- opportunity to experience, share passion-knowledge and care for our natural areas: both 

maintain existing coulee and riparian areas, as well as re-establish native ecosystems 

through the city, especially in ‘school’ yards, seniors homes, other shared community 

space, and personal property

Part 2: What is your best ‘living’ IN your neighbourhood 

story/experience? 

Rohan 

Kim 

- the 2009 Westminster summer Activities and Sport camp, where most of the kids walked 

and rode their bike; a Sudanese woman brought 4 trays of food to share; a Chinese 

woman offered food for next year, and 

- the Westminster park and area was full of children, 50 +, running playing, smiling 

together 

- People who walk in the neighbourhood from a meeting 

- Being committed to being green 

Natalie 

Mary 

- Playing guitar music on porch, and neighbours listen in 

- Sharing art, talents, music, chalk on the sidewalk 

- The downtown farmers market 

- Wish for a year round farmers’ market 

- Stop in the fountain in the Galt 

Audrey, 

Rita 

Al 

- share neighbour’s garden, take turns watering, weeding… 

- know neighbours well enough that they will take care of dieing cat 

- Garage sale with neighbours adding in cucumbers, eggs to sell and stop to share a coffee, 

and sit a while on our couch that we are trying to sell

- City-Net, random acts of kindness, party in the park (Wilson): hot air balloons, band, 

hamburgers/hotdogs, jumpers 

- Each party has a sense of community 

- Kids brought their parents to the party to for events, free of cost 

- The smaller party in the park was very ethnic and the best 

Sherri and Paul 

Bill 

Brian 

Julie 

Kevin 

- The construction of the community play ground, by neighbours 

- Husking corn, cutting and watering grass for neighbours, coulee clean-ups, the Nature 

Club, the Kid Style Neighbourhood Nature Club with, Stewardship Campout, ‘sandlot 

baseball’, plots in the garden, solar ‘kit-car’… 

- Saturdays and after school playing hockey, sharing snacks, a feel of community 

- The empty space in the downtown is a concern, 

- A walk on a cold morning and running into Galbraith, a building of character 

- Streets filled with people in Spain, 

- Upon retuning to Lethbridge wonder: Where are all the people? 

- The London Road – 6A Street party, vibrancy to the area 

- Create an area where there are sidewalk cafes, 

- Spontaneously, immigrants dance and sing in the 10,000 Villages store 

- A neighbour watched his children and offered the use of his car when he needed to return 

to church for forgotten gather keys 

- 

Part 3: Further Sharing: More Success Stories, Challenges, and 

Hopes for Lethbridge’s future. 

- Transit riding has improved and continues to improve 

- More and more people choose to use transit 

- Al’s presentation on a renovation and addition to a church. Please see Appendix C.

- A micro-community, condo ‘street-party’ 

- Densification of the downtown core, and some of the major commercial areas (13 th , 3 

- Create walk-ability, reduce threats 

- Support by economic development and city council of smaller community-based 

businesses, farmers market, offices, grocery, 

- Create more sharing gardens, co-op 

- Self sufficient areas (maybe 10 – 12 now, being about 7000 people per area); that has a 

niche, eg. spray parks, swimming parks; local grocery store; city council member 

affiliated with an area, therefore more personable relationship for council and the 

community have a richer voice 

- A grocery store for each community, eg. Downtown, University Students 

- Assisting the struggling community members 

- 

From Shelley, by email: 

“We just had a master plan vision day for our city, and despite technical difficulties, it was a 

great exercise in gaining appreciation for what it takes to look into the future then shape that 

future. I saw that same process in your work. 

Thanks for your interest in Community Renewal. You will find our website at 

communityrenewal.us “ From their webpage: 

The CRI strategy has three initiatives: 

Renewal Team 

The Renewal Team works citywide to unite businesses, churches, civic groups, residents and 

others as caring partners building a stronger city. 

Haven Houses 

Haven House volunteers unite neighbors on the block where they live. Identified by a “We Care” 

sign in their yard, Haven House leaders may host block parties, take meals to a sick neighbor, 

help find a lost pet, share garden produce or just offer a listening ear. 

Friendship Houses 

These are homes built in low-income areas and lived in by CRI staff – families who help turn 

impoverished neighbourhoods into havens of hope. Each house contains a large community 

room for tutoring, computer training, character-building and much more. Other agencies partner 

with us in this life-changing outreach. 

rd, )

Appendix A: Poster, with agenda 

Working and Playing in Beautiful Neighbourhoods, 

Building Meaningful Relationship: 

Please gather and share your success stories, challenges and hopes for Lethbridge, 

LIVING IN our neighbourhoods. 

WHERE: Westminster Community Center, Corner of 5th Ave and 16th St 

WHEN: Wednesday, September, 2, 2009, 7:15 - 9 pm 

WHAT: Round Table Discussion followed by Snacks, 

Welcome and introduction; start discussions considering what makes a neighbourhood beautiful, 

physically and relationally; further explore topic; conclusion and snacks. Our thoughts will be 

recorded and then shared at the City Ideas Fair, October 17. 

HOSTS: Members and Neighbours of the Westminster Community 

ALL ARE INVITED TO ATTEND 

COME READY TO SHARE YOUR STORY!!!! 

Please bring a cup for refreshments. 

MORE INFORMATION THROUGH: 

Rohan Crown – (403)795- 7692 or rohancrown@gmail.com 

Sherri Umeris Bohnert sherri@sayee.ca

Appendix B: “How to Build A Community” poster list from 10 000 Villages 

- Turn off your TV 

- Leave our house 

- Know your neighbours 

- Look up when you are walking 

- Greet People 

- Sit on your stoop 

- Plant flowers 

- Use your library 

- Play together 

- Buy form local merchants 

- Share what you have 

- Help a lost dog 

- Take children to the park 

- Garden together 

- Support neighbourhood schools 

- Fix it even if you didn’t break it 

- Have potlucks 

- Honour elders 

- Pick up litter 

- Read stories aloud 

- Dance in the street 

- Talk to the mail carrier 

- Listen to the birds 

- Put up a swing 

- Help carry something heavy 

- Barter for your goods 

- Start a tradition 

- Ask a question 

- Hire young people for odd jobs 

- Organize a block party 

- Bake extra and share 

- -Ask for help when you need it 

- Open your shades 

- Sing together 

- Share your skills 

- Take back the night 

- Turn up the music; Turn down the music 

- Listen before you react to anger 

- Mediate a conflict 

- Seek to understand 

- Learn from new and uncomfortable angles 

- Know that no one is silent though many are not heard 

- Work to change this


Kirby’s Coffee Chat 

Part 1 Housing Development 

Part 2 Facilities and Amenities in the City 

0112-318-00 CCID 26

City Circle Name: Kirby's Coffee Chat 

City Circle Topic of Interest: Housing Development 



It would seem that the land developers are limited by some of the regulations the city has for innovative and creative 

housing development. We are seeing developments that are trying to provide diversity in housing choice, facilities, 

amenities, and landscaping, but are prevented because of some of the guidelines. 


Our group feels that the city should revisit the guidelines associated with land development so that more innovation can 

occur. We also think it is important that these new subdivisions have the opportunity to create community associations to 

ensure the sustainability of the communities and the original goals of the community. One idea we have is to provide a 

financial incentive to the land developers that would need to change their plans to incorporate innovate ideas into their 

current outline plans since the development process takes quite a bit of time. We need to understand that innovative 

development and diverse housing choices must be offered to the community, but in order to do that we need to ensure 

that these types of developments can occur at a good pace and not be onerous on private industry. Another idea is to 

educate the citizens of Lethbridge about the different types of development and housing choice that is available. Industry 

will build what they can sell and if the buying public decides they want something different, you will find that industry will 

build that. Education on this issue also has to be taken on.

City Circle Name: Kirby's Coffee Chat 


City Circle Topic of Interest: Facilities and Amenities in the city 


There seems to be a disparity in the types of services and amenities that are located throughout the city. There is a lack 

of recreational facilities on the southside while there is a lack of commercial and retail amenities on the westside. It 

seems that the growth of the city is not balanced when it comes to facilities and amenities. 


It is our group's belief that the city needs to look at the growth of the city by ensuring that new areas have key facilities 

and amenities for the people that will be living in that area. If we were to look at areas that look at nodal development and 

incorporate that type of growth with regards to facilities and amenities, it might bring more well rounded communities to 

our city.


Moving Up Lethbridge 

0112-318-00 CCID 27

City Circle Name: Moving Up Lethbridge 

City Circle Topic of Interest: Housing Development 



The development of housing throughout the city is very interesting. Currently there is active development on the South 

side Northside and the Westside. It would seem that the East side has been overlooked. We are also seeing the seeds 

of innovation in land and housing development being planted, but only in areas where the city has control of the development. 

We are hearing messages about affordability, housing choice, increased densification, and a better division of facilities 

and amenities throughout the city, but we are not necessarily seeing any action on these fronts. There is a hint of 

this with some of the new subdivisions, but we haven't seen it materialize as of yet. 


In order to increase the amount of housing choice available to citizens of Lethbridge, our group recommends the following: 

1. Relax the guidelines that surround the land development process and encourage innovation in new communities 

through a financial incentive or speedier process for developments that involve some sort of innovation. Eg. Mixed Use, 

Nodal, etc. 

2. Educate the citizens of Lethbridge about the various housing and development choices. If the public want this, industry 

will build it so they can sell it. 

3. Increase the densification of the downtown core. Encourage the addition of a storey to those buildings either by a financial 

incentive or a speedier process. This will result in more housing choice. This should also help in creating a village 

atmosphere with nice apartments and condos and bring more people to downtown. 

4. Focus some economic development into the downtown core by targeting businesses to set up their head quarters in 

our downtown core. Build a marketing campaign that will draw in more professionals to the core. 

5. Revisit the guidelines about secondary suites in existing and new subdivisions. Make secondary suites a discretionary 

use in land zones such as R-SL to encourage more housing diversity and home ownership. 

6.Lobby the federal government to change the taxation structure for rental properties so that individuals are encouraged 

to become landlords and increase the level of affordable housing. 

7. Look at the inclusion of recreational facilities in the various communities or by having at least one large recreational 

centre that will encourage people to our city.


Lethbridge Communities in Bloom 

0112-318-00 CCID 28

PLAN YOUR CITY 

CITY CIRCLES 

SUBMITTED BY 

COMMUNITIES IN BLOOM 

LETHBRIDGE 

AUGUST, 2009

COMMUNITIES IN BLOOM – LETHBRIDGE 

Communities in Bloom was established as a national programme in 

1995. That same year the City of Lethbridge joined the national 

association, with its first judging and entry into the national 

competition for cities in the population group of 50,000 to 100,000. 

In 1996, Lethbridge was the first place winner in our category. 

Each year, the city is judged based on eight criteria. These are: 

Landscaped areas 

Environmental awareness 

Community Involvement 

Tidiness 

Floral Displays 

Natural and Cultural Heritage 

Urban Forestry 

Turf and Ground Cover 

The Lethbridge Communities in Bloom Committee has worked 

diligently over the past 15 years to influence substantive changes in 

city practices and community involvement to create a better place for 

all citizens to live and work. It is for this very reason that the 

committee saw the need to meet, and prepare a submission for the 

City Circles programme. This submission is based upon the eight 

criteria, as set out by the National Communities in Bloom 

organization.

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP 

2008 – 2009 

Brian Wright Chairperson 

Helen St. Onge Vice-chairperson 

Jan Foster 

Robert Hironaka 

Joanna Fraser 

Rhondda Schindeler 

Linda Kiernan 

Phil Edmundson 

Katy Edmundson 

Cynthia Edgar 

Enid Gom 

Joan Haig 

Judy Matlock 

Paulette Reid 

Judy Scott 

Dayna Tilleman 

Francis McHardy 

Dave Ellis Administrative Support 

John Gilbert Staff Support 

Marlene LaPointe Staff Support – Secretary

LANDSCAPED AREAS 

• Continue the development of floral areas in Galt Gardens. 

• Continue the improvement of Brewery Gardens, using more natural 

plantings. 

• Continue the revitalization of Henderson Lake controlling the weed 

problem. 

• Develop floral areas in Nicholas Sheran Park and other Westside areas 

with adequate staffing to maintain these areas. 

• Develop downtown sculptures and artwork that depicts local history and 

our historical heritage.

FLORAL DISPLAYS 

• Encourage more downtown hanging baskets 

and provide constant management. The City 

should adopt the program. 

• Encourage the development of 

Victorian and Heritage gardens. 

• Continue to encourage residential 

gardens and beautification with 

recognition, awards. 

• Encourage the development and 

maintenance of floral displays by 

businesses and public institutions.

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 

• Establish a “Welcome to 

Lethbridge” sign on west side 

of city. 

• Continue to promote 

Lethbridge at the National 

and International level by 

highlighting opportunities 

with quality of life issues, 

Education – University, 

College, Federal and 

Provincial Research Stations and business opportunities. 

• Development of an Arts and Cultural Centre, preferably in the downtown. 

• Diversify the economy but retain community as a marketplace with an 

agricultural focus and keeping a sustainable vision for the future. 

• Promote the development of a Convention Centre to attract events and 

the hospitality industry. 

• Encourage public involvement in our tourist attractions and visitor centres. 

Develop community gardens 

on the west and south side of 

city. 

• Encourage children’s 

educational programs 

involving gardening, planting 

of flowers and trees. 

• Encourage development of memorial gardens of trees and floral displays 

such as Rose Garden at St. 

Michael’s Health Centre and 

perhaps in the newly 

planned cemetery.

• Encourage the development of train 

rides over High Level Bridge. 

• Encourage partnerships with seniors 

and students and Senior’s residences 

with raised flower and vegetable beds. 

Provide raised beds for seniors in new 

community gardens. 

• Encourage more year round use 

of parks throughout the city, 

such as Winter Festivals, 

Children’s Festivals, Fundraising 

and Community events.

TURF AND GROUND COVER 

• Encourage the use of native plants that are adapted to the area through 

public education 

programs – low 

maintenance and lower 

water use. 

• Develop and maintain 

planting of native 

grasses in appropriate 

areas

URBAN FORESTRY 

• Maintain and improve 

existing programs by 

developing a long term 

urban forestry plan. 

• Encourage citizens to 

prune trees for beauty, 

water conservation, 

longevity and safety 

though creation and 

development of tree 

protection bylaw and 

develop public education 

programs for same. 

• Through public 

education, encourage 

residents and businesses 

to plant more 

appropriate trees. 

• Extend trees along boulevards – eg; 3 rd 

Mayor Magrath Drive. 

Avenue South from Downtown to 

• Encourage planting fruit bearing trees and shrubs (with proper education 

regarding clean up of fruit).

NATURAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE 

• Complete river bottom trail system 

by Golf Course. 

• Create focal point to recognize 

mining history in city. This will 

recognize the mining contribution 

to this community, as well as serve 

as a tourist attraction. 

• Maintain current state of natural areas 

of the river bottom. 

• Encourage development of heritage 

gardens throughout the city. 

• Continue and expand the designation of heritage buildings throughout the 

city. 

• Improve the public recognition and acknowledgement of heritage buildings 

and sites. 

• Continue the 

development of 

downtown while 

maintaining the 

heritage of the area.

TIDINESS 

• Encourage businesses, especially in the Industrial Park to “tidy up” their 

property – offer incentives, awards and recognition. 

• Develop a system to clean up alleys with stricter enforcement of existing 

bylaws. 

• Control littering with 

better education and 

more accessible refuse 

containers, especially 

at special events and 

parades. 

• Encourage absentee property owners to maintain revenue properties. 

• Encourage citizens to become involved in the annual Pitch-In week and 

litter pickup and all year round.

ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS 

• Develop a “Blue Box” program. 

• Develop and maintain more natural habitats for 

birds and wild life. Increase the use of 

artificial wet lands. 

• Encourage use of 

xeroscapes in cul de 

sacs and private 

properties. 

• Develop more recycling 

locations if blue box 

program is not viable. 

• Return the toxic waste drop off sites. Encourage yard waste drop off 

through public education. 

• Reduce use of large asphalt areas in residential developments. 

• Develop more shared bicycle walking paths around 

the city to promote reduced use of vehicles – 

dedicated bicycle lanes to provide harmony with 

vehicles.


6 Avenue A Neighbourhood Society 


0112-318-00 CCID 29

6 Avenue A Neighborhood Society City Circle Meeting Notes 

Introduction 

The 6 Avenue A Neighborhood Society City Circle is made up of a group of residents 

living on 6 Avenue A between 12 th and 13 th 

Street South. The topics we discussed in 

our meeting were topics, we felt as a group of City residents, to be relevant to the future 

of our area and to Lethbridge as a whole. The topics are not listed in order of 

importance. 

Topics 


Trees 

Energy 

Curbside Recycling/ Composting 

Downtown Core 

Low Income Housing 

Recreation Complex 

Herbicide/Pesticide Use


Current Reality 

Lethbridge is/has currently: 

Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) Dominant 

Car Centric 

Inconvenient Mass Transit 

Not Bike/Pedestrian Friendly 

Solutions 

SOV dominance. 

The vast majority of vehicles on the road in Lethbridge have a lone occupant. In order to 

improve this, Lethbridge can create incentives for those that choose to carpool or make 

it more convenient for those that choose not to drive. Some ideas that may help 

alleviate this problem are listed below: 

Improve mass transit to the point that it can become a viable alternative to driving a 

vehicle. 

Create HOV lanes and bus lanes on busy thoroughfares to create an incentive to 

carpool. 

Create monitored car pooling parking lots in highly desirable parking locations for 

carpool users to take advantage of. 

Car Centric 

The motor vehicle is the primary mode of transportation in Lethbridge. Some reasons 

for this may be the fact that Lethbridge covers a very large area for the population; it has 

a very convenient and relatively fast roadway system and it has poor infrastructure to 

allow for alternate modes of transportation. Some ideas that may help alleviate this 

problem are listed below: 

Promote car sharing (refer to carpooling above). 

Move toward higher density so walking/biking/transit becomes a more convenient or 

quicker mode of transport. 

Improve mass transit. 

Use an alternating license plate concept similar to other cities where cars are restricted 

to entrance to key parts of the city dependant on the day of the week and the license 

number. 

Inconvenient Mass Transit 

Lethbridge transit is not convenient to use due to long ride times, long wait times and 

long transfer times. There are some other potential issues discussed below. 

It is felt that mass transit in Lethbridge has an image issue that makes it undesirable for 

many people to be seen as a transit user. If transit is seen as a smart choice to driving, 

people would more likely use it. 

Smaller busses running more frequently on certain routes may help with some of the 

wait issue. 

A central bus depot where quick transfers can take place would help with trip times, 

convenience and shorter transfer times. 

Bus lanes would improve trip times and help to increase frequency with smaller busses.

Not Bike/Pedestrian Friendly 

Due to the fact that Lethbridge is a car centric city, it has poor infrastructure that hinders 

the use of alternate forms of transportation in particular walking and the use of bicycles. 

Bike lanes could be incorporated onto existing roads, room could be made by using 

parking lanes which may help with limiting the number of cars per household. 

Bike depots or safe parking areas placed in convenient places throughout the city would 

encourage the use of bikes. 

Lessons or awareness campaigns for cyclists on how to use the road legally and safely 

would increase the average citizens will to ride. Conversely lessons or awareness 

campaigns to teach motor vehicle drivers to interact safely with cyclists. 

Better quality pathways that are interconnected on well used traffic routes may cut down 

traffic. 

Pathways that are designated to streets should be clearly marked as such so 

pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles are all aware of the existence. 

Links between North, South and West Lethbridge are poor at best and need to be 

improved. 

Grades on Whoop-up Drive are steep for vehicular traffic and more so for bikes. A ‘zip 

line’ has been used in other cities where a mechanical means is used to aid the cyclist 

from the bottom of a long hill to the top. This does not alleviate the problem of the 

unsafe steep downhill grade on this road. 

Trees 



Few trees in new areas of the City 

People can cut trees down at will on private property 

Lack of maintenance on City landscaped areas 

New areas create an urban heat sink 

Driveway approaches thru boulevards approved 

Solutions 

Few trees in new areas of the City 

Lethbridge has beautiful treed older neighborhoods that many people visiting the City 

comment on. These areas also happen to be some of the most desirable areas to live in 

no small part due to the trees. New areas of Lethbridge lack this appeal and will 

continue to lack this appeal in the future simply because fewer and fewer trees are being 

planted. It seems as if the City has a short sighted view with regard to how the new 

areas will look in the future. 

Every house gets a new tree and all boulevards are planted with trees. 

People can cut down trees at will. 

While dictating what happens on private property is difficult, incentives can be created to 

keep a certain number of trees alive and healthy on your lot. This could be in the form of 

a property tax break and could be assessed with the property value.

Lack of maintenance on City landscaped areas. 

Maintenance of Green areas within the City is an expensive undertaking and it is 

obvious sometimes that the commitment to keep these areas looking good is not being 

met. 

Use of untreated water where possible would cut the cost and waste of treated City 

water. 

Xeriscaping of boulevards and medians using hearty native trees and grasses could be 

incorporated so watering and minimal maintenance would be required. A good example 

of this would be the median near the Enmax Centre. 

New areas create an urban heat sink 

More trees and green areas curb the heat absorption of the new areas increased 

concrete and asphalt area in these areas. 

Driveway approaches thru boulevards approved 

Driveway approaches through boulevards take valuable green space away and 

potentially cause the cutting down of trees to allow for this. Driveways are a necessity 

for most houses but approaches are being approved where no driveway either exists or 

is planned. These approaches are being built in many cases to “save” a parking spot. 

The City should investigate prior to allowing construction of these approaches. Is there 

a driveway? Is there room for a driveway? Set a time line to have a driveway built or 

remove at owners cost. 

Energy 



Limited solar, wing, geo, and bio energy use options 

Solutions 

Limited solar, wing, geo, and bio energy use options 

Lethbridge has given limited options with regard to the types of energy home owners can 

use. Local by-laws need to be relaxed to allow citizens to use these alternate energies. 

Bio-digesters could be used to supplement our energy needs ant at the same time allow 

for a cleaner environment. 

Curbside Recycling/Composting 


Lethbridge does not currently offer curbside recycling or composting to city residents. 

Lethbridge does not offer composting of household waste. 

Solutions 

If the City is unable to provide this type of program, an increase of drop sites in the form 

of auxiliary drop sites may bridge the gap for the time being. These auxiliary sites could 

be smaller, limited capacity sites and be located in high traffic locations such as

estaurants, apartment buildings, convenience stores. The drop locations could be 

incorporated into the much improved transit system (in the future) at main stops or 

depots. 

Three collection box colors could be used to separate recyclables. Black – electronics; 

blue – plastics, paper, etc.; and brown – compost materials. Collection of compost 

material could be used in city run bio-digesters to create earth friendly energy. 

The Core 


The downtown core in Lethbridge has been dying for many years. It is not a desirable 

place to go most of the time. There is very little reason to go downtown for anyone that 

doesn’t work there. There is no longer a grocery store, the appearance of most of the 

area is poor, and it is not lively or exciting. The most positive thing to happen in 

downtown Lethbridge is the addition of the fountain park at the Galt Gardens. This has 

transformed a small part of the park into what we think Lethbridge could be. 

Solutions 

Bring in the Arts Center! 

An Arts Center brings people out after the main working hours. A centrally located 

facility that houses all different kinds of art, dance, and theatre would have some thing to 

show on any night of the week. This would help increase traffic to the core. 

Get some living accommodations downtown. 

A permanent population downtown would give it a voice. With no permanent population 

it is easy to pass on programs for that area and concentrate on areas that have more 

pull with the City. 

More mixed use would provide more accommodation downtown. 

Give incentives for development to happen downtown. 

Low income housing has negative connotations associated with it which causes 

opposition to certain types of development so allow for high quality, more expensive 

housing for professionals to start the move to living downtown and transition to more 

affordable accommodation once a precedent has been set. 

We need more social events. 

The main event that has most people taking a trip to the fringe of downtown is the Show 

and Shine on Street Machine Weekend. More festivals would have the same effect. 

Festivals such as the Fringe, Street Performers, Music Festivals, Wine and Food 

Festivals, most out doors, some in and all year round. 

Lethbridge needs a grocery store downtown. 

The closing of IGA was an unfortunate thing for the City of Lethbridge to allow to occur. 

This further set our downtown along the wrong path. The current IGA site could be used 

for many useful facilities but it is known as a grocery store so a natural use would be a 

fresh food market with local sellers of in season foods and goods.

Bring in University/College students. 

Bus connections are pretty good from downtown to the University and College right now; 

in fact the University is probably the shortest trip time in the City. Unfortunately living 

downtown is not an option for university students due to lack of accommodation. 

Students are currently forced to live either close walking distance and higher rents or a 

very long bus ride, with transfers, away. 

Free up bylaws to allow for buskers and market stands. 

This would help to create a feeling of liveliness and excitement. 

Low Income Housing 


Lethbridge is in dire need of low income housing. 

Solutions 

Create small pockets of low income housing mixed in with other types of housing 

throughout the City rather than low income areas. This proximity creates understanding 

between the different classes. 

Recreational Complex 


In Lethbridge we currently have to go to a hotel to use a waterslide. We have to share 

facilities with the University to get the use of ‘good’ facilities. We don’t have a sports 

center we can be proud of. 

Solutions 

Look to other cities. 

Cities such as Red Deer, Medicine Hat, or Spruce Grove would be a good comparison 

for similar sized cities with these facilities. 

Could be in the form of a multi-use building. 

The sports facility could be combined with other uses such as a library or art instruction. 

Construction of a campus type of facility a possibility. 

To spread out the cost of construction of a multi-sports/leisure complex a centrally 

located campus area could be created and building spread out over a number of years. 

The question that arises is; is the City able to make a long term commitment such as this 

and stick to it and carry it through with a change of council? 

Herbicide/Pesticide Use 


Herbicides are allowed in the City of Lethbridge

Solutions 

Use alternate means of weed control in the City. If herbicides are absolutely required, 

notice of intent to use should be supplied to residents that may be affected. This would 

include surrounding homes, businesses, school students, employees, etc. The notice of 

intent should be in the form of a letter (not a news paper notice) to all affected stating the 

date and type of herbicide/pesticide to be used as well as information on how to 

safeguard against the chemicals used.


Vox Musica Choral Society 

0112-318-00 CCID 30

City Circle Name: Vox Musica Choral Society 


City Circle Topic of Interest: Support for the arts is needed in both word and action; i.e., promotion and funding, 

priority and facilities. Over the years, the City of Lethbridge has invested quite consistently in sports facilities; these are 

valuable and worthwhile. Similar consistent attention to arts facilities is needed to tackle the perception of “second class” 

treatment for the arts that has arisen because of the contrasting deficit in concert facilities. We have excellent musicians 

in this city who perform in often inadequate space because there is no alternative. What more could happen if we had 

appropriate facilities? Such venues would also generate growth and promote culture by attracting high quality performers, 

prospective residents, and visitors. 


Numerous indicators of the need for a concert hall are evident. 

1. The Yates Centre is inadequate for concerts as it is acoustically dead. Electronic sound enhancement is not an option; 

rather, we need a place with excellent natural acoustics. The Yates also has limited capacity and is difficult to secure as it 

is constantly in use. 

2. Southminster United Church has good natural acoustics, but the seating can be uncomfortable, sight lines for some 

seats are compromised, and the temperature cannot be adequately controlled, leading to noise intrusion through open 

windows. Although it is larger than Yates, it, too, accommodates only around 750 people in a concert setting. Finally, because 

its primary function is not for performance, Southminster presents logistical challenges such as inadequate stage 

space for larger productions (choral/orchestral performances), inadequate stage lighting, and no concert grand piano. 


A key solution is to move quickly to build a much-needed concert hall. 

1. A facility with excellent natural live acoustics and seating for 1000-1200 would be ideal for a city of our size and potential. 

(Medicine Hat recently built a new hall with 750 seats; it is already too small for many events.) 

2. Lethbridge is due for the funding! Edmonton, Calgary, Red Deer, and Medicine Hat have all received performance facility 

funding in the last few years, but Lethbridge has missed out. How sad that we did not pursue such a project for our 

provincial centennial to parallel Lethbridge’s national centennial project (the Yates) and the provincial centennial projects 

of renovating both Jubilee Auditoriums. 

3. The cost of two endeavours - building a stand-alone concert hall and enhancing the Yates Centre to make it a topnotch 

theatre - could be lower than the cost of a single new mixed-usage venue that would compromise long-term sound 

quality if it were to try to serve a wide range of purposes. 

4. Such a project could be a centrepiece in downtown revitalization. It could also be successful in other locations with 

easy access/parking, and proximity to accommodations and restaurants.


Family Village 



0112-318-00 CCID 31

City Circle Name: Family Village 


City Circle Topic of Interest: The development and operation of a co-location site that brings together family and 

community social service organizations to share resources, collaborate and improve access to services for the citizens of 

Lethbridge and Southwestern Alberta. 


Lethbridge Family Circle Association (LFCA), with support from the City of Lethbridge, is working towards making Family 

Village a reality within the next 3-5 years. The group is working with local social service organizations to develop the most 

comprehensive and encompassing Village that LFCA can. Both provincial and federal government representatives are 

aware and familiar with this project. As of this date, no money has been raised but a lot of ground work has been and continues 

to be done towards gaining funding for this project. Many interested organizations are running into severe space 

constraints and will required more/new space in the next few years. For these groups, operating or overhead funding is 

becoming harder and harder to obtain. As a result, LFCA is in a positive position to help these vital groups as their needs 

arise. The next steps in ensuring Family Village becomes a reality is to move forward with an aggressive marketing plan, 

ensure large funding sources are secured and that space is available as groups need it. 


In order for Family Village to become a reality, the City of Lethbridge and its citizens need to support this initiative with 

substantial funding and support. This funding does not require an actual cash outlay but could include a donation of land 

and/or services towards the completion of Family Village. Citizens, businesses and other organizations who support this 

project need to step forward to volunteer with the organization of the various tasks that need to be completed. There is 

board work to be completed as well as numerous committees to work on. We welcome anyone who is interested in more 

information or those interested in becoming more involved. Please contact LFCA at info@thefamilyvillage.ca or call Tara 

at 403-381-4676 for more details.

FAMILY VILLAGE 


We want Lethbridge to be 

a place for families who are supported, 

with accessible services for all. 

We want to see the development and operation 

of a co-location site for family and 

community social service organizations 

Our Mission 

Lethbridge Family Circle Association is a 

not-for-profit organization whose mission is to 

develop and operate a co-location site called Family 

Village that brings together family and community social 

service organizations to share resources, collaborate 

and improve access to services for the citizens of 

Lethbridge and southwestern Alberta.

Our Vision for 2020 

Family Village is the busy and vibrant 

home to a collective of mutually supportive 

member organizations that provides: 

� a warm, inviting and inclusive Family Village where 

people can access supportive services in a socially 

interactive gathering place. 

� accessible and complementary services provided through the 

collaborative relationships between the community and 

member organizations. 

� a place that brings people together to create 

meaningful relationships that will help them more fully 

participate in the community. 

� expanded services to family and community through the 

reduction of administrative and operating costs of 

member organizations by cost sharing and sustainable 

building ownership. 

� an enhanced quality of life in our community. 

Lethbridge Family Circle Association (LFCA) is a registered 

society representing not for profit family service agencies 

committed to offering their services in one common facility. 

Upon purchase, this common facility will be named Family 

Village and will be a shared one stop shop area where 

agencies will share resources and benefits to enhance programs 

for individuals, children, youth and families in our 

community. 

By creating a Family Village, citizens of Lethbridge will see: 

� Community partnerships in action 

� Easier accessibility to services for its citizens 

� Enhanced services due to cost savings by the agencies 

� Improved programming due to joint programming 

� An environment that supports healthy individual growth and 

development


Canadian Home Builder’s Association– 

Lethbridge Region 

Part 1 Housing and Land Development 

Part 2 Facilities and Amenities 

0112-318-00 CCID 32


City Circle Name: Canadian Home Builder's Association-Lethbridge Region 

City Circle Topic of Interest: Housing and Land Development 


The residential construction industry is a large cornerstone of the local economy and is a driving force for employment 

and tax dollars within the City of Lethbridge. It is estimated that in 2009, the local industry will provide wages in excess of 

$153 million dollars and total housing investment will total around $370 million dollars. Not only does the development of 

housing and land offer large economic gains for the city, but the individuals who are involved in the industry are building 

the future of the city as they develop neighborhoods where families and individuals of all ages will live and call home. 

Currently, the city has started working more effectively with the industry to address concerns and foster better relationships 

as we work together to shape the future of Lethbridge. However, it is paramount that the effort is continued and 

expanded into all areas of the city that are affected by the development of housing and land. The various departments of 

the city must see industry as a resource rather than a problem and continue to work with industry to build a sustainable 

and vibrant city. 

There are several factors that affect housing and land development that must be considered by the city with regards to 

future plans. These factors include: 

1. Areas of the city that are being developed 

2. The type of development that is occurring 

3. Densification and Variety of Housing Choice 

It is crucial for the city to understand that all of these factors are intertwined and must be looked at holistically versus 

piece meal. As well, the demand of the consumers drives our local markets and those needs must be considered when 

making decisions about housing and land development. One must also remember that markets can change quickly and 

dramatically and that we must be in a position as a city to react to those changes in the best way possible. Included in 

our submission are our thoughts about each one of the factors listed above as well as ways to implement change in each 

of the areas. 

Where is Lethbridge growing currently? 

As a city we are seeing development of housing and land in almost all of the quadrants of the city, but a large focus being 

on the West side of Lethbridge. One of the largest developers on the West side of Lethbridge is the city’s own land department 

with involvement in Riverstone, Sun Ridge, The Crossings, and Copper Wood. There are only 2 subdivisions on 

the West side that do not have city involvement in them; Canyon Crest and West Highlands. With the city’s heavy involvement 

on the West side and the purchase of land for many years to come, it has forced private developers to look at 

the other areas of the city including the North and South. This has caused some concerns because we are not seeing the 

city encouraging development in the other areas of the city.


What is the current situation regarding your topic? (Cont.) 

Due to the large amount of development that has occurred on the West side, it has caused issues with the availability of 

facilities and amenities that an individual can access that builds or purchases a home on the West side. Not only has this 

caused an overburden on the infrastructure to the West side, but it has put a disproportionate amount of pressure to purchase 

on the West side as that is where the largest amount of development is occurring; thereby causing unbalanced 

growth. As a city we must be cognizant that growth needs to occur in all sectors and we must look to the future to see 

where growth should occur and consider all of the factors that will affect future growth. (Eg. Canamex Highway) 

What is the current type of development? 

It is apparent that our city is on the cusp of innovative development and wants to be a leader in that area. Recent examples 

include the creation of an innovation zone for new development and the Built Green subdivision of Sun Ridge. 

However, it has been established as fairly difficult for other developers and builders to be innovative in their plans because 

of bylaws that rule certain uses as permitted vs. discretionary, the NIMBY attitude of the citizens of Lethbridge, and 

the process involved in obtaining a development permit. Industry is trapped into providing similar types of development 

because of the MDP, the bylaws, off-site levies, and the cost of maintenance for the city. 

How is Lethbridge currently dealing with densification and housing choice? 

As a city we have been largely focused on providing single family units in subdivisions because this is what the consumer 

has demanded and this is what the bylaws and MDP have supported. Builders and Developers have been hesitant to 

look for innovative ways to increase the densification and add variety of housing choice in neighborhoods as the rules 

were too stringent and the attitude of the citizens of Lethbridge has been somewhat negative towards projects that have a 

higher densification. The NIMBY effect is very prevalent in this community when it comes to higher density projects. 

We have seen some movement towards increasing the densification of the city with the new bylaws about secondary 

suites and the city’s willingness to provide grants to bring existing suites up to code. However, even those bylaws have 

some struggles associated with them. The fact that the city does not allow secondary suites as a discretionary use in the 

zoning of R-SL will discourage densification. It is apparent that this bylaw must be revisited if we are to start tackling the 

low vacancy rates that are apparent in our city and provide more of our citizens with the option of home ownership as they 

are able to supplement their mortgage payments with a renter in the house. 

It must be noted that there are a lot more multi-family projects and condo style projects that are under construction or 

planned to be under construction. With the conversion of several of the upper floors downtown of buildings to provide 

suites, it is the feeling that we have taken some tentative steps to solving this problem but a lot of work is yet to be done. 

As a city we have not seen a large amount of mixed use development or implementing mandatory mother-in-law suites in 

certain areas of the city, etc. 

Another barrier to densification that has been identified is the tax structure that builders and/or landlords face when building 

units that can increase the densification. Due to the high amount of tax paid on buildings that are available for rent, it 

discourages this type of development. This will only change once the tax structure changes. In order for those changes 

to occur, it is paramount that industry and all levels of government work on this problem to develop a solution that will encourage 

more people to consider owning rental properties.



How can Lethbridge grow smarter? 

It is in the city’s best interest to ensure that the future development of the City of Lethbridge be balanced and focus on all 

quadrants of the city. As an association we would like to see development plans be moved through the process a quicker 

pace so that we can respond to the interests of the consumer on a more timely basis. We would suggest that the city 

consider scaling down the level of development they are actively involved in and allow the market to determine where, 

when, and how land should be developed. Or, the city could start to play a role that involves innovative and diversified 

development versus mass development. 

Consumers who have a vested interest in their neighborhood are more likely to ensure that developments are consistent 

and appealing. The use of community associations and neighborhood plans should be revisited as they provide a great 

resource to the city for ensuring integrity in the style of development in their area. 

It is also imperative to review how growth is being funded, should we unfairly tax the new home buyer over the existing 

homebuyer when the new home buyer is providing more tax revenue for the city and building the city. A review of the offsite 

levies and the projects that are being funded from the account must be reviewed openly. Government Imposed 

Charges for new home buyers in the City of Lethbridge equate to around $26,500. This has a serious impact on home 

affordability and ownership. If we wish to grow our city in a sustainable manner that encourages different types of development, 

we must be cognizant of the pressures that government imposed costs play. 

As we look further down the road, we must ensure that we look to the future developments that are occurring around our 

city that will affect growth. Factors to consider such as the Canamex highway, the Hwy #3 corridor, the County of 

Lethbridge Development Plan, need to be reviewed or a regional development plan implemented with all of the neighboring 

communities and counties. Infrastructure must be considered when looking at these projects as they might dictate 

growth in areas that are currently not being considered by the city. It would be foolish of us to think that we can completely 

dictate where growth can occur, we must understand that external factors will affect how the city grows as well. 

How can Lethbridge develop differently? 

If we want Lethbridge to develop differently, there are several factors that need to be considered. First, we must educate 

the citizens of Lethbridge to start changing the NIMBY attitude. The city has the key role to play in this and should be 

leading the way. Informational campaigns that talk about the benefits of different types of development such as mixed 

use, nodal, and green must be communicated to the public. The City of Lethbridge has a great opportunity to be a leader 

in the area of development and this could be one of the ways in which they lead. 

Second, reduce the barriers to innovation for both land developers and builders. It is extremely difficult and costly for land 

developers to change their plans when a new land zone is created like the innovation zone. The creation of subdivisions 

takes years and this must be taken into account when the city is requesting something different. A separate or streamlined 

process should be considered for all developers that are being innovative in their design. A financial incentive 

should be considered to encourage land developers to change existing plans that are on their way in the development 

process. As the consumer’s desires change, the need for inspired development must occur. We must consider mixed 

use development, green development, and nodal development. However, in order to accommodate those changing 

needs, we must ensure the vision of the city is followed by administration by providing them the resources and tools to 

implement the vision.


Please share your ideas to improve or implement you topic of interest? (Cont.) 

Builders must also be encouraged to continue to be innovative. Industry wants to be innovative and strives to be different. 

It was the home building industry that developed the Built Green program, not government and this is just one example 

of private enterprise leading the way. The development officers at the city must be given the tools, resources, and authority 

to look at the big picture when builders are submitting their house plans. If there is an innovative aspect to the plan, it 

should be allowed to be considered. This may cause all of the bylaws to be re-visited and ensure that industry has input 

into the creation of those bylaws. Innovation must have a vested interest from all parties involved; the municipality, the 

land developer, the builder, and the consumer if it is going to succeed. 

If a plan doesn’t fit into the exact requirements and or policy, it should be given the opportunity to be reviewed and the 

requirements adapted if the plan is for the greater good. Sometimes common sense needs to outweigh rules and regulations. 

Examples of this include allowing alternative energy sources within housing developments. The demand for energy 

efficiency is growing on a yearly basis. We need to ensure that the doors are open for considering these options and 

we are continually looking at how we can improve in those areas. The citizens of Lethbridge determine the type of housing 

and development projects that will grow the city; we must have the flexibility to meet those demands. Cookie cutter 

solutions do not offer that. 

It is imperative that the vision of the citizens be followed by administration through the guidance of council. As a city we 

must do more than just look at shining examples from other municipalities and areas, but ensure the resources and tools 

are in place to make our own shining examples. An idea is just a wasted thought unless acted upon. By continuing to 

work with the industry and foster relationships, the city and industry can bring innovation to the forefront here in 

Lethbridge. However, all sides must be actively working together to ensure this occurs and all departments in the city 

must be onside. 

How can we address densification and housing choice in the future? 

The densification issue is one that will continue to face the city throughout the years. However, by involving industry, 

opening up the MDP, and the bylaws to be more flexible, it is a problem which can be worked on. As an association we 

would suggest the following options to be implemented to encourage densification within the city: 

1. Review the current bylaws surrounding secondary suites and allow them as a discretionary use in the zone of R-SL. 

2. Educate the general citizens of Lethbridge about the benefit of higher densification housing. Work on calming the 

NIMBY effect. 

3. Look at mandating a percentage of higher densification in every subdivision. 

4. Encourage the addition of a floor or conversion of the second floor in the downtown core to suites or rentals. Some 

great examples of this are the Club Cigar Store and Alec Arms Hotel. 

5. Look at a tax break or a streamlined development process for developers and builders who are trying to be innovative 

in increasing the densification, like mixed use, etc. 

6. Work with industry and all levels of government on changing the tax structure around rental properties. 

7. Ensure and encourage the development officers to look for innovation in designs and allow them the flexibility to adopt 

the innovation. This may involve redrafting of numerous bylaws. 

8. Continue to foster the relationships between the city, UDI, CHBA-LR, LCA, and LDAR. Industry loves to innovate and 

they will if given the chance. 

As consumers demand more choice in housing, industry must be given the opportunity to satisfy that choice. This can



As consumers demand more choice in housing, industry must be given the opportunity to satisfy that choice. This can 

only be accomplished by industry and the municipality acting as partners versus opponents. We must also always understand 

that consumers will want a variety of choice and that moving to just one type of housing will never build sustainable 

communities. Building and development must encompass a wide range of housing choice including single family units 

and multi-family units. Adaptability and flexibility is key to the future growth and success of our city.


City Circle Name: Canadian Home Builder's Association- Lethbridge Region 

City Circle Topic of Interest: Facilities and Amenities 


The City of Lethbridge is a stable city with solid growth. We are starting to see some changes around the level of facilities 

and amenities that are offered in our city, but we have a long way to go. As an industry we hear a lot of comments from 

new home buyers and people from outside the city about our lack of facilities and amenities in areas of the city. It is impressive 

that we have both a University and a College, but the need for more facilities and amenities continues to be a 

topic of conversation. Other common topics of new home buyers and the public is the request for subdivisions with more 

walk ability and parks area. While it is generally accepted that we need to reduce car usage, city planning has made this 

nearly impossible in some areas which are not only remote, but also which have limited commercial development. 

As a city we lack commercial development on the West side, recreation facilities on the South side, housing development 

on the East side, and a Multi-Plex for the city. In order for us to attract more economic development to the city, we need to 

ensure that their employees have quality facilities and amenities throughout the city. 


As an association, we encourage the city to visit the issue of building a multi-plex for the city that can be used by all residents. 

It would also make sense for the city to partner with future developments to provide facilities and amenities in the 

newer subdivisions. Greater commercial development throughout West Lethbridge (rather than concentrating it all in the 

new development near the high school and at the north end of University) would allow more people work/shopping/ 

business opportunities within their own neighbourhoods. 

Existing neighbourhoods may need commercial retrofitting or bylaws may need to be re-examined to accommodate increased 

business opportunities within neighbourhoods (work/live arrangements; more reasonable home-based business 

licenses; reduced setbacks with garage offices, etc.). The recent comment of a city official that the new bridge will be put 

off for many years in order to encourage West Lethbridge residents to change their travel habits is an example of an impossible 

wish – folks can’t drive less if there is no place they can reasonably walk to. If we are going to sentence 

neighbourhoods to automobile dependency, and a second river-crossing would shorten the distance needed to drive (i.e. 

SunRidge to the airport), then adding the river crossing would REDUCE the mileage (i.e. amount) driven. 

We would also encourage the city to revisit the issue of green space in neighborhoods. As an industry we understand the 

cost of maintaining these spaces, but perhaps we need to look at reducing the size of the parks versus the quantity. Partnerships 

between community groups and community associations could also have a role to play in these new neighborhoods. 

The more we get people involved in their neighborhoods the more sustainable the community.


SAGE City Circle 

Part 1 Environmental Council 

Part 2 Greening our City and our neighbourhoods 

0112-318-00 CCID 33

Date: June 4 th 

, 2009 at Indian Battle Park 

City Circle: Environmental Council 

Southern Alberta Group for the Environment (SAGE) 

Attendees: Cheryl Bradley, Paul Bohnert, Sherri Umeris, Bill & Anne Brown, Nicola Miller, 

Deb Jarvie, Mary MacEachern, Braum Barber 

Topic: Sustainability Council 

o The City of Lethbridge has a position, currently unfilled, for a Sustainability Manager. 

Though it is important to maintain this position within the City administration, it 

requires access to a broad spectrum of expertise and coordination with nongovernment 

organizations. 

o The Sustainability Manager within the City could be modeled like a Quality Control 

manager in an industrial setting. In this setting, Quality Control is the only department in 

the company not responsible for quality – the role is to measure quality performance 

and provide support to achieve desired goals. Similarly, a Sustainability Manager would 

not be responsible for implementing sustainability – each department would set targets 

and processes to achieve their goals. The Sustainability Manager would monitor and 

measure department achievements and provide support where required. An 

organization can no more mandate sustainability than it can mandate quality – both 

must be integral to the spirit and operation of the organization. 

o To augment the Sustainability Manager position, an Environmental Council would be 

created with a director and volunteer board, and it would include groups directly 

involved in environmental health and sustainability. Such a council would be modeled 

on the successful local examples of the Allied Arts Council, and Economic Development 


o The Environmental Council would provide the voice of engaged citizens and their 

collective expertise directly to the Sustainability Manager. The relationship would be 

arms-length from the City to ensure critical objectivity. 

o It is critical that the City of Lethbridge become a leader for environmental stewardship, 

both by demonstrating best practices within the administration, and by acting as an 

inspiration for change in the community (residential, business, & industry). Redefining 

the Sustainability Manager position within the City administration with clear goals and 

performance measures, and supporting an Environmental Council that would provide a 

central voice for the array of existing citizens’ organizations currently existing in the City 

would be a positive step.

A leading voice for a healthy and 

environmentally sustainable community 

SAGE CITY CIRCLE 

Box 383 Lethbridge AB T1J 3E9 

Greening our City and our Neighbourhoods 

July 2009 

Contributors: Braum Barber, Sherri and Paul Bohnert, Cheryl Bradley, Bill Brown, Paula Collins, 

Lori Goater, Deb Jarvie, Klaus Jericho, Mary McEachern, Nicola Miller, John Nightingale 

This report is based on the outcome of three sessions – one at the Fish and Game Hut on May 7 th , one at a 

river valley picnic on June 4 th and one at the Penny Coffee House on June 29 th 

. Note that we have not 

included a section related to parks and the river valley as this is being dealt with through another City Circle 

organized by the Helen Schuler Coulee Centre. 

INTRODUCTION 

Over the past few months the Southern Alberta Group for Environment (SAGE) has informally 

convened a City Circle to share ideas on what Lethbridge could be like in the year 2050. We have 

discussed the concept of sustainable community that is variously defined including as “a 

community that meets the diverse needs of existing and future residents, is sensitive to 

environment, and contributes to a high quality of life” (Ref: United Kingdom Sustainable 

Communities Plan 2003). 

The focus of our discussions has been on the environmental quality component of Lethbridge as a 

sustainable community although we recognize that economic vitality and social equity are also 

important considerations and all three are interlinked. There is an important role for the City of 

Lethbridge (City Council and administration) as well as for SAGE and other interested individuals 

in our community in helping to achieve sustainable community. 

WHERE WE ARE 

In order to determine where we want to go, it is important to understand where we have been and 

where we are. Our discussions are informed by the following key historical points regarding 

environmental management towards sustainable community in Lethbridge. 

� The current City of Lethbridge Municipal Development Plan (1998) has four of six goals that 

are environment-related. They include directing future residential growth to those areas where 

development already has started, enhancing the downtown, encouraging open space 

corridors and protecting the river valley as required by the River Valley Area Redevelopment 

Plan (1986). We are not aware of an evaluation of progress towards the goals defined in the 

1998 Municipal Development Plan. Our assessment is that although there has been some 

progress towards the environmental goals in the last decade, there continues to be urban 

1

sprawl, plans to revitalize the downtown are slow to be implemented, our hiking/cycling 

pathway system remains fragmented, and there are increasing threats to the river valley 

environment. 

� In 2002 Lethbridge City Council resolved to incorporate the principles of sustainable 

development (economic vitality, social equity and ecological and environmental quality) into 

business planning, including an audit of current practices and identification of strategic 

responses and action plans for improvement. Community input, through an Ecosystem 

Management Advisory Group that included representatives of SAGE and other informed 

citizens, provided substantial background for this resolution. (Ref: Resolution of February 11, 

2002 regarding Model for Urban Environmental Management). Although SAGE offered at the 

time to continue in an advisory role, our offer was not accepted and we are not informed about 

how effectively the City of Lethbridge is incorporating the principles of sustainable 

development into business planning. 

� In 2003 an Environmental Manager position was established within City Hall however the 

position was discontinued in 2007. The Environmental Manager position was placed within 

Community Services with some responsibility to Infrastructure Services. It is our observation 

that the Environmental Manager position was not given a strategic leadership role; hence, 

there was not on a level playing field with business units directed towards economic growth 

and the traditional “business as usual” approach to municipal operations prevailed. There 

appeared to be little support for initiatives of the Environmental Manager within City Hall. 

There is a link on the City of Lethbridge website to an “Office of Environmental Management 

and Urban Sustainability” but there does not appear to be a human face to that “office”. 

� In 2005, Lethbridge City Council approved strategic priorities for the 2004-2007 term. One of 

the thirteen priorities dealt with improving environmental quality, that being “to identify those 

factors which would impact a safe and secure water supply to the City and develop internal 

and external mitigation strategies”. (Ref: Working Together For Tomorrow: an integrated 

strategic plan for the City of Lethbridge 2004-2007”). There was significant progress towards 

this goal with upgrades to the City’s water and wastewater treatment plants. The City of 

Lethbridge is considering external factors that may affect water quality and supply in the 

Oldman River headwaters through its involvement in the Oldman Watershed Council. 

� Since 2004, representatives of the City of Lethbridge, SAGE and other organizations on the 

Urban Team of the Oldman Watershed Council developed and implemented a multistakeholder 

process to assist with improving urban stormwater quality in Lethbridge. 

Lethbridge stormwater has high levels of lawn chemicals. A key finding of a 2004 community 

survey and a 2006 workshop is that the large majority of Lethbridge citizens are receptive to 

changing their yard practices to benefit the river and human health. They expect the 

municipality to demonstrate leadership in building community commitment to improved 

environmental practice. (Ref: Lethbridge Stormwater Education Program: Design and 

Evaluation Report (2004) and Municipal Leadership in Improving Urban Stormwater: Report of 

a Workshop (2006)). 

The City of Lethbridge has been improving stormwater management to comply with provincial 

requirements. Stormwater ponds are being constructed in newly developed communities (e.g. 

Uplands, Sunridge). Currently City Council is considering passage of a Drainage Bylaw that 

prohibits the release of specified materials into the stormwater drainage system and regulates 

connections made to the system. This is a measure that SAGE supports and considers long 

overdue. Furthermore, representatives of the City and SAGE are participating in the Prairie 

Urban Garden Group of OWC that is promoting use of xeriscaping principles. 

2

� In 2006 Alberta Environment announced that applications for new water allocation were no 

longer accepted in the Oldman River basin. This means that growth in the City of Lethbridge 

is limited by its current licensed water allocation unless new allocation is acquired through a 

license transfer. It is important that our plans for sustainable community recognize and reflect 

the limits of water supply in this semi-arid region that is expected to get more arid with climate 

change. 

� Economic Development Lethbridge (EDL) is a member of the Southern Alberta Alternative 

Energy Partnership which has developed a Green Growth Plan for the region including the 

expansion of alternative energy production mainly from wind power and waste-to-energy 

studies. SAGE has a representative on EDL. 

� The City of Lethbridge developed Canada’s first entirely ‘green’ neighbourhood based on Built 

Green principles. Every home must meet a minimum Built Green rating for environmentally 

friendly materials, systems and building practices that lower water and energy consumption, 

and reduce waste. In partnership with Cedar Ridge Quality Homes and Lethbridge College, 

The Living Home project was built to demonstrate best practices in green building. This is an 

important initiative towards sustainable community, however by continuing the practice of 

building suburbs of single family residential dwellings it does not address concerns about 

sprawl. 

� Approximately 1000 kg of waste is generated by each person in Alberta each year. Of this, 

less than 20% is diverted from the landfill. The City of Lethbridge has a rudimentary recycling 

program involving centralized collection points for plastics, glass, metals and cardboard. 

Electronics and toxic waste is presently separated at the Municipal Landfill for proper disposal. 

Trimark Engineering was recently commissioned to develop a preliminary study on Waste to 

Energy Treatment Alternatives in Southwest and South-Central Alberta focused mainly on 

incineration techniques to produce power. Advanced recycling, composting and anaerobic 

digestion were also mentioned in the report. Reducing and recycling are more sustainable 

approaches to solid waste management than landfilling or incineration. 

� In 2007 Lethbridge City Council committed to a strategic plan for the 2007-2010 term. The 

plan includes two priorities focusing on environmental quality. One priority is “to contain or 

reduce the community’s total impact on the environment” including developing an 

environmental policy and implementation plan that addresses water, energy, waste, air and 

soil. Another environmental priority is “to manage growth” including developing a sustainability 

plan as part of the Municipal Development Plan (ref: City of Lethbridge 2007-2010 Towards a 

Sustainable Future: an integrated strategic plan). Citizens were engaged in the process to 

define priorities. 

WHERE WE WANT TO BE 

Guided by an Environmental/Sustainability Office and Environmental Advisory Council 

� A City Environmental /Sustainability Office is revitalized. It has the mandate and authority to 

direct and guide all business units to work towards environmental sustainability. 

� The Environmental /Sustainability Office could be modeled like a Quality Control manager in 

an industrial setting. In this setting, Quality Control is the only department in the company not 

responsible for quality – the role is to measure quality performance and provide support to 

3

achieve desired goals. Similarly, an Environmental Manager would not be responsible for 

implementing sustainability – each department would set targets and processes to achieve 

their goals. The Environmental Manager would monitor and measure department 

achievements and provide support where required. An organization can no more mandate 

sustainability than it can mandate quality – both must be integral to the spirit and operation of 

the organization. 

� There is municipal leadership towards achieving sustainable community 

� There is a mechanism for drawing on environmental expertise in the community that will 

contribute to achieving sustainable community (e.g. environmental advisory council to the 

Environmental/Sustainability Office). 

� An environmental advisory council would be an ongoing City Circle. It would be created with a 

director and volunteer board, and it would include groups directly involved with the 

environmental health and sustainability of the region. Such a council would be modeled on the 

successful local examples of the Allied Arts Council, and Economic Development Lethbridge. 

The Environmental Advisory Council would provide the voice of engaged citizens and their 

collective expertise directly to the Environmental Manager. The relationship would be armslength 

from the City to ensure critical objectivity. 

� An Environmental Advisory Council would, among other things: 

° Conduct ongoing scan of governance structures, plans and programs in other 

communities making progress towards sustainability (e.g. Green Communities Guide) 

° Inform decision makers about sustainable options appropriate in Lethbridge. 

° Define indicators of environmental quality, monitor these indicators and report on them 

on a regular basis (e.g. stormwater quality) 

° Evaluate how effectively the City of Lethbridge incorporates the principles of 

sustainable development into business planning. 

° Evaluate progress towards the environment goals of the Municipal Development Plan 

° Encourage citizen’s initiatives (resourcing, awards…) 

° Define and encourage initiatives that help citizens find meaning outside of 

consumerism including initiatives that help to build community connections (e.g. 

community halls, community gatherings, supporting locally produced goods and 

services) 

Using Water Wisely 

� There is widespread recognition that we live in an area that is “water short” and growth is 

limited by the water allocation available to the City of Lethbridge. 

� There is widespread recognition that there is an increased risk of drought stress and less 

water supply due to climate change. 

4

� There is widespread recognition that we are responsible to other residents in the Oldman 

River basin to manage water wisely through conservation, efficiency improvements and 

reducing water contamination. 

� The City of Lethbridge is participating and investing in projects in the headwaters of the 

Oldman River and its tributaries (Waterton, Belly and St. Mary) that protect source waters. 

� The Municipality undertakes full cost accounting that captures all costs related to provision of 

municipal water services and reports these costs. 

� Savings in water use are linked to savings in energy for processing and distributing drinking 

water or treating wastewater. 

� There is full metering and reporting of water use, including City use of water for irrigation 

delivered through Irrigation District canals. 

� Infrastructure leakage is fully evaluated and addressed. 

� Water use reduction targets are set. 

� Programs are in place to encourage uptake of water efficient fixtures and technology. Options 

include rebates to builders and homeowners and a water use bylaw (examples exist for Red 

Deer, Okotoks, Calgary, Cochrane, Olds). 

� Stormwater is captured (stormwater ponds, rain barrels etc.) and used instead of treated 

water for irrigation and industrial cooling. 

� A bylaw is adopted and enforced that reduces contamination of stormwater. 

� A monthly allowance of water per household is defined at a reasonable rate. Water used 

above that amount is subject to a substantial penalty rate. 

� Xeriscaping practices are encouraged and the municipality leads by example. 

� Lethbridge is working with other municipalities and irrigation districts to develop an efficient 

regional supply system. 

Reducing Urban Sprawl 

� There is full-cost accounting of the municipal infrastructure costs (water supply, wastewater 

treatment, transportation, solid waste management) associated with future expansion of the 

urban footprint. These costs are passed on to the developer(s) by attaching them to the cost 

of land allocated for development. 

� Incentives are provided to redevelop and increase density of the current urban footprint (e.g. 

incentives to convert single family dwellings to multiple unit dwellings for students in 

residential areas near the University of Lethbridge). 

� There are examples of development that are an alternative to suburbia and are more 

environmentally friendly, including: 

5

° development and redevelopment that provides ample options for matching space 

needs with family size (e.g. smaller houses, condominium complexes, modular 

housing units) 

° essential shopping facilities and community gathering places in each neighbourhood 

° big-box store development on City fringes is discouraged 

° downtown redevelopment that includes residences above commercial storefronts and 

encourages the Arts in the downtown 

° demonstrating use of environmentally friendly materials, technology and practices (e.g. 

Sunridge development, OWC Praire Urban Garden xeriscaping projects) 

° use of public transit is encouraged and is increasing 

� delaying or forgoing construction of a third bridge crossing 

° use of bicycles for transportation is encouraged and increasing: 

� designing a bicycle trail system with better connections and signage 

� providing places to safely park bicycles in the downtown area and in other 

public places (perhaps partner with cycling shops in the City) 

� linking bicycle and bus routes (continue putting bike racks on buses) 

� implementing a rent-a-bike program 

Reducing Solid Waste 

� Initiatives are encouraged that help residents find meaning outside of consumerism 

� The Municipality undertakes full cost accounting of solid waste management, reports this to 

citizens and implements a waste disposal fee structure that fully reflects the costs 

� Building materials are recycled and kept out of the landfill 

� The current recycling program is improved by: 

° providing recycling bins in more places 

° ensuring proper signage on bins 

° accepting all plastics 

° transparent reporting of what is collected and its recycled use 

� Full curbside recycling is implemented following a trial program to sort out any issues 

6


Kids at Play City Circle 

Ideas Fair Survey Feedback 

0112-318-00 CCID 34

City Circle Name: Kids at Play – City Circle 

City Circle Representative’s Name: Lyndsey Robinson 

City Circle Topic of Interest: 

Our original topic of interest was: 

- Exploring options for indoor recreation opportunities for children, youth, and families in 

Lethbridge but the conversations began to include a lot of OUTdoor recreation opportunities as 

well, so that is what follows. 

- 69 people joined this facebook city circle. 


- There are a lot of parents of young children frustrated by the current indoor recreation facilities in 


- Some parents are nervous about biking on the side of the road while pulling a bike trailer with their 

child in it. 

- Some people find the under-development of the West side hard to understand. Why, if according to 

our latest census, this area of town has the highest number of residents, and it continues to grow 

steadily at rates much larger than those of the rest of the city – do residents have to cross the river 

every time they need to access a variety of services? 

- Concern about lack of indoor play space or gym space. Especially for use by families on the west side 

of Lethbridge. 

- Some people believe that only non profit groups are allowed in school gyms and there is no gym space 

available at the pools/arenas that we do have. 

Please share your ideas to improve or implement your topic of interest: 

- the creation of more community and school gardens that are close to or integrated into playground 

areas. 

- dedicated bike lanes would allow parents to feel safer and more comfortable biking with a child in tow. 

- the university and college could offer regular opportunities for families to try free physical activities. 

Students could gain practical teaching and mentorship skills, the schools could promote their facilities 

and programs, and families could try a variety of activities they may not otherwise have tried. This type 

of initiative also promotes feelings of connectedness and community which is a very important

component to mental and social well being. 

- the city could construct a kid’s play area in the Bay mall downtown. A good example of one is at 

Market Mall in Calgary. It's not huge, but the kids love it, it's free, and it brings people to the mall. If we 

had something like that downtown, it would serve a few different purposes: offering kids a place to 

come and get some physical activity, it would help to revitalize the downtown shopping as parents 

would inevitably come and spend some money while down there and it would serve as a gathering place 

for parents to come and socialize. The City would also need to make sure some desirable retailers were 

in that mall to make the whole idea viable; this should fit nicely with the whole "downtown 

revitalization" idea. 

- a new movie theatre complex 

- Wouldn't it be great if the little indoor playgrounds we DO have weren't just at McDonald's and Burger 

King, but at places where we eat HEALTHY choices? 

- Offer West Lethbridge residents easier access to city services by: building a bridge connecting the west 

side with the south side and putting future developments on the west side. 

- Open more community halls like they have in Calgary – they have moms and tots groups, family night 

outs, fitness classes, drop in times, festivals, potlucks, pub nights etc. You get to know your neighbours 

this way. 

- If there is not gym space or an inside area available for playgroups or kid’s events/classes, then maybe 

a private facility or multi- use facility (like Okotoks Centre) needs to be built. 

- Key on the expanded indoor play area that is planned for the new Family Centre. Promote it well and 

make sure it is accessible to all city residents. 

- we need more fun free things to do with our kids 

- build a leisure centre that has an indoor wave pool, workout room, skating arena, indoor playground, 

gymnastics room, etc. 

- Something that would be good in the city is a park called GREEN GYM. You can visit their website at 

www.greengym.ca 

. It is a series of gym equipment pieces - like ellipticals and sit up machines and leg 

presses and arm presses and so on – where you use your body weight as the resistance. Everyone can 

enjoy themselves and do it and get a workout at the same time. The best part about this is it is outside 

and you don’t have to pay for a gym to use gym quality equipment. For all the people out there that 

don’t want to be seen in a gym these are awesome to use late at night when no one is around. They 

could be built near already existing parks so that we could use them as our kids are playing on the kids 

equipment or the kids could join us for a workout. It’s a great step toward a healthy future.

- The City could build and operate OR a private investor could build and operate a child activity facility 

such as: 

Giggles & Smiles - a supervised fitness and fun center for children ages 3 to 10. Giggles 

& Smiles' many gross-motor skill activities promote movement, which helps build strength, flexibility, 

balance and endurance, and helps to build each child's confidence. 

http://gigglesandsmiles.net/storefront/our_center.html 

Something like ENERGYPLEX in Kelowna. http://www.energyplex.ca/index.htm. This indoor 

facility has a gymnastics centre, pool, climbing wall, activity cube where you climb up and through tubes, 

ladders, slides and agility spaces, gym-type spaces where they teach martial arts, dance, etc. There is 

also a healthy cafeteria and eating area. This complex does birthday parties and has plans to add an 

adult work out area with TV monitors so you can see your children taking various lessons in the adjacent 

areas. What am amazing way for families to be active together!

Ranking 

# 

Choosen 

% choose 

Option 1 

# 

Choosen 

% choose 

Option 2 

# 

Choosen 

% choose 

Option 3 

# 

Choosen 

% choose 

Option 4 

# 

Choosen 

% choose 

Option 5 

No 

Answer Ranking 

1st 13 25.00% 12 23.08% 9 17.31% 6 11.54% 12 23.08% 0 1st 

2nd 10 19.23% 6 11.54% 10 19.23% 11 21.15% 11 21.15% 4 2nd 

3rd 5 9.62% 6 11.54% 14 26.92% 12 23.08% 9 17.31% 6 3rd 

4th 7 13.46% 9 17.31% 9 17.31% 9 17.31% 12 23.08% 6 4th 

5th 13 25.00% 13 25.00% 4 7.69% 12 23.08% 4 7.69% 6 5th 

Key: 

Option 1: More School and Community Gardens 

Option 2: Inddor Playgrounds for Kids 

Option 3: More Free Events at Current Venues 

Option 4: More Outdoor Family Fitness Fun 

Option 5: A Multi-Use Family Leisure Facility 

Family Recreation Activities: What does out city need? 

Survey Results- 52 surveys received 

November 2009 

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5


CAL City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 35

CAL Recreation [calrecreation@agecare.ca] 

C.A.L. City Circle 

Hi Brian, 

The following is a list of ideas from the residents and staff at Columbia Assisted Living, regarding future 

planning in Lethbridge. 

1. More amenities on the West side, e.g. restaurants, department stores, clothing stores. 

2. More seating - like benches in the stores for the seniors because they often have a long wait for a 

ride. 

3. Recreational facilities, such as roller skating rinks, arcades for the young people to hang out in. 

4. Less signage along the roads, especially advertising. 

5. More mom & pop stores. 

6. There are too many senior facilities, and as a result every place has empty beds and staff 

are either having hours cut or finding a second job. 

Thank you, 

Veronica Bohnert, R.T. 

Columbia Assisted Living 

Hi Brian, 

One more idea came across my desk this afternoon - more 4 way stops. 

Thanks, 

Veronica Bohnert, R.T. 

Columbia Assisted Living


AAC Membership City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 36

AAC Member City Circle ~ August 22, 2009 

Statements: 

The leaders of our community need to understand and focus on the identity of 

our city. In terms of "The Arts" the name Lethbridge is favourably noted for 1) 

The University of Lethbridge Art Collection, 2) The Southern Alberta Art Gallery, 

3) The Galt Museum and 4) The Japanese Garden. But we also have a small but 

growing number of smaller galleries which showcase local artists, an excellent 

live music scene, and a number of active visual artists' organization all of which 

are largely un-integrated and operating as separate entities. 

Cities with a successful Art scene draw people in from all around. Lethbridge 

should be known across the Country for its Arts. We need to take this 

opportunity to ponder our identity. Lethbridge is the hub for Southern Alberta 

and already draws many people in from surrounding smaller communities to take 

part in its Arts scene. The more visible the Arts are the more people will 

understand its importance and support it. The City needs to encourage 

integration by building Culture & the Arts together, making inclusiveness, 

cooperation & transparency its top priority. Funding & communications are 

crucial for creating awareness within the city and encouraging consensus 

building. We need to train the culture of our community. We also need to 

prepare ourselves for future generations, realizing the importance the Arts have 

in children’s lives as well as adults. 

Problems: 

1. Existing Arts Facilities are inadequate. 

2. Getting a process through city departments has too many avenues and there 

is too much bureaucracy. It is difficult to use public spaces with the existing 

City bylaws. To encourage artistic endeavours, the City has to stop thinking 

strictly in business terms. 

3. The City has unbalanced itself by encouraging people to drive to the outskirts 

to shop. 

4. Lower income families are not able to afford programs. 

5. There is a lack of support for local/newer arts groups. The City does not 

celebrate the talent that exists within Lethbridge. Major events taking place 

that draw some of the largest audiences/community, always showcase the 

same groups year after year. This makes it very difficult for new artists' groups 

to get showcased in the community. Announcements of public events, where 

artists' groups can participate, need to be advertised well in advance, with an 

audition/application process. Every major public event should be looked at for

the opportunity to draw in the arts community. When planning such events , it 

would be helpful to draw in representation, from the various arts groups, to be 

involved in the planning process. Above all, this would help showcase, and 

celebrate the great diversity that already exists in the city now and in the 

future. 

6. Most financial support is based around sports, very little for the Arts. 

7. Business license costs for Artists in their homes are outrageous. The high 

costs discourage Artists from coming to the surface. 

8. Community and Artists are separate entities. The Arts exist primarily 

underground. 

9. Lack of Public Art & acceptance of controversial Arts that stretch the 

boundaries. When publically funded Arts projects come up, there should be a 

fair and level playing field. The call should be well advertised. Public Art 

should be exciting, not just in the planning and choosing, but should 

keep/command the interest of people whenever they encounter it. Perhaps the 

Public Art Acquisition Committee should be expanded to include several 

community members in addition to the 2 council members, 2 arts community 

members and the member from downtown. There needs to be more public art, 

including more murals. The public acquisitions committee should take more 

chances with some very controversial art. Wind energy and the power to 

manifest razzle-dazzle kinetic artwork needs to be looked at. This is a project 

that could make Lethbridge a world tourist site. We can't stop the wind but we 

could harness some of it to produce unique artworks. 

10. The City outsources a lot of their projects but provides inadequate funding. 

The AAC needs more funding to adequately do their job and to expand the 

services they currently offer. 

Solutions: 

1. The City’s Arts Facilities process needs to keep moving forward, seeing the 

completion of the SAAG, the Performing Arts Centre & the Community Arts 

Centre. The Yates theatre should be upgraded as necessary. The Performing 

Arts Centre & Community Arts Centre should be kept located downtown, both 

facilities requiring the space for greater public access. These facilities should 

encourage integration among the arts groups and encourage walking to and 

from Arts Destinations. Creating a cultural corridor will encourage integration. 

There needs to be more artist studio spaces offered in the downtown core. 

Local schools close at 6pm and mostly remain empty. These spaces should be

utilized more. Local artists could be encouraged to use empty school rooms 

allowing students to then see the processes and end products. Perhaps 

unused classroom space thus used would encourage more utilization of 

community artists/organizations in the education process. 

2. There should be more leniencies for Arts Groups, allowing for more creative 

ideas to grow. The Regulations on City spaces needs to be reviewed and 

changed to allow for this. It should not be difficult to utilize these spaces. 

There should be lower cost rent for Arts Groups and benefits/ regulations for 

businesses that support the arts. 

3. More housing & shopping opportunities should be created in the downtown 

core (Grocery Store is a must!). The City should be shovelling the sidewalks in 

the downtown area to allow for community walk-ability and to encourage 

access all year round. 

4. More subsidizing should be made available to lower income families who are 

not able to afford some arts programs. Free arts programs should be 

encouraged. 

5. All major city public events should include an Arts sector. Auditions should be 

held, giving the new and upcoming a chance. In general there should be 

larger, well funded, year round artistic events. Local talent should be looked at 

first for entertainment. It should be encouraged that the Arts partner up with 

other areas of the city and other organizational events like the Rotary club 

Dragonboat Festival or the Show and Shine. They could be partnered up or 

run parallel to the events, to broaden and enrich, thus bringing more public on 

board. 

6. More city money needs to be put towards the Arts. Sports & Arts should be on 

the same playing field. 

7. Home business licenses need to be seriously reviewed and revised to 

encourage artists to continue to create and add colour to our community. 

8. There should be more art sharing with the public. More public spaces should 

be available to display local art. The addition of the Arts should be in all City 

special events. More murals painted throughout the city. 

9. The City’s Public Art acquisition Programme should continue. In addition, a 

local artist in Residence Programme should be created. The City would cover 

the cost of the programme in lieu of artwork. 

10. The City needs to recognize the value of the work that is being outsourced

and provide adequate program funding to organizations who work on behalf of 

the city, eg. the AAC. 

11. The University Satellite campus should be located downtown. 

12. The University Art Collection should be more accessible and visible, and 

should have gallery space downtown. 

13. The City might think of a new web-portal where artists can view the 

availability of various city facilities and book space online. A model for this would 

be the same scheduling system used by city cooperative auto networks (e.g. that 

operate in Vancouver and elsewhere). This would mean that a group like AAC 

having funding and personnel to create and maintain this kind of database. 

14. At large events, rather than having a single main stage, the city should aim 

to maximize benefits across the art community and community at large by 

having a number of stages (and sizes) to showcase talent and encourage more 

involvement, thus expanding arts and culture within the city.


Siever Family City Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 37

Siever Family City Circle 

Contributors: Mary, Kim, Sinéad, Regan, and Aisling Siever 

1. What Lethbridge has that we like 

• Gyro spray park 

• Pools 

• Museum 

• Destinations are not far from each other 

• Downtown spray park 

• Library 

• Gyms 

• Art galleries 

• Helen Schuler Nature Centre 

• Hiking trails 

• Whoop-Up Days 

• Coulees 

• River valley 

• Walkability of downtown 

• Second run movie theatre 

• Variety of classes for children 

• YMCA 

• Great support for homeschoolers 

• Theatres 

• Parks 

• Playgrounds 

• Nikka Yuko 

• Galt Gardens 

• Family-oriented 

2. What we wish Lethbridge had 

• Dinosaur museum 

• Community leisure centres in each neighbourhood 

• Shadow of the Bridge Festival was annual 

• More support for home businesses 

• Year-round farmers market 

• Zoo 

• An annual country fair (rides, livestock contests, gardening contests, etc) 

• More support for xeriscaping 

• Artisan market downtown in the summer 

• 300 block of 6 St S closed off to vehicular traffic to allow for markets, fairs , 

festivals, etc. 

• Bicycle lanes, more bicycle racks 

• Transit to nearby communities

• Public indoor water park 

• Saturday marathons 

• Higher density development 

• Parking downtown to be all underground or above storefront 

• Priority given to transit at controlled intersections


5th on 5th Youth Services 

0112-318-00 CCID 38

Staff Meeting – September 4, 2009 City Circles 


• Bus system too slow; Casual Labour clients do not get to the job sites on time and 

many times job is completed before the client gets there. 

• Bus system does not go out to the far regions of the city; does not go out far 

enough on the South and West side of the city, cannot get to job locations on 43 rd 

street or out to the research station area. 

• People need to arrive at work before starting time and therefore the schedule of on 

the hour and half-hour do not work. Worked better when the bus schedule was 

every 20 minutes instead of every 30 minutes as it is now. 

• Bus system is under utilized in the morning hours because people have already 

started work before the bus systems first buses start in the morning especially 

related to shift work. 

• We need a subway system before the year 2050. 

• Need another bridge from the West Side of the city as soon as possible to 

accommodate the present traffic and future traffic. 

Recreation 

• We need a youth centre for kids, with Skate Park, and drop-in centre. 

• Maybe have the drop-in centre operated by the police force. 

• Need a Sporting Complex, like the city of Medicine Hat has, a facility where 

youth can meet and play games, etc, where they can play all kinds of different 

sports and other creative activities; a place where they can sit and chat with 

friends. 

• A place where people can play basketball recreationally and that is affordable to 

all. 

Job Situation 

• Create a recreation facility where youth can be employed and services will be 

provided to the general public. 

• Employers do not feel youth under 18 years of age are very reliable; hence they 

will wait for University or College students to fill their job requirements. 

• Early training in schools to encourage work ethics; rather than have employers try 

to teach employees basic work skills. 

• People quitting school to work before they have obtained their high school 

diploma. We need to promote education throughout society to assist youth to 

understand the value of education. 

• Re-arrange the school system to adapt to the fact that many people would be 

better with vocational training rather than academics. We need to have the school 

system show these youth that they are as important and valuable as those 

attending University. 

• “Math Pure – is not meant for all to learn; it is not practical.” 

• Bring in school uniforms; less teasing and taunting and separate the boys and 

girls, particularly in Junior and Senior High School.

• Street gangs are a problem – graffiti is terrible. Perhaps installing security 

cameras in the downtown area would assist to stop some of the vandalism by 

street youth. 

• Make parents more responsible for their children. 

• More restitution for the crime and parents should have to accompany their child. 

• Better funding for not-for-profits that assist people who fall through the cracks of 

the normal life routine. 

• Not enough resources for people with disabilities at any age in Lethbridge. 

• More feasible ways for young people to obtain their high school diploma or GED 

after dropping out of the school at a young age. 

• Aboriginals feeling like they need to change their names on their resumes so they 

won’t be discriminated against.


Language Supports for Newcomers in 


0112-318-00 CCID 39


Growing Food Security in Lethbridge & 

Area 

0112-318-00 CCID 40


City Circle Name: Growing Food Security in Lethbridge & Area 

City Circle Topic of Interest: Food Security: Equity & Access to Nutritious Food 


Growing Food Security in Lethbridge & Area includes representatives from various organizations including the Lethbridge 

Interfaith Food Bank, The Salvation Army (Community & Family Services), The Lethbridge Food Bank, Community Good 

Food Club, The Chinook Country Interfaith Community Kitchen, Lethbridge Community Gardens, Making Connections 

(Galbraith Elementary School), Blood Tribe Food Security, and Community Nutrition AB Health Services. Our mission: A 

coalition of agencies that strives to achieve food security through education, advocating and influencing change to provide 

better health and quality of life for southwest AB. Some food security issues identified by the coalition include: 

• Along with shelter, clothing and water, food is a basic human need. A lack of nutritious, adequate food is related to 

crime, education, mental health, depression and overall health and well-being. Lethbridge currently does not have a Food 

Charter to support the right to nutritious adequate food. 

• Access and location to city community gardens is lacking; the current north side location is inconvenient or too far for the 

majority of Lethbridge residents. There currently is a 3 year waiting list to obtain a plot so this also limits access. 

Lethbridge Housing currently does not allow their residents to plant gardens on lots. 

• Access and time period to farmers markets is limited. 

• Low income residents often face transportation barriers to access grocery stores and existing food security programs 

such as the Community Good Food Club, Community Kitchens and to Food Banks. 

• There is currently no gleaning project in Lethbridge for excess produce from people yards and gardens. Many of the 

food charity organizations receive excess buns, breads, sweet rolls, etc. but are lacking fresh produce. 

• There are many agencies working to provide fundamentally similar services involving food security and all make a great 

effort to obtain adequate, nutritious food to their clients. 

• Twenty percent of student’s surveyed in Lethbridge and area schools (4768 in total) reported a 20% rate of some food 

security issues, e.g., often going hungry, worrying about getting enough food to eat, etc. (June 2003) 

• School kitchen facilities are currently under utilized during the evening and weekends for community kitchen projects. 


• Adopt a Food Charter to “Put Food Back on the Table” and make food security a priority within the community. 

• Increase the number of community gardens available in the city to rent out. Utilize under utilized parks and land areas 

for community gardens. Provide City of Lethbridge zoning bylaws which will support land availability for community gardens. 

Increase the number of perennial fruit trees and bushes throughout the city; e.g., raspberries, saskatoons, apples, 

rhubarb, etc. 

• Increase hours of Saturday farmers market and provide more locations throughout the city for additional markets similar 

to the downtown and Westside market. Change the location of the Westside farmers market to a more populated and 

accessible location, e.g., University parking lot, Shopper’s Drug mart parking lot or Nicholas Sheran parking lot (Leisure 

Centre, School or Park).



• Support a city gleaning project which would help to increase fresh produce donations. A greenhouse project and a community 

garden located by the Lethbridge Soup Kitchen and Shelter would also help to increase fresh produce available 

throughout the winter months. 

• Improve access to school kitchen facilities for families and individuals to participate in community kitchen projects. 

• Improve transportation access for low income residents to farmer’s markets, grocery stores, Good Food Club program, 

community kitchens, community gardens, food banks, etc. 

• Maximize human and material resources to improve service and decrease duplication and overhead costs of food related 

charity organizations or projects. 

• Increase public awareness of the opportunities to improve food security and build a stronger community for better health 

and an improved quality of life. 

• Work to improve the five A’s for Food Security: 

1. Availability - sufficient supplies of food for all people at all times 

2. Accessibility - physical and economic access to food for all at all times Acceptability - culturally acceptable and appropriate 

food and distribution systems 

3. Adequacy - nutritional quality, safety, sustainability of available sources/methods of food supply 

4. Action - ensuring the social and economic infrastructures are in place to enable action that will ensure the previous four 

elements of food security.


Galt Museum & Archives Board City 

Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 41

Galt Museum & Archives Board City Circle 

In talking about the importance of history to planning for our future, we identified a number of 

themes that we feel need to be reflected in the upcoming Integrated Community Stability Plan. 

We focused on the importance of our history to helping meet one of the challenges identified by 

the Metroquest team: to provide high quality cultural and social services. We also believe that a 

community’s memory is a vital to maintaining a high quality of life. Following are our ideas about 

what will be important to preserving, building, and communicating our community memory. 

(1) Preserve our stories. 

� It is important to recognize that preserving our history is about more than what 

takes place inside a museum. It also needs to consider where history is made. 

We would like to see the physical buildings, structures, and spaces where our 

stories happen preserved. An example of this would be historic building 

designations. 

� We all have an interest in the preservation of the community’s stories. It is 

important to record our collective, civic history not only for generations to come 

but to create a sense of community between those who live here now. 

� History is about more than just the group’s story; it is also about individuals’ 

stories. We would like to see a place where individuals can share their stories. 

Again, this is as important in the present for the understanding it fosters as it will 

be for its historic value in the future. 

(2) Share our stories. 

� It will not be enough to keep the spaces, items, stories, etc. We must also ensure 

that there are spaces where our stories are shared. This means both sharing our 

history and to communicate current stories. 

� History is not the exclusive realm of museums. It will be important for the future 

of Lethbridge to make connections with different groups. The opportunity for 

shared community spaces for story-sharing and story-building is essential. This 

may be with the Arts (e.g. Theatre space that can be used by different groups for 

different purposes); it may be parks and recreation (e.g. the current preservation 

of Indian Battle Park for both its historic significance and for what park space 

brings to citizens); it also includes working with educational institutions at all 

levels. 

(3) Ensure the physical spaces and resources are available. 

� Finally, it is not enough to say our history is important or to encourage sharing 

our stories. There must be the physical spaces for: 

o Preservation and keeping (adequate collections and archives 

spaces); 

o Sharing and constructing our stories; 

o Communicating stories from our past; and 

o Making connections to others stories (Arts, Recreation, Education). 

� It will also be important to keep resources accessible by using the best methods 

for preserving and communicating. The next forty years will certainly see 

changes in technology that can help communicate and keep our stories. It will be 

essential to take advantage of these technologies to help keep our stories.


Lethbridge Healthy Communities 

0112-318-00 CCID 42

City Circle Name: Lethbridge Healthy Communities 

City Circle Representative’s Name: Carol Thibert 

City Circle topic of interest: Health of Lethbridge Residents with an emphasis 

on active living, healthy eating and tobacco reduction. 


• Poor nutritional food and beverage choices in city facility vending 

machines and canteens, e.g., city arenas and sports centres which serve 

many families with children do not follow the Alberta Nutrition 

Guidelines 

• Lethbridge and Southern Alberta Childhood obesity rates are amongst 

the highest in Canada at 28% 

• Access and location to city community gardens is lacking; the current 

north side location is inconvenient or too far for the majority of 

Lethbridge residents 

• Outdated playground equipment in city parks and playgrounds, plus 

limited facilities for young families 

• Access and time period to farmers markets is limited 

Please share your ideas to improve or implement your topic of interest? 

• Improved food and beverage choices in public arena vending machines 

and canteens following the Alberta Nutrition Guidelines; particularly for 

facilities which serve mostly children and youth. 

• Increase awareness of what Healthy Communities and its partners offer 

as far as programming and resources. 

• Increase the number of community gardens available in the city to rent 

out. Utilize underused park and land area for community gardens. 

And/or increase the number of perennial fruit trees and bushes 

throughout the city; e.g., raspberries, saskatoons, apples, rhubarb, etc. 

• Improved or updated playground areas for families with children; 

especially in older communities throughout the city. Include tennis 

courts and ice arenas in more locations. 

• Offer subsidised support for low income families for facility usage 

• Increase hours of Saturday farmers market and provide more locations 

throughout the city for additional markets similar to the downtown and 

Westside market. Change the location of the Westside farmers market 

to a more populated and accessible location, e.g., University parking lot, 

Shopper’s Drug mart parking lot or Nicholas Sheran parking lot (Leisure 

Centre, School or Park). 

• Find “champions” from City Council that support our initiatives regularly 

• Understand what problems exist for community members ie. Time, 

transportation, money etc.


CMARD City Circle: Building a 

Welcoming and Inclusive Community 

0112-318-00 CCID 43

CMARD City Circle 

Building a Welcoming and Inclusive Community 

Plan Your City submission from the Coalition 

of Municipalities Against Racism and 

Discrimination (CMARD) Committee. 

NOVEMBER 24, 2009

5 Areas of Focus 

We have chosen to focus on five different areas: 

1) Safety 

2) Involvement 

3) Building Relationships 

4) Accessibility 

5) Quality of Life

� We need to work towards: 

#1 - Safety 

Goal: 

To ensure that the community remains safe and that our 

residents’ perception of safety is effectively addressed. 

� Creating an environment that supports all forms of safety - not just 

physical safety but safety in a more holistic sense 

� Changing personal perceptions towards minority groups 

� Improving transit hours of operation as they can play a role in safety 

as well

� We need to consider: 

#1 – Safety Cont’ 

� The influence we have on our children 

� The role that media plays in how community issues are portrayed to 

the public 

� We would like to see a 

community where all 

members feel 

safe by 2050.

� We need to encourage: 

#2 - Involvement 

Goal: 

To promote active involvement of residents in all 

facets of governance and community life 

• Civil engagement and political involvement 

• Feeling comfortable and welcome in the 

community - “this is your community” 

• Community connections 

� We need to work towards 

• Equality and fair competition 

• Dispelling myths about minority groups

� We need to consider: 

#2 – Involvement Cont’ 

• the importance of Teacher’s influence on children 

� We need to provide: 

• Opportunities for people to be active participants 

• An ongoing open venue for discussion of community issues 

• Access to online networking and discussion forums 

� We would like to see full participation in all facets of 

community life by 2050

� We need to: 

#3 – Building Relationships 

Goal: 

To cooperate with our municipal and First Nations 

neighbours; strengthening our region 

• Understand the historical context and what our collective vision for 

the future is 

• Listen to the Elder’s and appreciate the information and wisdom they 

can provide 

• Strengthen the education on aboriginal history for youth in our 

schools

#3 – Building Relationships Cont’ 

� We face some barriers: 

� Western alienation and provincial alienation 

� Underrepresentation of the Alberta South Region 

� We want to see a community with no perceived 

boundaries or barriers between our municipal and First 

Nations neighbours by 2050.


#4 – Accessibility 

Goal: 

To ensure that recreation, transportation, housing, 

education and employment opportunities are 

economically and physically accessible to all of our 

residents 

• Ensure equal opportunities for all residents 

• Create the systems that help us to interact and form linkages 

• Improve public transportation between neighboring communities 

� We would like to see a community where no 

opportunity is missed due to lack of accessibility by 

2050.


#5 – Quality of Life 

Goal: 

To balance cultural, social, economic, and 

environmental policies and programs to achieve a 

high quality of life for all residents 

• Respect and celebrate diversity in our community (i.e. Gay Pride 

Celebration, Ethnic Celebrations) 

• Listen to others 

• Create a sense on belonging and respect throughout Lethbridge 

� We want to see a community where all residents feel 

respected and have a high quality of life by 2050.

Thank you


Lethbridge Astronomy Society 

0112-318-00 CCID 44

October 19, 2009 

Brian Conger, Community Infrastructure, Canada 

AECOM 514 Stafford Drive North 

Lethbridge, AB. 

Dear Mr. Conger, 

Thank you for the opportunity to be a part of ‘Plan Your City’. As with others participating in 

this program, the Lethbridge Astronomy Society also wants to ensure that the future offers 

quality life for its citizens, environment and protects resources we value. 

One resource that we believe is worth protecting is a natural dark night sky – a rare commodity 

in an urban setting. Lethbridge is fortunate to have this resource at Popson Park where the 

Lethbridge Astronomy Society and Oldman River Observatory are located. 

Because the park is free from light pollution, our society has been able to provide educational 

programs and hold astronomical events for our community for the last 20 years. Thousands of 

people including school and service groups have accessed our Centre. As well, for over a 

decade, the University Physics Department has hired us to teach the lab component of their 

astronomy curriculum at our Centre. A few years ago, the labs (that were once taught at the 

university campus) was relocated to our Centre because of the dark skies and facility we offer. 

Because Popson Park provides a true reprieve from light pollution, citizens are able to 

experience a dark night sky within an urban setting. Through our programs citizens are able to 

learn about the universe, then step outdoors and actually see constellations, planets and 

phenomena such as meteor showers and aurora. Through our telescopes they can peer even 

deeper into the heavens and see galaxies and other celestial wonders. 

With good planning this precious resource can continue to be available to our citizens and the 

creatures that we share the park with. It is our hope is to have Popson Park designated an Urban 

Dark Sky Park so that the skies will be protected now and for future generations. As 

development inches its way southward towards the park, we ask that we be included in talks and 

urban planning to ensure that we not destroy or downgrade the resource that we currently value 

and enjoy. 

Rena Woss 

Light Pollution Committee 

Email: renaonlinenow@gmail.com phone: 403-317-3129 

cc: Robert D. McKay, Plan Your City Project Manager 

Lethbridge Astronomy Society 

Box 1104 

Lethbridge, AB. T1J 4A2 

Phone (403) 381-star (7827) 

www.lethbridgeastronomysociety.ca


Two Ideas Circle 

0112-318-00 CCID 45

“I would like two things to happen for 

things to happen for this city: one is to 

have a company called Wild Health 

that sells herbal plants with all the 

needed resources for growing and 

collecting the seed for sustainability 

and their uses. A club that shares this 

exploration of knowledge and a garden 

design firm for the disabled to design 

their own successful garden. A 

greenhouse run by it’s members either 

to suit a purchase or to learn in a 

greenhouse. And Erica Leuschen to 

successfully run it. 

Secondly, I would like to see a youth 

drop-in centre privately funded to host 

all types of small events like 

improvisational skills and improve 

nights. A night coffee shop, poetry 

weekly and art space freely, 

comfortable seating for the occasional

nap, good music at will and 

anthropology for kids. Tables that go 

up and down to the revolving around 

the days busy calendar. Every hobby’s 

house. Basically a youth hostel with 

pazzaz. 

Choose6@live.ca 

Erica Leuschen 

Age: 27


0112-318-00 

APPENDIX A 


Newsletters

Hello All: 

City Circles August Newsletter 

First and foremost I want to extend a sincere thank you to everyone that has registered a City Circle todate. 

As of today we have a total of 34 City Circles registered throughout the City that are actively 

contributing policy shaping information for the City of Lethbridge “Plan Your City” Municipal Development 

Plan/ Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP). 

The intent of this newsletter is to update all registered City Circles about some of the exciting things that 

have been going on with Plan Your City and some of the key events and dates as we move forward with 

the Plan. 

We are currently in the Policy Alternatives Phase of the Plan Your City MDP/ICSP following the 

successful adoption of the Plan Your City Vision by Council on June 15th. The Vision Statement, 

Principles and Goals, which comprise the Plan Your City Vision, set forth the direction we as a community 

want to move towards over the 40 year horizon of this Plan (see online for a copy of the Vision). 

As we move forward with the development of potential policies there are a few key events and dates in 

the near future: 

• City Circles Submission Deadline - September 8th 

• City Circles Ideas Fair Orientation - September 17th 

• Plan Your City Policy Alternatives Open Houses - October 14th, 15th, and 17th 

• Plan Your City Ideas Fair - October 17th 

City Circles Submission Deadline 

We are asking all City Circles to submit their ideas to the City Circles Coordinator Brian Conger by 

September 8th. We would also appreciate at this time if you could please let us know if your Circle is 

intending to participate in the Ideas Fair so that we can begin preparations. 

City Circles Ideas Fair Orientation 

On September 17th we will be holding an Ideas Fair Orientation in the Culver City room at City Hall from 

7:00 to 9:00 pm for all City Circles that have participated in the planning process. At this meeting we will 

be discussing how City Circles can prepare for the Ideas Fair and best present their ideas to the 

community at large. This will also be an opportunity for City Circles to mingle and share their ideas with 

one another.

Plan Your City Policy Alternatives Open Houses 

On October 14th, 15th, and 17th, a series of three Open Houses will be held throughout Lethbridge in 

order to give residents an opportunity to view the potential policies that have been developed to-date. The 

first Open House will be held on October 14th at the Children of St. Martha’s School on the west side and 

will run from 6:30 to 9:00 pm. The second Open House will be held on October 15th at Park Meadows 

School on the north side and will run from 6:30 to 9:00 pm. The third and final Open House will run on 

October 17th, the same day as the Ideas Fair at City Hall, with a presentation at 1:30 in the afternoon in 

the Culver City Room. While these Open Houses are not part of the City Circle process they are an 

opportunity for everyone in the City to participate in the policy development process and such you are 

welcome to attend. 

Plan Your City Ideas Fair 

On Saturday October 17, the City of Lethbridge will be holding Plan Your City Ideas Fair from10:00 to 

3:00 pm in the atrium of City Hall. You are invited to participate by creating displays of any type – videos, 

display panels, slide shows, write-ups, plans, or cultural presentations such as dance, song, poetry – 

anything that talks about the Lethbridge of the future. One key aspect of the Ideas Fair will be the Ideas 

Fair Awards; all participants in the Ideas Fair will be eligible to win Cash Awards up to $500. 

All City Circles are encouraged to participate in the Ideas Fair as this will be a fantastic opportunity to 

present your ideas to people throughout our City. We ask that any Audio/Visual Entries be submitted 

with a hardcopy (CD/DVD) by October 5th so that we can prepare your entry, and that any Print/Graphic 

Entries be at City Hall by 4:00pm on October 16th, the night before the Ideas Fair. 

More information about all three events is provided online at www.lethbridge.ca 

On a final note, we have an opportunity for interested City Circles to discuss their ideas with the Media. 

If you are interested please inform City Circles Coordinator Brian Conger and he will add you contact 

name and information (provided in the Sign-up Form) to the media contact list. It is important to note 

that this does not mean that you will be contacted. 

Should you have any questions about any of the City Circles registered to-date please feel free to contact 

AECOM Planner and City Circle Coordinator Brian Conger at brian.conger@aecom.com, or City of 

Lethbridge Senior Planner and Plan Your City Project Manager Robert McKay at rmckay@lethbridge.ca. 

Sincerely, 






Plan Your City Project Manager

Hello All: 


September Newsletter 

Once again I want to extend a sincere thank you to everyone that has registered a City Circle. To-date we 

have a total of 48 City Circles registered throughout Lethbridge that are actively contributing policy 

shaping information for the City of Lethbridge “Plan Your City” Municipal Development Plan/ Integrated 

Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP). 

As we continue forward with the Policy Alternatives Phase of the Plan Your City MDP/ICSP several key 

events and dates draw nearer: 

• City Circles Submission Deadline - September 8th 

• City Circles Ideas Fair Orientation - September 17th 



City Circles Submission Deadline 

Submissions are starting to roll in. Of the 48 City Circles currently registered, 16 Circles have made 

submissions. It is important to note that if you are planning on participating in the Ideas Fair we do not 

need your final Ideas Fair display for the September 8th submission deadline. 

City Circles Ideas Fair Orientation 

As stated in our last newsletter, we will be holding an Ideas Fair Orientation on September 17th in the 

Culver City room at City Hall from 7:00 to 9:00 pm for all City Circles that have participated in the planning 

process. At this meeting we will be discussing how City Circles can prepare for the Ideas Fair and best 

present their ideas to the community at large. This will also be an opportunity for City Circles to mingle 

and share their ideas with one another. Mayor Bob Tarleck has also confirmed that he will attend the 

orientation to extend a thank you to all City Circle participants. 

Plan Your City Policy Alternatives Open Houses* 


order to give residents an opportunity to view the potential policies that have been developed to-date. The 

first Open House will be held on October 14th at the Children of St. Martha’s School on the west side and 

will run from 6:30 to 9:00 pm. The second Open House will be held on October 15th at Park Meadows 

School on the north side and will run from 6:30 to 9:00 pm. The third and final Open House will be held at 

City Hall at the same time as the Ideas Fair on October 17th, a presentation will be made at 1:30 in the 

afternoon in the Culver City Room. While these Open Houses are not part of the City Circle process they 

are an opportunity for everyone in the City to participate in the policy development process and as such 

you are welcome to attend. 

* Open House locations are subject to confirmation. Should an unforeseen change occur notification will be provided.



3:00 pm in the atrium of City Hall. You are invited to participate by creating displays of any type – videos, 

display panels, slide shows, write-ups, plans, or cultural presentations such as dance, song, poetry – 

anything that talks about the Lethbridge of the future. One key aspect of the Ideas Fair will be the Ideas 

Fair Awards; all participants in the Ideas Fair will be eligible to win Cash Awards up to $500. 

All City Circles are encouraged to participate in the Ideas Fair as this will be a fantastic opportunity to 

present your ideas to people throughout our City. We ask that any Audio/Visual Entries be submitted 

with a hardcopy (CD/DVD) by October 5th so that we can prepare your entry, and that any Print/Graphic 

Entries be at City Hall by 4:00pm on October 16th, the night before the Ideas Fair. 

More information about all three events is provided online at www.lethbridge.ca 

Community Advisory Group 

On a final note, many City Circles have been curious about the various committees responsible for the 

effective development of the Plan Your City MDP/ICSP. One key committee is the Community Advisory 

Group (CAG); a steering committee made up of representatives of various organisations and institutions 

from throughout Lethbridge as well as four Alderman and selected members from the community at 

large. The role of the CAG has been to provide ideas and advice on the various activities undertaken 

throughout the planning process. As such, the CAG has played a pivotal role in the development of the 

Plan Your City Vision and are currently assisting in the creation and review of potential policies, many of 

which will be based on, or refined by, feedback from City Circles. 

Should you have any questions please feel free to contact AECOM Planner and City Circle Coordinator 

Brian Conger at 403.329.7139 or brian.conger@aecom.com, and/or City of Lethbridge Senior Planner 

and Plan Your City Project Manager Robert McKay at 403.320.4041 or rmckay@lethbridge.ca. 

Sincerely, 







Hello All: 


October Newsletter 

As we come close to the end of the Policy Alternatives Phase of the Plan Your City MDP/ICSP I want to 

thank every one of the 54 City Circles who participated in the City Circle process. This final newsletter 

addresses the remaining two events before we begin the Policy Review Phase of the Plan: 



Plan Your City Policy Alternatives Open Houses 


order to give residents an opportunity to view the potential policies that have been developed to-date, 

please feel free to attend one of the following Open Houses and provide input: 

Open House #1 October 14th at the Children of St. Martha’s School on the west side; 6:30 to 9:00 pm 

Open House #2 October 15th at Park Meadows School on the north side; 6:30 to 9:00 pm 

Open House #3 October 17th in the Culver City Room at City Hall during the Ideas Fair; 

Presentation at 1:30 



4:00 pm in the atrium of City Hall. I want to say thank you to the 20 City Circles who are participating in 

the Ideas Fair alongside resident artists and professionals throughout the City. 

Come on down and visit the Ideas Fair! 

Sustainable Community Initiatives Funding 

A great funding opportunity is available for interested City Circles. Recently City Circle Participant Steve 

McGlenn attended the Impact! Youth Conference on Sustainability in Guelph, Ontario and has been given 

access to an endowment fund created by the sponsor's of the conference. If you would like to find out 

how to attain funding to further develop the topics you have explored within your City Circle please 

contact Steve at stephen.mcglenn@uleth.ca. The deadline for funding is October 30th. 

Should you have any questions please feel free to contact AECOM Planner and City Circle Coordinator 

Brian Conger at 403.329.7139 or brian.conger@aecom.com, and/or City of Lethbridge Senior Planner 

and Plan Your City Project Manager Robert McKay at 403.320.4041 or rmckay@lethbridge.ca. 

Sincerely, 







Hello All: 

On behalf of the Plan Your City Development Team I 

want to extend a warm thank you to the hundreds of 

residents from Lethbridge and the surrounding region 

who participated in the City Circles and Ideas Fair. 

A special thank you goes to the dozens of people 

involved in creating the 41 displays that filled the 

Atrium at City Hall. The variety of displays, including 

dance, videos, poetry, interactive art, booths, collages 

and live music, created a truly festive atmosphere. 

Your time and effort shows an extraordinary 

commitment to ensuring that Lethbridge is a great 

place to live, work and play. 

Congratulations to the Ideas Fair contest winners! 

The official advertisement that will be included in the 

Lethbridge Herald on October 31 st has been attached 

to this newsletter. Please Contact Plan Your City 

Project Manager Robert McKay at 403.320.4041 or 

rmckay@lethbridge.ca if you are a winner. 

All of the information gathered these past five months 

will be compiled into the Ideas Book that will be used 

to refine policies within the Plan and identify any gaps 

that may exist. Your input will help us develop a Plan 

that strives to make this City a better place for 

everyone over the next 40 years. 

Once again, thank you all! 

Sincerely, 



Plan Your City Project Manager 





& Ideas Fair 

Wrap-up Newsletter

Ideas Fair 

Thanks for 

sharing your 

ideas! 

The City of Lethbridge thanks the hundreds of Lethbridge residents who attended the Plan Your City Ideas 

Fair. Your input will help develop a Plan to make the City of Lethbridge great for everyone throughout the 

next 40 years. 

A special thank you to those involved in creating more than 40 displays that filled the City Hall Atrium. The 

variety of displays, including dance, videos, poetry, interactive art, booths, collages and live music created 

a truly festive atmosphere. Congratulations to our contest winners! 

And the winners are… 

People’s Choice $500 

Panel Prize A $250 

Audio/Visual Print/Graphic 

Celebrating Diversity Group: Ethnic 

Dancing and Music 

Allied Arts Council, Lethbridge 

Registered Music Teachers: Live Music 

Panel Prize B $250 Curbside Recycling in Lethbridge Video 

Panel Prize C $250 

Community Gardens in Lethbridge 

Video 

Panel Prize D $250 Planning Our City Video 

Bikebridge Cycle: Removing Barriers to 

Cycling in Lethbridge Interactive Display 

Biodiversity and Ecological Integrity: Nature 

Web and Display 

Allied Arts Council, Bowman Arts Centre 

Staff and Volunteers: Painting a Great City 

Lethbridge Astronomy Society: Light 

Pollution Committee Display 

Ability Resource Centre: Limited Access 

Collage


0112-318-00 

APPENDIX B 

City Circles Pamphlet 

& Ideas Fair Poster

What is a City Circle?? 

A City Circle is a self-formed and 

self-managed group of Lethbridge 

residents who want to help with 

preparing the new Plan. To form a 

City Circle get a group of friends 

together; they can be from work, 

school, sport, extracurricular 

activities, an existing organization, 

your family, or all of the above – 

there are no rules for how your 

Circle organizes itself. 

Your City Circle will meet when and where its 

members want and discuss any community 

related issue you choose such as: 

Arts, Heritage, CULTURE, Parks, 

recycling, SUSTAINABILITY, zoning, 

roads, CITY GROWTH, pesticide use, 

RECREATION, affordable housing, 

protecting the river valley. 

From May to September 2009 your City Circle 

can meet as many or few times as you want and 

prepare input for the Plan. There is no limit to the 

number of City Circles that you can form or be 

part of. 

Your ideas will 

MAKE a 

DIFFERENCE 

Why Join or Create a City Circle? 

Everyone seems to have an opinion about what 

makes a great community – those are the ideas we 

need to hear to plan the future. It is great to work 

with new and old friends to create something that 

makes a lasting difference. 

The Vision : 

A Public Conversation 

We know that many people in Lethbridge will form 

City Circles – students, neighbours, friends, and 

families. We will help but creating the Circle will 

basically be up to you. 

How to Run a City Circle: 

Some suggestions on how to make the most of 

your meetings may include the following: 

• 

SET, DISTRIBUTE AND STICK TO AN 

AGENDA – an agenda is used to focus 

your meeting. Input into the agenda should 

refl ect the needs, interests and concerns of 

all group members. It should be distributed 

in advance of the meeting to help group 

members gather their thoughts and be 

better-prepared for the discussion. 

• ASSIGN A NOTE-TAKER – good ideas 

often come at a fast pace and they need to 

be recorded. Your fi nal output will be a list 

of issues and solutions and your notes will 

form the basis of this list. 

• 

ALL IDEAS WILL 

BE PRESENTED TO 

THE PUBLIC FOR 

CONSIDERATION IN 

THE PLAN 

Submit!! 

Submissions: 

Once your Circle has come up with ideas you feel 

are ready for submission please send them to us 

in any format. All submissions will be reviewed and 

presented to the public. Your ideas will be published 

in the Plan Your City Ideas Book. We will 

be holding an Ideas Fair in October at which time 

all City Circles will be invited to display 

and/or present their ideas to the public. 

You can participate in any 

format or language. We will 

translate. 

Tentative Schedule: 

There are three optional meetings scheduled 

for City Circle participants; the fi rst meeting will 

occur on May 26th at 7:00 pm in City Hall Council 

Chambers, and will provide orientation for City 

Circles. The second meeting scheduled for early 

September will provide an update of the Plan’s 

progress to-date and how to prepare for the Ideas 

Fair. The fi nal meeting will be the Plan Your City 

Ideas Fair, held on October 17th in the main 

foyer at City Hall.

Have Your Say 

PLAN YOUR CITY 

Every so often an opportunity comes along where 

you get to play an integral role in the development 

and success of the place you call home. For 

Lethbridge residents this opportunity is now. 

Over the next year, The City of Lethbridge will be 

preparing a Municipal Development Plan for the 

next 40 years. 

The ‘Plan Your City’ Municipal Development Plan / 

Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ 

ICSP) is the primary planning document that maps 

out the future of our city and we need your ideas 

about how the city should grow and operate. 

The fi nal Plan will address such things as: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

How and where should the City grow? 

Environmental issues and sustainability 

New development – height, density, 

architecture 

Social issues and needs 

Economic development 


Parks 

Recreation and Culture 

• 

and much more 

The best way to be involved in this 

Plan is to form a 


Contact 

Working together, the City and AECOM will 

collect all input received from City Circles. The 

City Circle Coordinator is AECOM Planner, 

BRIAN CONGER. Brian can be reached at 

brian.conger@aecom.com or 403-329-7139. 

The City Planner responsible for the Plan is 

ROBERT MCKAY. Robert can be reached at 

rmckay@lethbridge.ca or 403-320-4041. Either 

Brian or Robert can answer any questions you 

may have. 

It will take some imagination and maybe a bit of 

courage to create a City Circle. 

For registration and should you have any 

questions or require further clarifi cation, please 

call Brian or Robert. 

CITY CIRCLES

‘How to Make 

Lethbridge Better’ 

- we want 

YOUR 

ideas 

PLAN YOUR CITY IDEAS FAIR 

at City Hall, October 17th 

You are invited to participate in this unique opportunity by creating displays of any type – 

videos, display panels, slide shows, write-ups, plans, interactive art, or cultural presentations 

such as dance, song, and poetry – anything that talks about the future of our community. 

There are two categories, Audiovisiual and Print/Graphic. Each category will have a $500 

People’s Choice Award as determined by Ideas Fair attendees, as well as four $250 Panel 

Prizes that will be awarded based on the review of the judge’s panel. 

Restrictions do apply please visit the website for more information. 

www.lethbridge.ca and follow the PLAN YOUR CITY links

Date of City Council Meeting: December 14, 2009 

Subject: RFP S-09-89; Mechanical Contractors - Protective Plumbing Program 

Submitted By: Garth Sherwin, CA 

City Manager 

REQUEST FOR DECISION 

RECOMMENDATION: The recommendation of the Purchasing Manager to award 

the above Request for Proposal to all four proponents, DMT 

Mechanical of Lethbridge, AB; Basements Systems Calgary 

Inc. of Calgary, AB; KB Heating and Air Conditioning Ltd. of 

Lethbridge, AB and Reive Plumbing and Heating Ltd. of 

Lethbridge, AB is submitted for your consideration and 

approval. 

PURPOSE: To select qualified firms to provide an effective and efficient 

method of delivering the City’s Protective Plumbing Program. 

FINANCIAL: The cost breakdown of the proposals is as follows: 

Estimated Total Cost incl. GST $ 1,482,600 

Less 100% GST refunds 70,600 

Net est. cost to the City of Lethbridge $ 1,412,000 

* Unit rate contract(s) based on hourly rates, materials and 

administration markups, and vehicle and tool charges. Total 

contract value may vary based on actual requirements. 

Reports/Docouments: Tender Overview 

Procurement Recommendation Memo 

Reviewed & Endorsed by City Manager: ____________________________________


Subject: Tender Summary for November, 2009 

Submitted By: Garth Sherwin, CA 

City Manager 

RECOMMENDATION: That the Tender Summary Report for November, 2009 be 

received as information and filed. 

PURPOSE: Attached is a summary of all competitions awarded for the 

month of November, 2009 and a description of each 

competition as well as the year-to-date summary. 

FINANCIAL: N/A 

Reports / Documents: Tender Summary Report 


Reviewed & Endorsed by City Manager: ____________________________________

Council Date Page Item Responsibility 

March 7/05; 

Oct. 5/09 

89 

To ensure capsules are removed and 

contents distributed and capsules refilled 

for the next period (no time capsules from 

2006 Centennial) 

Estimated 

Completion Date 

City Clerk Sept. 20/10 

Jan. 9/06 10 Purchase of land in Fairmont Park City Solicitor Dec. 15/09 At Land Titles 

Jan. 8/07 11 

Land swap with Elim Society for 

acquisition of land for road right-of-way 

for the future North Scenic Drive 

May 26/08 218 Water Conservation Request Ad Hoc Committee June, 2009 

March 9/09 105 

July 7/08; 

March 9/09 

106 

Lethbridge College Residence 

Development Project 

Sale of neighborhood commercial land in 

Sunridge (Howler Developments Ltd.) 

Status 

September 2034, 2059 and 2084 

- open in 2010 (in conjunction with 

Galt Museum, Mayor's Office, City 

Clerk's Office, Communications 

Office, 1985 Centennial Committee) 

City Solicitor Nov. 30/09 Awaiting return from Elim's solicitor 

Review request to incorporate water 

conservation measures as part of 

Environment Plan & Policy Initiative 

City Solicitor Nov. 2/09 Debenture to be prepared 

March 23/09 137 SHIA Funding Agreements City Solicitor Nov. 30/09 

June 15/09 258 

July 13/09 284 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY CLERK & CITY SOLICITOR 

Contract for facility maintenance 

agreements for 2009-2011 for: 

1) Lethbridge Southwest Little League 

Baseball; 

2) Lethbridge North Little League 

Baseball; 

Renewal of Contract - Fee for Service 

Agreement for Allied Arts Council for the 

Bowman Arts Centre 

City Solicitor March 31/10 Closing date extended to March 31/10 

City Solicitor Nov. 16/09 


Mayor & City Clerk to execute 

appropriate funding agreements 

1) Awaiting return of executed 

agreement, insurance & WCB 

2) Need insurance & WCB 

Mayor & City Clerk to sign the 

agreements. Awaiting return of 

executed agreement. 

Mayor, City Council, City Clerk 

and City Solicitor 1 

Revised 12/9/2009


July 27/09 297 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY CLERK & CITY SOLICITOR 

Approval of facility use agreements for 

2009-2011 with 

1) Community Mediation Society of 

Southern Alberta; 

Estimated 



Status 

Mayor & City Clerk to sign the 

agreements. Awaiting return of 

executed agreements. 

July 27/09 305 Purchase portion of 238 - 22 St. N. City Solicitor October, 2009 Execute related agreements 

Sept. 21/09 360 

Sept. 21/09 

Oct. 19/09 

360 

405 

Lethbridge Animal Shelter Grounds 

Maintenance Agreement 


Mayor & City Clerk to execute the 

agreement with the Grow It 

Community Garden Association. 

Awaiting return of agreement 

Henderson Lake Golf Club City Solicitor Jan. 12/10 Execute consent to mortgage 

Oct. 19/09 415 Sale of Closed Service Road ROW City Solicitor Dec. 15/09 Consolidation is complete 

Nov. 2/09 428 

Nov. 2/09 437 

Nov. 2/09 438 

Nov. 16/09 455 

Lethbridge Sport Council's request for 

letter of support to host the 2011 Football 

Canada Cup 

Purchase and Sale of Land - 2414-25 St. 

S. and 100 Metis Trail W. 

Purchase of Downtown IGA site (721 - 3 

Ave. S.) 

McNally Contractors Ltd. - lease 

agreement with the City of Lethbridge 

Mayor Nov. 16/09 Write letter of support 

City Solicitor Dec. 15/09 Vendor creating title 

City Solicitor Nov. 26/09 Complete 

City Solicitor Dec. 31/09 Execute lease agreement 

Nov. 30/09 462 Unsightly Premises, 314 - 17 St. N. City Clerk Jan. 11/10 Issue Notice in Form B 

Nov. 30/09 466 

Approval of the tentative agreement with 

National Bank 

City Solicitor Dec. 14/09 

Execute agreement with National 

Bank 

Mayor, City Council, City Clerk 

and City Solicitor 2 

Revised 12/9/2009


Nov. 30/09 464 

Request that property taxes on student 

residences be eliminated 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - CITY MANAGER 

Director, City Manager's 

Office 

Estimated 


Feb. 22/10 

Status 

Administration to review and report 

back by January 11, 2010 

City Manager 1 

Revised 12/9/2009

Council Date Page Responsibility 

March 23/09 131 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - COMMUNITY SERVICES 

Lethbridge Curling Club's request for a 

comprehensive planning review of the 

Civic Sportsfield 

Director of Community 

Services 

Estimated 


May 1/10 

Status 

Administration to complete a 

comprehensive review of the Civic 

Sports Field/LSCO/YMCA/City 

Hall/Civic Ice Arena area, and report 

back to City Council during 2011-20 

CIP Discussions 

Community Services 1 

Revised 12/9/2009

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - CORPORATE SERVICES 


Estimated 


Status 

Corporate Services 1 

Revised 12/9/2009


Oct. 1/07 433 

May 26/08 218 

July 7/08 286 

Feb. 23/09 77 

Bicycle corridors and bicycle/pedestrian 

corridors 

Water Conservation Request & 

Environmental Plan/Policy 

Land Development System Evaluation 

and Rebuild (LaSER) 

Canadian Paraplegic Association (parking 

in the downtown core for those with 

physical disabilities) 

March 9/09 97 Curb Side Chipping Program 

June 15/09 251 

Lethbridge Astronomy Society - 

designating Popson Park as an "Urban 

Dark Sky Preserve" 

Sept. 21/09 355 Improvements to recycling depot system 

Sept. 21/09 356 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES 

Protective Plumbing Incentive Program 

and Overland Flooding 

Estimated 


Status 

Transportation Manager Feb. 22/10 Update Bicycling Bylaw 3515 

Ad Hoc Committee Jan. 25/10 

Urban Construction 

Manager 

Jan. 25/10 

Transportation Manager Feb. 22/10 

Waste & Recycling 

Manager 

Director of Infrastructure 

Services 

Waste & Recycling 

Manager 

Water & Wastewater 

Engineering Manager 

March 1/10 

Jan. 25/10 

March 31/10; 

July 1/10 

March 31/10 

Review request to incorporate water 

conservation measures as part of 

Environment Plan & Policy Initiative 

Undertake an evaluation and rebuild 

of system for reviewing and approving 

new land developments 

Administration to report to City 

Council on the feasibility of 

implementing the solutions 

Administration to review the feasibility 

of a Curb Side Chipping Program and 

provide a recommendation to City 

Council 

Refer to Environment Committee to 

review and report back to Council 

Prepare a comprehensive review of 

the recycling depot system and report 

back by March 2010; 

Increase the recycling charge in 

Bylaw 5543 from $3.40/month to 

$3.60/month 

Report back to City Council with 

alternatives and estimated costs of 

capital improvements for 

consideration in advance of the 2011- 

2020 CIP 

Infrastructure Services 1 

Revised 12/9/2009

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES 


Oct. 5/09 380 Clearview Subdivision in S.E. Lethbridge 

Nov. 2/09 426 Parking concerns at NOMA Place 

Nov. 16/09 451 

Nov. 16/09 453 

Nov. 30/09 473 

Nov. 30/09 476 

Concerned Residents of Parkside - 

request for the implementation of speed 

zones on the roads adjacent to 

Henderson Lake Park 

Green Acres Foundation re: outlining 

safety issues at 5th Ave. & 1st St. 

crosswalk 

Request to review water drainage 

problems in the subdivision surrounding 

Chinook Lake in Uplands p 

Concern that changes to the traffic lines 

on 7th St. between 1st & 4th Ave. S. have 

created a variety of concerns for drivers 

and merchants 


Services 

Traffic Operations 

Manager 


Manager 


Manager 


Services 


Manager 

Estimated 


Jun 2010 

Jan. 25/10 

Jan. 25/10 

Jan. 25/10 

March, 2010 

June 21/10 

Status 

Work with developer to create a cost 

neutral development scenario and 

report back to Council when complete 

Administration to continue to work 

with NOMA Place and residents, and 

report back to City Council 

Administration to review the traffic on 

roads adjacent to Henderson Lake 

Park and the need for a 30km/hr 

speed zone 

Administration to review the 

recommended solutions and report 

back to City Council 


back on possible solutions 


back regarding the details of this pilot 

project 

Infrastructure Services 2 

Revised 12/9/2009


Jan. 22/07 23 Sustainable Water Use Practices 

May 14/07 196 Worldwide Day Recognizing Labour 

June 23/08 262 

Central Neighbourhood Issues 

Identification Study 

Nov. 10/08 445 Micro Wind Turbines 

Nov. 2/09 431 

Heart of Our City Revitalization 

Committee to examine alternatives or 

enhancements to the Downtown 

Redevelopment Incentive Policy 

Nov. 2/09 427 Canadian Home Builders Association 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

Director of Planning & 

Development 

Downtown Revitalization 

Manager 

Senior Community 

Planner 

Senior Community 

Planner 


Development 


Development 

Estimated 


2010 

Dec. 31/2010 

January, 2010 

January, 2010 

March 1/10 

Status 

The Environmental Policy Council 

Strategic Initiative will begin in 2009. 

Water conservation will be a 

component of this initiative and it is 

recommended that implementation of 

any water conservation measures be 

part of the implementation plan that will 

be developed from the Environmental 

Policy Program 

Consider incorporating a memorial to 

miners in downtown gateways 

Develop options and budget 

implications and report back to City 

Council 

Planning is working on sample 

regulations to be presented to MPC in 

January 2010. It is intended to have 

them incorporated into the Land Use 

Bylaw update due this fall. 

The Committee is to report back to City 

Council by March 1, 2010 

City to work with Industry 

Representatives to resolve home show 

signage issues; City to meet with 

Housing Industry Representatives to 

discuss impact of new regulations on 

the home builder industry 

Corporate Initiatives 1 

Revised 12/9/2009


Nov. 2/09 427 Unsightly Premise Bylaw 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

Regulatory Services 

Manager 

Estimated 


Dec. 14/09 

Status 

Review bylaw and identify options 

which will reduce the time between 

identification of an unsightly property to 

resolutoin of the issue, and report back 

to City Council 

Corporate Initiatives 2 

Revised 12/9/2009

Council Date Page Responsibility 

Oct. 5/09 389 

Nov. 16/09 447 

Nov. 30/09 463 

Nov. 30/09 463 

BYLAW 5610 

(Amendment to Bylaw 5544 Waste 

Services Bylaw) 

BYLAW 5619 

Proposed Road Closure (Mayor Magrath 

Drive & 3rd Ave. North) 

BYLAW 5542 

Authorization for establishment and 

operation of a Fire & Emergency Services 

Department 

BYLAW 5622 

Designation of the Vendome Hotel, 110-8 

St. S. as a Municipal Historic Resource 

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - BYLAWS 

Estimated 


City Clerk Dec. 14/09 Tabled 

Status 

City Clerk Nov. 16/09 First Reading given Nov. 16/09 

City Clerk Dec. 14/09 First Reading given Nov. 29/09 

City Clerk Dec. 14/09 First Reading given Nov. 29/09 

Nov. 30/09 463 BYLAW 5624 - Building Permit Bylaw City Clerk Dec. 14/09 First Reading given Nov. 29/09 

Bylaws 1 

Revised 12/9/2009


Sept. 21/09 358 

RFP S-09-55; Auditors for 2009-2011 and 

pension plan audits in 2011 (KPMGLLP, 

Lethbridge) 

Estimated 



Sept. 21/09 355 Improvements to recycling depot system City Solicitor Nov. 16/09 

Oct. 5/09 386 

Nov. 16/09 453 

Nov. 30/09 475 

Nov. 30/09 476 

Nov. 30/09 463 

FOLLOW-UP ACTION LIST - TENDERS & REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS 

RFP E-09-16; Electrical Substation 

Engineering, Construction & 

Commissioning Service (Rising Edge 

Engineering Ltd., Calgary) 

EQ-09-72 (Sole Source); Parking Meter 

Coin Chute Upgrade [Trafco (Canada) 

Ltd. of Edmonton] 

SS S-09-108; Water Treatment Plant 

Boiler Replacement (Liberty Boiler & 

Mechanical services Inc., Lethbridge) 

RFQ SC-09-44; South Siphon Line 

(Wolseley Canada, Lethbridge) 

S-06-68; Amended Contract - Project 

Management & Landscape Design 

Services - West Lethbridge Centre 

Status 

Execute 3-year contract (with option 

to extend for up to 3 additional years) 

Extend the contract for provision of 

recycling services (S-02-16) for two 

years 

City Solicitor Nov. 16/09 Awaiting return from Rising Edge 

City Solicitor Jan. 9/10 Execute contract 



City Solicitor Dec. 31/09 Amend contract 

Tenders and RFP's 1 

Revised 12/9/2009

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - FINANCE COMMITTEE 


Estimated 


March 19/07 96 Galt Museum Expansion Project City Treasurer Dec. 31, 2011 

Status 

Allocate $342,369 from MRSR for 

capital expansion - credit MRSR with 

Museum operating surpluses through 

2008 and naming funds through 2011 

(reduced to $169,316 in 2008) 

Finance Committee 1 

Revised 12/9/2009

FOLLOW UP ACTION LIST - COMPLETED ITEMS 


Estimated 


Status 

Completed 1 

Revised 12/9/2009


Subject: Picture Butte Water Pipeline Project 

Submitted By: Doug Kaupp, GM Water and Wastewater 

RECOMMENDATION: Authorize administration to utilize the Town of Picture Butte’s 

procurement process to award and deliver: 

– oversizing of portions of the Town’s water 

pipeline within the city; 

– the extension of a sewer forcemain 

adjacent to the water pipeline; and 

– engineering services for design, tender 

and construction. 

PURPOSE: To take advantage of the opportunity to add value to the 

Town of Picture Butte’s water pipeline construction within the 

city limits by upsizing the water pipeline needed to feed the 

town and include the extension of a sanitary sewer forcemain 

adjacent to the water pipeline within the same contract. 

IMPLICATION OF RECOMMENDATION 

FINANCIAL: 


Oversizing the water pipeline ultimately reduces the number 

of pipes within the city water distribution system requiring 

maintenance and lifecycle replacement. The City of 

Lethbridge will own the entire pipe installed within city limits 

one year after completion. The total value of this asset will 

be about $1.5M. Engineer’s pretender estimate of the 

oversize cost is $325,000.00. 

The extension of the sanitary sewer forcemain is an offsitefunded 

project scheduled to be delivered in 2010. Including 

this work in the scope of the water pipeline project eliminates 

the potential for conflicts between two contractors working in 

the shared easement and should cost less. Engineer’s 

pretender estimate is $265,000.00. 

Estimated amount to be reimbursed to Town from the Offsite 

fund is $590,000.00. 

1

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: (mark if applicable sections) 

I:\Everyone\Reports & Studies\City Council\Towards A Sustainable Future .pdf 

Affordable Housing Environmental Policy and Plan 

Financial Stewardship X Communications Strategy and Plan 

Advocacy on Behalf of the 

Community 

Strategy for E-Business 


Growth Management 

Inter-municipal Planning 

Background/ 

Justification : 

Mayor Terry Kerkhoff of the Town Picture of Butte appeared before City 

Council on September 29, 2008 seeking a letter of support for a 

regional water pipeline grant application. The following resolution was 

passed following his presentation and the responses to a number of 

questions: 

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the communications from Mayor Terry 

Kerkhoff, Picture Butte, requesting a letter of support from City 

Council to accompany their report to the Provincial Government 

requesting funding for a regional water line, be received as 

information and filed 

AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor’s Office write 

the appropriate letter of support 

AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT Mayor Kerkhoff be 

thanked for his presentation. 

May 2009, the Town of Picture Butte obtained provincial funding for the 

construction of a water pipeline from Lethbridge to the Town. 

The water pipeline to the Town will parallel the existing pipeline to the 

hamlets north of the river in the County of Lethbridge and will begin 

near the Uplands Reservoir. The Town pipeline design requirements 

call for a 300mm (12”) diameter line from the City of Lethbridge to the 

Town of Picture Butte. Though paid for by the Town the first 3,000 

metres, within the City Limits, will be owned, operated and maintained 

by the City of Lethbridge when the construction warrantee period of one 

year has passed. In order to accommodate future development in 

North Lethbridge, it would be prudent to oversize portions of the 

pipeline beyond the size necessary for provision of water to the Town. 

Therefore, the Town has agreed to have a larger pipeline constructed if 

the City pays the difference in the cost of the pipe material. The cost of 

oversize. There will be no additional cost to the Town and a future third 

pipe would not be required in 13 th Street North to service development 

within the city. 

Changes to the water supply agreement with the Lethbridge Regional 

Water Services Commission are in the process of being finalized and 

will require the approval of Council at regular public meeting of City 

Council. 

2

BRIEFING SHEET 

The extension of an existing wastewater forcemain that currently 

conveys wastewater from the Sherring Industrial Park to a trunk sewer 

in Uplands Blvd will run parallel to the new Picture Butte water pipeline. 

The purpose of the forcemain extension is to move the industrial 

discharge to 13 th Street and to free up capacity in the Uplands Blvd 

trunk sewer for pending adjacent developments. This is an off-site 

funded project scheduled for 2010. 

The water and wastewater pipes will share an easement with a 

separation of only three meters. Because of their proximity, 

simultaneous construction is preferable to separate construction. 

Advantages of simultaneous construction include assurance of the 

relative pipe locations and having a single contractor responsible for 

trench compaction and restoration of the easement. Again, the Town of 

Picture Butte has agreed to include a separate schedule in the contract 

tender to cover this work for the City of Lethbridge. The City would 

then reimburse the Town for the tendered cost of this work. Further, 

the Town’s selected engineering services provider, MPE, will be 

compensated directly for design and services during construction. 

Legislation & Policy As per the City of Lethbridge Procurement Policy, the Town 

will award the contract to the lowest bidder responding to a 

public tender. 

Plans Oversized water pipeline will ultimately service future 

developments directly east of 13 th Street North. 

Options 

The wastewater forcemain extension is required to provide 

wastewater capacity in Uplands Blvd. for the Black Wolf 

development. 

Water Pipeline Options: 

a) City pay the Town for the cost to oversize the 

pipeline constructed by the Town within City Limits, 

resulting in reduced capital and lifecycle costs. 

b) The Town could contract to construction a 3000 

metre long pipeline that the City will operate and 

maintain but not be sufficient for any future 

developments. This will ultimately result in additional 

pipelines being required in the same right of way. 

3

Wastewater Forcemain Extension Options: 

a) Town includes the forcemain extension as a 

separate schedule in the water pipeline contract to 

be reimbursed by the City. 

b) City delivers the forcemain extension in a separate 

contract along side the newly installed water 

pipeline some weeks or months later. 

Recommended Option Recommend options a) and a). 

Risk Analysis To reduce the risk of impacting city water customers, all 

required connections to the existing water system will be 

made by the City and are not included in the scope of the 

Town’s construction contract. 

Submitted By: _________________________ 

Reviewed By: _________________________ 

City Treasurer: _________________________ 

City Solicitor: _________________________ 

Reviewed & Endorsed by City Manager: _________________________________ 

City Manager’s Comments: _____________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________ 

Revision Date & Time: 

4


Subject: Overland Flooding 

Submitted By: Neil Evans – Water and Wastewater Engineering Manager 

RECOMMENDATION: That this report be received as information and filed. 

PURPOSE: To provide information on potential storm drainage 

improvements in areas where property damage occurred as 

a result of overland flooding during the July 1, 2008 storm. 



GENERAL: The rainfall of July 1, 2008 revealed sixteen locations that 

have a substandard level of service for overland drainage. 

Deficiencies in the overland drainage system at these sixteen 

locations result in damage to private property during severe 

rainfall events. 

Unfortunately, deficiencies in an existing overland drainage 

system are extremely difficult to correct. Generally, the 

improvements required to provide the desired level of service 

cannot be achieved on public property alone. This means 

that acquisition of private property would be necessary to 

achieve the desired level of service. 

To provide the desired level of service at most of these 

sixteen locations, the combined cost of improvements and 

private property acquisition exceeds the value of the affected 

properties. 

1

ORGANIZATIONAL: Projects to improve our storm drainage system are 

commonly proposed for consideration as part of our Capital 

Improvement Plan process. 

Storm drainage improvement projects proposed for 

consideration in the 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan 

will focus on overland drainage improvements on public 

property that will reduce the risk of private property damage 

resulting from overland flooding. 

FINANCIAL: Overland drainage improvements approved as part of the 

2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan will be funded from 

Stormwater capital and operating budgets. 

IMPLICATION/ 

COMMUNICATIONS: 

Timelines for proposed projects will be determined through 

the Capital Improvement Plan process and funding 

availability. 

Standard processes for public notification and input will be 

followed for projects approved as part of the 2011-2020 

Capital Improvement Plan. 


I:\Everyone\Reports & Studies\City Council\Towards A Sustainable Future .pdf 

Affordable Housing Environmental Policy and Plan 

Financial Stewardship ● Communications Strategy and Plan 

Advocacy on Behalf of the 

Community 

Strategy for E-Business 


Growth Management 

Inter-municipal Planning 

Background/ 



The City is responsible for providing and maintaining its 

drainage systems. At the same time, fiscal constraint is one 

of the City’s strategic priorities. 

The projects proposed for consideration in the 2011-2020 

Capital Improvement Plan will attempt to achieve an 

appropriate balance between level of service and capital 

expenditure. 

Legislation & Policy This recommendation will have no impact on current policy 

or legislation. 

Plans This recommendation will affect preparation of the Capital 

Improvement Plan. 

2

Options Options considered can be summarized into three 

categories: 

a) No improvements 

b) Improvements on public property 

c) Improvements on private property 

Recommended Option Option, b) Improvements on public property, was the only 

one judged capable of providing an improved level of 

service in a fiscally responsible manner. 

Public Participation A number of affected residents were engaged on the topics 

of: Existing deficiencies, expected levels of service, potential 

improvements and the impact of potential improvements. 

Risk Analysis The projects proposed for consideration in the 2011-2020 

Capital Improvement Plan will reduce, but not eliminate, the 

risk of property damage resulting from severe rainfall 

events. 

Reports / Documents PowerPoint Presentation 

Submitted By: _________________________ 

Reviewed By: _________________________ 





_____________________________________________ 

Revision Date & Time: December 9, 2009 

3

Date of City Council Meeting: December 14 th , 2009 

Subject: Bylaw No. 5542 Establishment and Operation of a Fire and Emergency 

Services Department 

Submitted By: Brian Cornforth, Chief of Fire and Emergency Services 

RECOMMENDATION: That City Council give second and third reading to Bylaw 

5542 

PURPOSE: To provide a new updated Bylaw to reflect current legislative 

changes in the Municipal Government Act and related 

changes in other Acts and Regulations including: 



Safety Codes Act changes that require municipalities to 

submit a Quality Management Plan to conduct fire and life 

safety inspections. 

Alberta Fire Code Changes to the sale of Fire Works and 

permits to discharge. 

Emergency Health Services Act which shifts responsibly of 

Ambulance service delivery to Alberta Health Services. 

To provide an updated schedule of fees for services that is 

reflective of current industry rates and cost recovery of 

specialized services to incidents outside City boundaries and 

Provincial highways. 

GENERAL: This new Bylaw will reflect current operating policies and 

align our legal responsibilities under the Municipal 

Government Act due to legislative changes over the past few 

years. 

A new schedule of fees will provide minimal cost recovery in 

an area where additional focus of staff is required to resolve 

outstanding issues or requires typically higher than normal 

resources, such as repeated false alarms from faulty alarm 

1

systems. These fees will also provide for cost recovery of 

responses outside the municipal boundaries of the City that 

require Department resources. A comparative review of our 

fees has been done internally and externally with other 

Emergency Services Departments and is in alignment with 

the standard fees. 

FINANCIAL: Based on a preliminary review of fees and charges this 

Bylaw will have minimal impact on budget revenue. 

IMPLICATION/ 

COMMUNICATIONS: 

Staff will be providing the City Communications Department 

with resources and information on changes to communicate 

with the public on the key issues and changes to this 

updated Bylaw 



Legislation & Policy Repels Bylaw 4381 and 4173 

Options Option 1. Council give second and third reading to Bylaw 

5542 

Option 2. Council table Bylaw 5542 until further Public 

input is received. 

Recommended Option City Council give second and third reading to Bylaw 5542 

Submitted By: _________________________ 

Reviewed By: __________________________ 





_____________________________________________ 


2

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION INCAMERA SUBMISSION 

BACKGROUND: Report/Document Attached 

Available 

Nil 

Comments: 

WILL SOMEONE APPEAR AS A DELEGATION Yes No 

Name and Title of Presenter: Brian Cornforth - Chief of Fire and Emergency Services 

EQUIPMENT REQUIRED: PowerPoint Presentation 

Elmo 

Other 

IMPORTANT 

� All Requests for Decision (RFD) must be received by the City Clerk’s Office by 12:00 

noon the Wednesday prior to the City Council meeting (this includes the signed RFD 

as well as all information you would like City Council to review) 

� Please ensure that all RFD’s to be considered by the Priorities and Agenda Review 

Committee are signed in all the mandatory and appropriate fields 

� Electronic copies of all RFD’s and related material should be sent to Council Agenda 

Submissions Group listed in Outlook. Please ensure that the subject line in your email 

is complete with the title of your submission. In addition, if this is a revised copy, 

please indicate REVISED as well as the title in the subject line of the email. 

� Please insert Date and Time on the Briefing Sheet. If submission is revised, then date 

and time must be revised as well. 

� Colour Inserts – please consult the Legislative Coordinator (320-3822) if you wish to 

include any colour inserts with your RFD as these items will have to be hand inserted. 

You are required to provide twenty-eight (28) copies. The copies should be three hole 

punched and double sided. 

� Presentations – All PowerPoint presentations should be emailed to the Council Agenda 

Submission Group or if too large, delivered to the City Clerk’s Office on a disk or thumb 

drive by 10:00 a.m. on the day of the presentation. 

� Presentation Handouts - PowerPoint Presentations containing text only will be printed 

by the City Clerk’s Office. PowerPoint Presentations containing any charts, graphs, 

maps or pictures must be printed in Colour. You are required to provide the coloured 

copies – twenty-six (26) copies, two slides per page, double sided, stapled and threehole 

punched.


Subject: Unsightly Property Bylaw Review 

Submitted By: Duane Ens 

RECOMMENDATION: THAT the proposed Unsightly Property Bylaw be prepared 

for first reading 

AND THAT should the Unsightly Property Bylaw be 

ultimately approved by City Council City of Lethbridge Bylaw 

3193 be repealed 

PURPOSE: To respond to City Council’s request to review the Unsightly 

Premises Bylaw 3193 and specifically address shortening 

compliance deadlines 


Background/ 




The Unsightly Premises Bylaw has not been reviewed since 1988. 

Given the current volume of complaints and length of time required to 

obtain a clean up order, City Council requested administration conduct 

a review of Bylaw 3193 to expedite the process. 

Legislation & Policy Unsightly Premises Bylaw # 3193 

Options A) City Council can approve the proposed bylaw for first 

reading 

B) City Council can approve the proposed bylaw but change 

timelines and or delegate their authority to hear appeals 

C) City Council can make significant amendments to Bylaw 

3193 changing the notification process 

D) City Council can retain Bylaw 3193 and processes listed 

there under 

1

Recommended Option A) City Council approve the proposed bylaw for first reading 

Reports / Documents Proposed Unsightly Property Bylaw 

Submitted By: Duane Ens ________________ 

Reviewed By: _________________________ 





_____________________________________________ 


2

CONSOLIDATION OF A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE TO REGULATE UNTIDY 

AND UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE 

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 

Whereas the Municipal Government Act, R.S.A 2000 Chapter M‐26.1 as amended 

authorizes municipalities to deal with untidy and unsightly property. 

NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE, IN THE PROVINCE 

OF ALBERTA, DULY ASSEMBLED, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 

NAME OF THE BYLAW 

1. This Bylaw may be cited as the “Unsightly Property Bylaw” 

DEFINITIONS 

2. For the purpose of this bylaw , the following words mean: 

(1) “Act” means the Municipal Government Act, R.S.A 2000, c M‐ 26.1 as amended 

(2) “City” means the Municipal Corporation of the City of Lethbridge 

(3) “Council” means the Municipal Council of the City 

(4) “Derelict Vehicle” means a motor vehicle as defined in the Traffic Safety R.S.A. 2000, 

c T‐6 as amended and which is dilapidated, partially or completely dismantled, or 

not capable of operating under its own power 

(5) “Designated Officer” means a bylaw enforcement officer, peace officer, police 

constable or any other official appointed by the City to enforce this bylaw 

(6) “Direction” means a written direction in accordance with section 4 of this Bylaw

(7) “Motor Vehicle” means a vehicle as defined in the Traffic Safety Act R.S.A 2000, c T‐6 

as amended 

(8) “Order” means a written order in accordance with section 546(1)(c ) of the Act 

(9) ”Owner” means 

(a) in respect of land, the person who is registered under the Land Titles 

Act R.S.A 2000 c L‐4 as amended as the owner of fee simple estate in 

the land, and 

(b) in respect of property other than land, the person in lawful 

possession of it 

(10) “Property” means 

(a) a parcel of land 

(b) an improvement 

(c) a parcel of land and the improvement to it 

(11) “Unsightly Property” means property as described in section 3 of this bylaw 

(12) “Municipal Tag” means a ticket alleging an offence, issued pursuant to the 

authority of a bylaw of the City 

(13) “Violation Ticket” has the same meaning as in the Provincial Offences 

Procedure Act R.S.A. 2000, c 34 as amended 

UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY 

3. (1) Unsightly Property is property that in the opinion of a Designated Officer is not in 

keeping with the surrounding properties within a one block radius, of similar zoning 

under The Land Use Bylaw of the City and which is detrimental to the surrounding 

area because of its unsightly condition 

(2) Some factors which may be considered by a Designated Officer in determining 

whether property is unsightly include the following:

DIRECTION 

ORDER 

SERVICE 

(a) The presence of a derelict vehicle 

(b) The external storage of more than one intact, operable unregistered motor vehicle 

(c) The storage or accumulation of garbage, litter, refuse(including but not limited to 

building materials, tires, boxes, scrap material), equipment, dilapidated furniture, or 

appliances, machinery, machinery parts or other similar materials or items. 

(3) Subsection (2) is not intended to be an exhaustive list of factors which may be 

considered in determining whether property is Unsightly Property 

4. If a Designated Officer forms the opinion that property is Unsightly Property, the 

Designated Officer may issue a written direction to the owner or occupier of the 

property. The direction may require the owner or occupier of the Unsightly Property 

to improve the appearance of the property in the manner specified and shall state a 

time within which the person must comply with the direction. 

5. If in the opinion of a Designated Officer, property is detrimental to the surrounding 

area because of its unsightly condition, the Designated Officer may issue a written 

order in accordance with section 546(1)( c ) of the Act. 

6. The written order or written direction, given by the Designated Officer, shall be deemed 

to have been duly served on the person or persons to whom it is addressed by: 

(a) Personally delivering the order or direction to the person or persons to whom it is 

addressed; 

(b) Leaving the order or direction with a person apparently over the age of eighteen 

(18) years at the residence of the person or persons to whom the order is 

addressed; 

(c) By sending the order or direction by registered mail to the last known postal address 

of the person or persons to whom it is addressed; or 

(d) Posting the order or direction in a conspicuous place on the property referred to in 

the order or direction or on any buildings or erections where the Designated Officer

has reason to believe the person or persons to whom the order or direction is 

addressed is evading service 

CITY MAY REMEDY UNSIGHTLY CONDITION OF PROPERTY 

7. If an order has been issued, the city may take whatever actions or measures are 

necessary to: 

(a) Deal with the unsightly condition of property in accordance with section 550 of the 

Act, and 

(b) Collect any unpaid costs and expenses of the actions or measures taken by the City 

in accordance with the Act, which includes adding unpaid costs and expenses to the 

tax role of the property 

The costs and expenses of the actions or measures taken by the City are charged in 

addition to any penalty imposed under this Bylaw 

REVIEW OF ORDER 

8. Council may review an order in accordance with section 547 of the Act 

9. A person who receives an order may request that Council review the order by written 

notice filed within seven (7) days of receipt of the order, to the office of the City Clerk at 

the following address: 

Office of the City Clerk 

Second Floor, City Hall 

910 4 Ave S 

Lethbridge AB T1J 0P6 

DECISION OF COUNCIL 

10. After reviewing the order Council may confirm, vary, substitute or cancel the order in 

accordance with section 547(2) of the Act

APPEAL TO COURT 

11. A person affected by the decision of Council under section 10 of this bylaw may appeal 

to the Court of Queen’s Bench within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision in 

accordance with section 548 of the Act 

INSPECTION 

OFFENCE 

PENALTY 

12. A Designated Officer may inspect property in accordance with section 542 of the Act 

for the purpose of determining whether: 

(a) Property is Unsightly Property under this bylaw 

(b) Property, because of its unsightly condition, is detrimental to the surrounding area 

in accordance with section 546 of the Act 

(c) There has been compliance with a direction issued under section 4 of this bylaw, or 

(d) There has been compliance with an order issued in accordance with section 

546(1)(c) of the Act 

13. A person who fails to comply with: 

(a) A direction issued in accordance with section 4 of this bylaw, or 

(b) An order issued in accordance with section 546(1)( c ) of the Act 

is guilty of an offence 

14. (a) Where a Designated Officer believes on reasonable and probable grounds that an 

offence has been committed under section 13 of this bylaw, he may serve upon such 

persons a Municipal Tag, or he may commence proceedings by issuing a summons by 

means of a Violation Ticket in accordance with the Provincial Offences Procedure Act 

R.S.A. 2000, Chapter 34 as amended 

(b) The specified penalty shall be $300.00 

(c) Upon production of any such Municipal Tag or Violation Ticket within twenty‐one 

(21) days from the date of service of such notice, together with the payment of the 

sum specified to a person authorized by the City or Province of Alberta to receive

GENERAL 

such payment, an official receipt for such payment shall be issued and subject to the 

provisions of this section such payment shall be accepted in lieu of prosecution. If the 

person upon whom any such notice or ticket is served fails to pay the said sum within 

the time allotted , the provisions of this section shall no longer apply 

15. Any Person who contravenes any provision of the Bylaw is guilty of an offence and is 

liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than ten thousand ($10,000.00) 

dollars and in default of payment is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

six (6) months. 

16. It is the intention of Council that each separate provision of this Bylaw shall be 

deemed independent of all other provisions herein and it is further the intention of 

Council that if any provisions of this Bylaw be declared invalid all other provisions 

thereof shall remain valid and enforceable. 

17. Bylaw No 3193 and amendments are herby repealed 

18. This bylaw shall come into full force and effect on the date of final passing thereof

City Council Meeting 

Monday, November 2, 2009 

� Unsightly Premises Bylaw Amendment 

K.E. TRATCH: 

655-B 

WHEREAS under the Municipal Government Act, Revised Statutes of Alberta 

2000, Chapter M-26, City Council has the power to pass Bylaws for municipal 

purposes respecting unsightly properties 

AND WHEREAS Unsightly Bylaw 3193 was originally passed by City Council in 

1973 and has not been amended since 1988 

AND WHEREAS the current process is somewhat lengthy and cumbersome 

BE IT RESOLVED THAT that Administration undertake a review of the Unsightly 

Bylaw 3193 to identify options which will reduce the time between identification of 

an unsightly property to resolution of the issue and report back to City Council 

with recommended changes by December 14, 2009. 

ACTION: City Solicitor, City Clerk, Regulatory Services 

……………………………….. 

-------------------------CARRIED


Subject: Unsightly Premise at 513 - 19 Street North 

Submitted By: Duane Ens, Regulatory Services Manager 

RECOMMENDATION: That City Council issue Form C to owner Dalyce 

Leonard Boese, owner of 513 19 Street North , as per 

the recommendation of the Regulatory Services 

Department at the Public Hearing of December 14, 

2009 and in accordance with Bylaw 3193, the Unsightly 

Premises Bylaw of the City of Lethbridge. 

AND FURTHER THAT if Form C Order is to be issued 

to the owners, then at the expiration of the deadline 

date noted in the Order, the City will then take 

necessary action to remedy the condition of the 

property. 

PURPOSE: The property at 513 19 Street North is in contravention 

of City of Lethbridge Bylaw 3193 respecting unsightly 

premises 

As it contains two couches and miscellaneous 

household appliances. 



Legislation & Policy Unsightly Premises Bylaw 3193 

Options At the Public Hearing, one of two actions will be 

requested of Council; 

1. If the property is in compliance, the Regulatory 

Services Manager will request that Form C 

Order be defeated or withdrawn, or 

2. If the contravention is still occurring that an 

Order by way of Form C, will be issued to the 

owner. If the situation is not remedied on or 

before the deadline noted in Form C, the City 

1

may then take necessary action to remedy the 

condition of the property. 

Submitted By: Duane Ens Regulatory Services Manager 

Reviewed By: _________________________ 





_____________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________ 


2

Office of: City Solicitor 

His Worship the Mayor and 

Members of City Council 

November 25, 2009 

For Submission to 

City Council Meeting 

November 30, 2009 

RE: Bylaw 5626: A Bylaw of the City of Lethbridge to Divide the Residential 

Assessment Class Into Sub-Classes for the 2010 Assessment 

And Tax Rolls 

Attached is Bylaw 5626 for Council’s consideration. The purpose of the Bylaw is to 

permit the Residential Assessment Class Property to be divided into sub-classes: 

� Single Family Residential 

� Multi-Family Residential 

As this matter is housekeeping Council may wish to consider having three readings at 

this time. 

Douglas S. Hudson, Q.C., 

City Solicitor

BYLAW 5626 

-------------------- 

A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE TO DIVIDE THE RESIDENTIAL 

ASSESSMENT CLASS INTO SUB-CLASSES FOR THE 2010 ASSESSMENT AND 

TAX ROLLS 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 297 and 313 of the Municipal Government Act, R.S.A. 

2000, c. M-26, Council may pass a bylaw setting the assessment and supplementary 

assessment sub-classes for residential property authorizing the assessor to assign these 

sub-classes in preparing the assessment of the property. 

WHEREAS pursuant to Sections 302 and 303 of the Municipal Government Act, R.S.A 

2000, C.M-26, the municipality must annually prepare the assessment roll including the 

assessment classes not later than Feb 28. 

NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE ENACTS AS 

FOLLOWS: 

(1) This Bylaw may be cited as the “2010 Residential Assessment and 

Supplementary Assessment Sub-class Bylaw” 

(2) The purpose of this bylaw is to authorize the assessment and supplementary 

assessment sub-classes for residential property. 

(3) In this bylaw, unless the context otherwise requires: 

(a) “Act” means the Municipal Government Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. M-26; 

(b) “Assessed Property” means assessed property as defined in Section 

284 of the Act; 

(c) “Assessment Roll” means assessment roll as defined in Section 303 

of the Act; 

(d) “Dwelling unit” means one or more rooms operated or capable of 

being operated as a residence for a household containing cooking, 

sleeping and sanitary facilities. 

(e) “Manufactured Home” means manufactured home as defined in 

Section 284(1)(m) of the Act; 

1

(f) “Manufactured Home Community” means manufactured home 

community as defined in Section 284(1)(n) of the Act; 

(g) “Mobile Home” means mobile home as defined in Section 284(1)(n.1) 

of the Act; 

(h) “Multi-family residential property” means all residential property other 

than single family including boarding houses with over three sleeping 

rooms; 

(i) “Non Residential Assessment Class Property” means non residential 

property as defined in Section 297(4)(b) of the Act; 

(j) “Residential Assessment Class Property” means residential 

property as defined in Section 297(4)(c) of the Act; 

(k) “Single family residential property” means 

(i) dwelling units occupied by a single family where the total 

number of dwelling units on the parcel of land, whether 

contained in a single building or more than one building, does 

not exceed three dwelling units together with any other 

buildings located on the site that are ancillary to the use of the 

single family dwelling 

(ii) a residential unit and parking unit, if any, occupied by a single 

family and established under the same condominium plan, 

provided that the said residential unit and parking unit, if any, 

are occupied and used by the same single family; 

(iii) owner occupied portions of multi-family residential dwellings 

together with the proportionate amount of land; 

(iv) owner occupied portion of non-residential property together 

with the proportionate amount of land; 

(v) residential property that contains four dwelling units where at 

least one unit is owner occupied. 

(vi) a manufactured home community; 

(vii) a mobile home or manufactured home located on a site in a 

manufactured home community and any other improvements 

2

Moved by: M.A. SIMMONS 

Mayor: R.D. Tarleck 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

City Council Communications Initiative 

Committee Communication Plan 

5.1 

545-D 

645-A 

WHEREAS one of City Council’s Strategic Initiatives is to improve pro-active, 

effective, two-way communication between City Council members and the 

Community 

AND WHEREAS the goals, objectives and purpose of the Communication Plan 

were discussed in detail with City Council at the Community Issues Committee 

meeting of December 7, 2009 

AND WHEREAS a number of recommendations have been developed by the 

Committee 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following Communications Initiative 

Committee recommendations 

� Acceptance of the Communication Plan of December, 2009 

� Extension of the advertorial contract with the Lethbridge Herald from 

January to May 2010 

� Pilot of a semi-annual Newsletter

� Continuation of the following projects: 

o Website renewal 

o Community Satisfaction (IPSOS Reid Survey) 

o City Hall Foyer Kiosk 

be approved 

AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Communications Initiative 

Committee be thanked for their work in developing the Communication Plan.

Moved by: M.A. SIMMONS 



City Council Communications Initiative 

Committee Terms of Reference Revision 

5.2 

545-D 

645-A 

WHEREAS the original Terms of Reference for the Communications Initiative 

Committee were approved on April 14, 2008 

AND WHEREAS it has been determined there was a need to revise the Terms of 

Reference to include reference to a Quorum and to conform to standard City 

Terms of Reference format 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the attached revised Terms of Reference 

dated December 8, 2009, be approved.

1. Name and Type of Committee 

December 8, 2009 

CITY COUNCIL 

COMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE COMMITTEE 

TERMS OF REFERENCE 

a. Communications Initiative Committee 

b. Committee of City Council 

2. Statement of Purpose 

To provide direction for the development of a Council communications strategy and plan, 

and guide the implementation of the plan. 

3. Composition of the Committee 

The Committee shall be comprised of four (4) members of City Council 

4. Duties and Responsibilities 

a. Acting on behalf of City Council as a whole, the Communications Initiative 

Committee will meet as required to provide direction to the implementation of City 

Council’s communications strategy 

b. Ensure that the communications initiatives reflect the vision and values and 

decisions of City Council as a whole as set out in the current strategic plan 

c. Act as a liaison to the City Council Committees working on the other City Council 

initiatives to get their input on planned communications initiatives 

d. Consult with the Leaders, Administration and other internal experts as required to 

ensure accuracy of information presented 

e. Ensure that the work of the Communications Initiative Committee is carried out in 

accordance with the governance requirements of the Municipal Government Act 

and Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP) 

f. Periodically update progress and recommend to City Council approaches to 

communications initiatives as recommended in the Strategic Communications 

Plan 

g. Recommend to City Council the approval of budgets for communications 

initiatives and report financial status periodically 

h. Provide performance measures for communications initiatives and report results 

to City Council as a whole 

i. Recommend to City Council revisions to the communications strategies based on 

performance feedback criteria

COMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE COMMITTEE 

TERMS OF REFERENCE (CONTINUED) 

5. Quorum 

A quorum of the Committee is a majority of the appointed members. (Procedures 

Bylaw 5411, section 5 (cc)). 

6. Support Services 

The Committee shall be supported by the Director of the City Manager’s Office, 

Communications and the Office of the City Clerk. 

. 

2

Moved by: R. DODIC 



Financial Reporting 

5.3 

590-D 

WHEREAS Administration currently reports financial forecasts and information to 

Finance Committee three times per year based on June, September, and 

December financial information 

AND WHEREAS the City of Lethbridge is now on a three year operating budget 

cycle wherein business units are expected to operate within their 36 month 

budget 

AND WHEREAS annual financial reporting in the form of the Unaudited Financial 

Information package and the Annual Report will provide sufficient updates for 

City Council on the status of City operations within the three year operating 

budget 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Administration report financial information 

to Finance Committee annually based on December information

AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that in the year of operating budget 

preparation that Administration also provide a financial forecast in November to 

assist in operating budget decisions 

AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that Administration continue to report urgent 

or unusual financial information to the Audit Committee, Finance Committee or 

City Council on an ad-hoc basis as required.

BYLAW 5542 

********************** 

A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE TO AUTHORIZE 

THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF A FIRE 

AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 

******************************************************************************* 

WHEREAS City Council may pass bylaws for municipal purposes respecting the 

safety, health and welfare of people and the protection of people and property 

and services provided by or on behalf of a municipality; 

AND WHEREAS a municipality may take action or measures necessary to 

eliminate an emergency and the expenses and costs of the actions and 

measures are an amount owing to the municipality by the person who caused the 

emergency; 

AND WHEREAS the City of Lethbridge as an accredited municipality pursuant to 

the Safety Codes Act may make bylaws respecting fees for materials or services 

provided; 

NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE, IN THE 

PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, DULY ASSEMBLED DOES HEREBY AUTHORIZE 

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MUNICIPAL FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES 

DEPARTMENT, THE CARRYING OUT OF ITS OPERATIONS AND THE 

IMPOSITION OF FEES AND CHARGES IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: 

1. In this Bylaw unless the context otherwise requires: 

(a) “Apparatus” means any vehicle provided with machinery, devices, 

equipment or materials for firefighting as well as vehicles used to 

transport firefighters, emergency services personnel, supplies 

and/or provide rescue and ambulance services. 

(b) “Chief Fire Marshall” means the member designated by the City of 

Lethbridge pursuant to the Quality Management Plan. 

(c) City” means the municipal corporation of the City of Lethbridge. 

(d) “City Manager” means the person appointed by Council to be the 

City Manager. 

(e) “Council” means the Council of the City of Lethbridge. 

1

(f) “Dangerous Goods” means any material or substance that may 

constitute an immediate or long-term adverse effect to life, health, 

property or the environment when burned, spilled, leaked or 

otherwise released from its normal use, handling, storage or 

transportation environment and shall include those regulated 

products, substances and organisms that are covered by applicable 

Provincial and Federal Acts, Regulations and Guidelines. 

(g) “Equipment” means any tools, contrivances, devices or materials 

used by the Fire Department in the normal course of their duties. 

(h) “False Alarm” means: 

1. any malfunction in a fire safety installation or other safety 

monitoring device whereby the alarm activation was not 

caused by heat, smoke or fire; or 

2. a response initiated by equipment or human negligence in 

circumstances where the caller is aware that no actual 

danger or possible danger to safety, health and welfare or 

people or the environment existed at the time the call was 

placed. 

(i) “Fire Chief” means the member appointed by the City Manager as 

head of the Fire and Emergency Services Department. 

(j) “Fire Investigation” means the process of determining the cause, 

origin and circumstances of a fire or emergency pursuant to the 

Safety Codes Act. 

(k) “Fire Protection” means all aspects of fire safety including, but not 

limited to fire prevention, firefighting or suppression, pre-fire 

planning, fire inspection, fire investigation, public education and 

information, training or other staff development and advising and 

responding to public or business community requests for fire 

protection including legitimate emergencies and false alarms. 

(l) “Incident” means a fire or a situation where a fire or explosion is 

imminent or any other situation presenting danger or possible 

danger to life or property and to which the Fire and Emergency 

Services Department has responded. 

(m) “Member” means any person that is a duly appointed member of 

the Fire and Emergency Services Department. 

2

(n) “Owner” means: 

1. the person which is registered under the Land Titles Act as 

the owner of the fee simple estate in the land; and 

2. in respect of any property other than land, the person in 

lawful possession of it. 

(o) “Peace Officer” means a member of the Lethbridge Regional Police 

Service or a Bylaw Enforcement Officer of the City of Lethbridge. 

(p) “Person” includes an individual, partnership, association, 

corporation, trustee, executor, administrator or legal representative; 

(q) “Quality Management Plan” means the accredited system adopted 

by resolution of the City of Lethbridge under the authority of the 

Safety Codes Act. 

(r) “Resident” means a person whose primary residence is in the City 

of Lethbridge, Province of Alberta. 

(s) “Safety Codes Act” includes the regulations and bylaws made 

under the Act and any code, standards or body of rules declared to 

be in force pursuant to the Act. 

(t) “Security Alarm” means an alarm system intended to detect an 

unauthorized entry to a premises or to alert people to the 

commission of an unlawful act or both. 

2. The Fire Chief shall be appointed by the City Manager. 

3. Other officers and members as the Fire Chief deems necessary may be 

appointed to the Fire and Emergency Services Department. 

4. The Fire Chief may appoint other officers of the Fire and Emergency 

Services Department to act as Fire Chief on his behalf. 

5. The limits of the jurisdiction of the Fire Chief, and the officers and 

members of the Fire and Emergency Services Department will extend to 

the area and boundaries of the City of Lethbridge. Fire apparatus, officers 

and members may be utilized to assist other jurisdictions to deal with 

incidents beyond the limits of the City of Lethbridge, as stipulated by a 

contractual obligation or at the discretion of the Fire Chief or a person 

designated to act on his behalf. 

3

6. The Council may by Resolution enter into Agreements with other 

municipalities for the supply of mutual aid and for fire suppression, rescue 

and ambulance services. 

7. The Fire Chief has complete responsibility and authority over the Fire and 

Emergency Services Department, subject to the direction and control of 

the City Manager to whom he shall be responsible, and in particular he 

shall be required to carry out all fire protection activities and such other 

activities such as the City Manager directs including, but not limited to: 

(a) rescue 

(b) emergency medical services 

(c) other incidents 

(d) pre-fire planning 

(e) fire disaster planning 

(f) preventive patrols 

(g) post fire investigation 

(h) inspections 

(i) other fire prevention activities 

8. The Fire Chief, subject to the ratification by the City Manager, shall 

establish rules, regulations, policies and committees necessary for the 

proper organization and administration of the Fire and Emergency 

Services Department, including: 

(a) use, care and protection of Fire and Emergency Services 

Department property; 

(b) the conduct and discipline of officers and members of the Fire and 

Emergency Services Department; and 

(c) efficient operations of the Fire and Emergency Services 

Department. 

(d) a Quality Management Plan in conformance with the Safety Codes 

Act. 

(e) municipal accreditation in conformance with the Safety Codes Act. 

9. The Fire Chief, or in his absence, the senior member present, shall have 

control, direction and management of any Fire and Emergency Services 

Department, apparatus, equipment or manpower assigned to an incident, 

and where a member is in charge, he shall continue to act until relieved by 

an officer authorized to do so. 

4

10. The Fire Chief shall take responsibility for all fire protection matters, 

including the enforcement of the Safety Codes Act and regulations 

thereunder. 

11. The Fire Chief, or any other member in charge at a fire, is empowered to 

cause a building, structure or thing to be pulled down, demolished or 

otherwise removed if he deems it necessary to prevent the spread of fire 

to other buildings, structures or things. 

12. The Fire Chief, or the member in charge at an incident, is empowered to 

enter premises or property where the incident occurred, and to cause any 

member, apparatus or equipment of the Fire and Emergency Services 

Department to enter, as he deems necessary, in order to combat, control 

or deal with the incident. 

13. The Fire Chief, or the member in charge at an incident, may at his 

discretion, establish boundaries or limits and keep persons from entering 

the area within the prescribed boundaries or limits unless authorized to 

enter by him or another law which gives authority to enter. 

14. No person shall enter the boundaries or limits of an area prescribed in 

accordance with Section 13 unless he has been authorized to enter by the 

Fire Chief or the member in charge or another law which gives authority to 

enter. 

. 

15. The Fire Chief, or the member in charge at an incident, may request 

peace officers to enforce restrictions on persons entering within the 

boundaries or limits outlined in Section 13. 

16. The Fire Chief, or the member in charge at an incident, is empowered to 

enter, pass through or over buildings or property adjacent to an incident 

and to cause members of the Fire and Emergency Services Department 

and the apparatus and equipment thereof, to enter or pass through or over 

the building or property, where he deems it necessary to gain access to 

the incident or to protect any persons or property. 

17. The Fire Chief or the member in charge may obtain assistance from other 

officials of the municipality as he deems necessary in order to discharge 

his duties and responsibilities under this Bylaw. 

18. No person shall damage or destroy Fire and Emergency Services 

Department apparatus or equipment. 

19. No person shall drive a vehicle over any equipment without permission of 

the Fire Chief or the member in charge. 

5

20. No person shall obstruct a member from carrying out duties imposed by 

this Bylaw. 

21. No person shall falsely represent themselves as a Fire and Emergency 

Services Department member or wear or display any Fire and Emergency 

Services Department badge, cap, button, insignia, or other paraphernalia 

for the purpose of such false representation. 

22. The Fire Chief or the member in charge of an incident is empowered to 

commandeer or contract privately-owned equipment which he considers 

necessary to deal with an incident. In the event that privately owned 

equipment is so utilized, the owner of such equipment shall be 

compensated at the then prevailing rates as established in the Alberta 

Transportation and Utilities Schedule of Rental Rates for Construction 

Equipment. 

23. There is hereby established fees and charges for the provision of services 

of the Fire and Emergency Services Department all as shown on the 

attached Schedules A, B, C, D and E. 

24. Every person who violates any of the provisions of this Bylaw, or who 

suffers or permits any act or thing to be done in contravention or in 

violation of any of the provisions of this Bylaw, or who neglects to do or 

refrains from doing anything required to be done by any of the provisions 

of this Bylaw, or who does any act or thing or omits any act or thing thus 

violating any of the provisions of this Bylaw, shall be deemed to be guilty 

of an infraction of this Bylaw, and upon a summary conviction is liable to a 

fine of not more than $2,500.00. 

25. The Fire Chief, or a member of the Fire and Emergency Services 

Department charged with the enforcement of this Bylaw, acting in good 

faith in the discharge of his duties, shall not hereby render himself liable 

personally and he is hereby relieved from all personal liability for any 

damage that may accrue to persons or property as a result of any act 

required or by reason of an act in the discharge of his duties. 

26. The sale, purchase, or discharge of fireworks other than high hazard 

6

fireworks or pyrotechnics for which a permit has been obtained from the 

Fire and Emergency Services Department is prohibited. 

27. Bylaw 4318 and amendments thereto are hereby repealed. 

28. This Bylaw shall come into force and effect on the 1 st day of January, 

2010. 

READ A FIRST TIME this _______ day of_________________, A.D. 2009 

____________________________ ____________________________ 

MAYOR CITY CLERK 

READ A SECOND TIME this _______ day of _______________, A.D. 2009 

____________________________ ___________________________ 


READ A THIRD TIME this ________day of _________________, A.D. 2009 

____________________________ ____________________________ 


7

OCCUPANCY POSTINGS: 

New Occupancy Posting 

SCHEDULE “A” – FIRE PREVENTION FEES 

8 

$125.00 

Temporary Posting Special Event $100.00 

Replacement Posting $ 65.00 

INSPECTION: 

Annual Code Compliance Inspection No Charge 

1 st Non‐Compliant Re‐Inspection $100.00 

2 nd Non‐Compliant Re‐Inspection $225.00 

Inspections Required for Licensing by Other Agency $100.00/hour 

minimum one hour 

After Hours Inspections $100.00/hour 

minimum two hours 

Out of Town $100.00/hour 

plus expenses as per the 

City of Lethbridge Expense 

Guide Policy 

Home Inspections No Charge

TANK INSTALLATION / REMOVAL: 

Plan Review 

SCHEDULE “B” ‐ PERMITS 

9 

$150.00 

Each Additional Review $ 75.00 

Permit $ 75.00 first tank 

$ 50.00 each 

additional tank 

Removal Permit 

$ 75.00 first tank 

$ 50.00 each 

additional tank 

PYROTECHNICS: 

High Level Fire Works $100.00/event 

Special Effects (Indoor) $150.00/event 

Standby During Event $100.00/hour 


Fire Apparatus Standby As per Schedule E 

DANGEROUS GOODS: 

Permit – One Year (12 months) 

$100.00 

OPEN BURNING: 

Residential Fire Pits – No Permit Required No Charge 

Open Burning Special Event $100.00 

Construction / Demolition $250.00 

DEMOLITION: 

Fire Safety Plan Review $100.00

SCHEDULE “C” – FIRE PREVENTION ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS 

File Search and Report 

10 

$100.00/report 

Up to two hours 

research and 

preparation 

Plus: $25.00 

thereafter, per 

thirty minutes or 

portion thereof 

Fire Report $100.00/report 

Up to two hours 

research and 

preparation 

Plus: $25.00 

thereafter, per 

thirty minutes or 


Reproduction of Photos ‐ (Hard Copy) $ 10.00 first photo 

$ 5.00 each 

additional photo 

Digital Photographs 

$ 2.00/photo 

with no editing 

$ 5.00/photo 

with editing

SCHEDULE “D” – PUBLIC EDUCATION TRAINING 

Fire Extinguisher Training in Lethbridge 

During Regular Office Hours * 

Fire Extinguisher Training in Lethbridge 

Outside Regular Office Hours 

11 

$ 10.00/person 

minimum $100.00 

$ 100.00/hour 

minimum two hours PLUS 

$10.00/person, minimum 

$100.00 

Fire Extinguisher Training Outside of Lethbridge $ 100.00/hour 

minimum two hours PLUS 

$10.00/person, minimum 

$100.00, AND travel 

expenses 

Evacuation Planning Training 

(Plan Review, On Site Training, Fire Drills) 

Stand Alone Fire Drills 

Request For Attendance at Special Functions 

Outside Regular Office Hours 

$ 200.00/plan 

No Charge 

$100.00/hour 


* Regular Office Hours shall mean 07:00 to 17:00 Monday – Friday, and Statutory 

Holidays shall be deemed to be outside of regular office hours

SCHEDULE “E” – FIRE SERVICES STANDBY RATES 

Aerial Ladder / Platform Truck 

12 

$700.00/hour 

Pumper $ 500.00/hour 

Water Tender / Pumper $ 500.00/hour 

Rescue Truck 

Field Command Post 

Any additional satellite, data and phone costs incurred 

Utility Truck 

Brush Unit 

Jet Boat 

Emergency Responder 

Per Pumper with Standby Four (4) Man Crew 

Per Ambulance With Two (2) Man Crew 

Safety Codes Officer Standby For Safety 

FIRE SERVICE RESPONSE TO FALSE ALARMS: 

First Response related to malfunctioning fire safety installation or 

other safety device during a calendar year 

Second Response related to malfunctioning fire safety installation 

or other safety device during a calendar year 

Third Response related to malfunctioning fire safety installation or 

other safety device during a calendar year 

Fourth and Subsequent Responses related to malfunctioning fire 

safety installation or other safety device during a calendar year 

$ 500.00/hour 

$ 300.00/hour 

$ 250.00/day 

$250.00/hour 

$ 250.00/hour 

$ 100.00/hour 

$ 250.00/hour 

$ 200.00/hour 

$ 100.00/hour 

during the period of 

07:00 – 17:00 

$ 155.00/hour 

during the period of 

17:01 – 06:59 

No Charge 

$75.00 

$350.00 

$675.00

BYLAW 5610 

------------------------ 

A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE TO 

AMEND BYLAW 5544 – THE WASTE SERVICES BYLAW 

OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE, IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, 

DULY ASSEMBLED, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 

1. Bylaw 5544 – Waste Services Bylaw of the City of Lethbridge is hereby 

amended. 

2. Bylaw 5544 is hereby amended by deleting the present Clause 2(x) defining a 

“Landlord Agreement”. 

3. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by deleting the present Clause 3. 

4. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by adding Clause 4(viii) as follows: 

“(viii) There is adequate waste bin storage capacity to meet the needs of the 

occupants.” 

5. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by adding Clause 4(ix) as follows: 

“(ix) All waste is stored within the waste bin.” 

6. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by deleting the current Clauses 25.1(c), 25.1(d) 

and 25.1(e) and inserting: 

“25.1(c) Free disposal of up to 250 kilograms of residential waste and 

recyclables” 

25.1(d) Minimum charges as shown in Schedule “B” are waived for this program 

25.1(e) Special waste, Freon removal, residential waste in excess of 250 

kilograms, and loads arriving at the landfill unsecured are excluded from 

the Enhanced Free Landfill Disposal Program and are subject to fees as 

set out in Schedule “B’ 

7. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by deleting the current Clause 31.(b) and 

inserting: 

“31.(b) With the exception of the Large Item Service as described in Section 15, 

no person shall create or maintain or permit on or at any street or lane for 

which the occupant is responsible for and within his control or 

management:” 

1

8. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by deleting the current Schedule “A” and 

inserting the following: 

SCHEDULE “A” 

CHARGES FOR RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL GARBAGE 

COLLECTION SERVICE 

1. The waste collection charge for residential customers will be $0.447dollars 

per day per dwelling unit. This rate applied to all residential customers in single family, 

multi-family residences and condominiums containing up to and including 6 units. 

2. The “Waste Collection Charge” for single family residential customers, multifamily 

residential and condominium customers will be reduced to $0.3895 dollars per 

day per dwelling unit, for those customers that choose the smaller 65 gallon cart. 

3. Residential customers in apartments and condominiums with greater than 6 

units, that are using a shared bin service provided by the City of Lethbridge will be 

centrally billed for waste services at the “Commercial Collection Rate”. 

4. The “Waste Program Fee” will be $0.0723 dollars per day per dwelling unit. 

This fee applies to all residential customers in apartments and condominiums that 

receive waste services at the commercial rate. The “Waste Program Fee” will be 

centrally billed where waste services are centrally billed. 

5. The “Landfill Charge” will be $.115 dollars per day per dwelling unit. This rate 

applies to all residential customers in single family residences, multi-family residences, 

apartments and condominiums. The “Landfill Charge” will be centrally billed where 

waste services are centrally billed. 

6. The Administration Fee for changing the size of the waste collection cart will be 

$25.00. 

7. The cost of a replacement cart if $100.00. 

8. The fee for an additional waste collection cart will be $0.2876 dollars per day. 

9. The minimum charge for customers receiving “Commercial Collection” will be $0.483 

dollars per day. This charge is collected from customers producing less than 0.36 cubic 

metres per week and requesting service from the City of Lethbridge. 

10. The maximum collection charge for customers receiving “Commercial Collection” for 

volumes and frequencies other than the minimum are outlined on the table below: 

11. The extra pickup charge for a customer receiving “Commercial Collection” is $60.00 

per pickup. 

2

SCHEDULE “A” – Continued 

12. The “Landfill charge” for non residential customers receiving “Commercial 

Collection” will be $0.115 dollars per day times the frequency of pick-up per week in any 

one month. 

Demolition Bin Rental Rates 

Size Delivery & first dump All other dumps 

6 yard bin $120.00 $60.00 

4 yard bin $96.00 $60.00 

3 yard bin $72.00 $60.00 

$3.00 daily rental fee for Monday - Friday for all bins, the daily rental fee does not apply on holidays, 

weekends, or the day of bin delivery or pick-up. 

Commercial Solid Waste Collection Rates 

(Rates shown are in Dollars per Day) 

Pickups Per Week 

Volume Pickups Per Week 

(cu m) 1 2 3 4 5 

Day Day Day Day Day 

0.35 0.483 0.917 1.401 1.836 2.319 

0.50 0.710 1.628 2.544 3.460 4.371 

0.75 1.044 2.243 3.439 4.628 5.811 

1.00 1.375 2.852 4.321 5.777 7.223 

1.15 1.574 3.215 4.846 6.458 8.054 

1.25 1.704 3.456 5.192 6.908 8.602 

1.50 2.032 4.055 6.051 8.017 9.948 

1.75 2.357 4.646 6.898 9.104 11.257 

2.00 2.680 5.232 7.731 10.166 12.527 

2.25 3.001 5.810 8.550 11.308 13.757 

3.00 3.948 7.508 10.922 14.158 17.188 

3.75 4.874 9.142 13.155 16.859 20.215 

4.50 5.779 10.710 15.242 19.295 22.832 

5.25 6.663 12.210 17.177 21.465 25.048 

6.00 7.524 13.639 18.960 23.375 26.887 

6.75 8.364 14.999 20.590 25.033 28.379 

7.50 9.184 16.287 22.069 26.453 29.559 

8.25 9.980 17.503 23.405 27.653 30.466 

9.00 10.756 18.649 25.062 28.651 31.131 

10.00 11.757 20.070 25.989 29.699 31.705 

3

9. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by deleting the current Schedule “B” and 


SCHEDULE "B" 

CITY OF LETHBRIDGE REGIONAL LANDFILL 

TIPPING RATES 

Commodity Rate per Tonne 

(Unless Otherwise 

Specified) 

Definition 

Asbestos $67.50 Includes friable asbestos 

materials 

Asphalt - Pavement $27.25 Asphalt free of dirt and debris 

Clean Topsoil & Clean Sod $5.00/tonne Soil free of contaminants 

*Concrete & Rebar $27.25 Concrete foundations, 

sidewalks, brick, rubble, rebar, 

gravel & sand suitable for 

class III disposal 

*Construction & Demolition $54.50 Insulation, drywall, renovation 

materials such as tiles, 

electrical materials, doors, 

windows, ceiling tiles, 

partitions, carpeting and 

plumbing fixtures 

*Contaminated Soil $30.00 Soil contaminated with 

hydrocarbons that meet 

analytical requirements 

Freon Appliances $30.00 + disposal charges Refrigerators, freezers 

*Mixed Solid Waste $54.50 

Residential, commercial, 

Minimum charge - $10.00 institutional mixed waste 

Recyclables $27.25 

Metal, non-Freon white goods, 

green wood, clean white 

Minimum charge - $5.00 wood, organic yard waste 

suitable for the compost pad 

*Special Waste $67.50 Industrial wastes including 

sludges, sump waste, packing 

house material and other 

material requiring special 

handling procedures 

Tires, Electronic Waste, Paint Free This includes any tires and 

electronic waste that is part of 

Alberta Recycling 

Management Authorities 

program. This also includes 

material that is recycled 

through industry sponsored 

programs 

Untarped Load Surcharge $20.00/load – under 1000 kg Applies to all loads that are not 

$40.00/load – over 1000 kg in an enclosed container, 

covered with a tarpaulin or 

firmly covered and secured in 

4

a manner such that no 

material will leave the vehicle 

or trailer 

*Subsoil Sales $4.00/tonne Sale of subsoil that is removed 

from the site 

Pitting Charge $250.00 per 30 m3 pit area For wastes requiring separate 

disposal pits 

* Waste and Recycling Services may negotiate rates for commodities marked with an asterisk (*) for customers 

offering bulk volumes, provided the Director of Infrastructure Services approves the terms in writing. 

10. Bylaw 5544 is further amended by deleting the current Schedule “D” and 


General Provisions 

SCHEDULE “D” 

CUSTOMER ACCOUNT TERMS AND CONDITIONS 

1. The application when accepted by the Retail Services Agent shall be a contract 

between the customer and the City by which the customer agrees to be bound by 

all the provisions of this bylaw or any other bylaws or regulation of the City in 

connection with the supply of Utility Provision within the City of Lethbridge. The 

said contract shall not be transferable. 

2. A site owner, landlord or tenant shall apply for Utility Provisions and the applicant 

will be considered the Customer. During vacancies, the site owner or landlord will 

be considered the Customer. Utility Provisions will not be discontinued or 

reduced for short term vacancies in order to avoid fixed charges. 

3. In a landlord-tenant situation, the application fee will be waived for landlords. 

Application 

4. Any applicant who requires Utility Provisions shall apply to the City and pay an 

application fee of $20.00. The applicant may be required to sign an application or 

a contract for service, to supply information with respect to load and the manner 

in which the services will be utilized, and credit references. 

5. The utility account shall be set up: 

a. In the name of the owner of the property to which the utilities are to be 

supplied, or; 

b. In the name of the purchaser of a property who is entitled to occupy the 

premises, or; 

c. Where there is evidence of a landlord-tenant situation, in the name of the 

tenant or; 

d. In the name of the general contractor in the case of a new building under 

construction. 

5

6. An application shall be supported by such identification and legal authority of the 

applicant as the Retail Services Agent may require. 

7. Upon making application, providing all information required by the City, and 

paying the application fee, deposit and any other sums herein required, there 

shall thereupon be a binding agreement between the customer and the City, for 

the Utility applied for, and the provisions of the application and this bylaw shall 

constitute the terms and conditions of such agreement. 

8. Where the applicant is indebted to the City for any Utility Provisions previously 

provided by the City, the applicant may not be allowed to complete their 

application, or be entitled to receive Utility Provisions, until satisfactory 

arrangements have been made for payment of such outstanding account and 

any deposit required. 

Deposits 

9. No deposits are required in order to establish a utility account where: 

a. The applicant has had a utility account with the City of Lethbridge over the 

past 12 months and has a satisfactory credit history or; 

b. The applicant can establish and maintain a credit worthiness satisfactory 

to the City of Lethbridge or; 

c. The Retail Services Agent waives the requirement for a deposit. 

10. Before obtaining a utility account, applicants who are not in the foregoing 

categories shall pay all arrears or previous balances owing, and shall also 

provide a guarantee of payment in the form of a cash deposit or irrevocable letter 

of guarantee from a financial institution, in a form suitable to the City, in the 

amount equal to the greater of: 

a. 2 times the average monthly utility bill for the premises over the past 12 

months; or, 

b. $150 for each metered utility 

11. The Retail Services Agent may waive the requirement for a deposit or adjust 

those requirements as appropriate to the perceived credit worthiness of the 

applicant. 

12. Interest on each customer’s cash security will be calculated using a prescribed 

rate set by the City Treasurer. Simple interest will be calculated annually and 

then the interest will then be credited to the customer’s utility bill when the 

deposit is credited to the account. 

13. The utility account deposit paid by such customer will be refunded with any 

accrued interest that has not already been credited to the customer’s account 

when the customer has: 

a. has maintained an account with the City of Lethbridge for the past 12 

months and has a satisfactory credit history or; 

6

. established and maintains a credit worthiness satisfactory to the City of 

Lethbridge or; 

c. terminated their contract, 

14. A customer has a satisfactory credit history with the City when the customer has: 

a. been issued no more than ONE (1) disconnect notice, 

b. not had utilities disconnected for non-payment of account, and 

c. made no more than ONE (1) dishonoured payment to the City for utilities 

in the preceding twelve (12) months. 

15. Should a customer’s bank refuse to honour a payment because of non-sufficient 

funds or any other reason the customers account will be charged a $35.00 

handling fee plus any other penalties or charges resulting from late payment. The 

Retail Service Agent may waive this charge at their discretion. 

PAYMENT OF UTILITY ACCOUNTS 

16. Invoices for Utility Provisions shall be forwarded monthly to the customer and 

shall be payable at the office of the Retail Services Agent and such other places 

as may be designated by him. 

17. Final Utility accounts with debit balances or credit balances less than or equal to 

$2.00 will not be collected or refunded. 

18. Invoices shall be deemed rendered and other notices duly given when delivered 

to the customer personally, when mailed to or left at the premises where the 

Utilities are provided, or the last known address of the customer, or when emailed 

to the customer. 

19. All charges and rates payable under this Bylaw shall be paid to the office of the 

Retail Services Agent and the collection of all disbursements connected with the 

operation of the Utility and supervision of books of account shall be under the 

immediate control and direction of the Retail Services Agent. 

20. The Retail Services Agent shall be promptly notified of all connections made or of 

any discontinuance of Utility Provisions so that the proper charges or allowances 

may be made against or to any person or persons liable to pay for the Utility 

Provisions consumed or who is entitled to a refund where the Utility Provisions 

are disconnected. The Retail Services Agent may base the final charge for 

service on an estimated meter reading which will be prorated from the time of an 

actual meter reading. 

7

21. Where any service rate or charge is designated by reference to a certain period 

of time, the charge for a lesser period of time shall be calculated on a 

proportionate basis. 

22. An administration fee of $6.10 will be charged for each Utility invoice issued. The 

Retail Services Agent shall attempt to consolidate the utility service charges 

associated with one premises on a single invoice. 

23. The entire utility account invoice is due and payable when rendered. 

24. If the utility account invoice is not paid on or before the penalty date the account 

is deemed to be in arrears. 

25. Failure to receive a utility account invoice will not entitle the customer to any 

delay in the settlement of each account or to any extension of the penalty date 

after which a penalty charge becomes applicable. 

26. In the case of a dispute between the customer and the city, the customer shall be 

expected to make payment or settlement as originally arranged and agreed to, 

pending the resolution of the dispute. 

27. A customer who has not paid the full utility account invoice on or before the 

penalty date may have the supply of all or any Utility Provisions discontinued 

without notice and such service will not be reinstated until all arrears and charges 

owed to the City are paid. 

LATE PAYMENT PENALTY 

28. When the customer pays the utility account invoice after the penalty date, the 

customer shall pay a penalty charge of 3.0% of the total amount due. Payments 

must be received by the Retail Services Agent on or before the penalty date in 

order for the customer to avoid the penalty. Payments made at a financial 

institution must be received by the Retail Services Agent on or before the penalty 

date in order for the customer to avoid the penalty. 

29. For greater certainty, a customer is obliged to pay for utilities when the invoice is 

rendered and it is a breach of the Utility Provisions agreement to make a late 

payment. The late payment penalty is not to be construed as permission for the 

customer to pay late but is rather a penalty for breaching the terms of the Utility 

Provision agreement. 

ENFORCEMENT 

30. A customer who fails to make payment on time will be subject to normal credit 

action, which may include, but is not limited to: 

a. Disconnection Notice; 

b. Notification by telephone; 

c. Use of collection agencies; 

d. Requiring prepayment before additional service; 

e. Withholding of additional service and 

8

f. Legal action 

31. A fee of $15.00 will be charged for each Disconnection Notice issued. 

Disconnection Notices are issued when a customer account is in arrears. 

32. The payment of any rates, charges, tolls, fares, or rents as provide by this Bylaw 

may be enforced by all or any of the following methods, namely: 

a. By action in any Court of competent jurisdiction. 

b. By suspending the delivery of Utility Provisions 

c. By distress and sale of the goods and chattels of any persons owing such 

rates, chares, tolls, fares, or rents wherever the same may be found in the 

City. 

33. Where the customer is the owner or purchaser of a building lot or part of a lot 

served by Utilities, the sum payable by him for the Utility Service supplied by the 

City to him or for his use, and all rates, costs and charges or loans made to him 

imposed under this Bylaw are a preferential lien and charge on the building, lot or 

part of a lot, and on the personal property of the debtor and may be levied and 

collected in like manner as municipal rates and taxes recoverable. 

34. Where the customer to whom the Utility has been supplied is a person other than 

the owner or purchaser of the building, lot or part of a lot, the sum payable by the 

person is a debt due by him and shall be a preferential lien and charge on his 

personal property and may be levied and collected with costs by distress. 

ARREARS 

35. Any Utility Provision expenses, rates or rents that may be charged as taxes 

against a person may be entered on the assessment and tax roll at any time. 

TERMINATION BY CITY 

36. The city may discontinue the supply of all Utility Provisions for any of the 

following reasons: 

a. Non payment of any utility accounts; or 

b. Inability of the City to obtain access to a residential premises to read any 

meter for a period of six months, or inability to access a non-residential 

premises to read any meter for a period of three months; or 

c. Failure by, or refusal of, a customer to comply with any provision of this 

bylaw; or 

d. Failure by, or refusal of, a customer to comply with any provisions of any 

Provincial Acts, the Building code, or any regulations thereunder; or 

e. At the owner’s request to have services discontinued, provided the 

premises are not lawfully occupied; or 

f. In any other case provided for in this bylaw. 

37. The following fees will be charged if the city disconnects services for non 

payment of a utility account: 

9

a. $40.00 for each electric service disconnection 

b. $40.00 for each electric service reconnection 

c. A fee as stated in Schedule A of the Water Service Bylaw for water 

service shut off for non payment. 

11. This Bylaw shall come into force and effect on the 1 st day of January, 2010. 

READ A FIRST TIME this _______day of ________________, A.D. 2009 

___________________________ __________________________ 


READ A SECOND TIME this _______day of _____________, A.D. 2009 

__________________________ __________________________ 


READ A THIRD TIME this _______day of _______________, A.D. 2009 

__________________________ __________________________ 


10

BYLAW 5619 

----------- 

A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 22 OF THE 

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT, R.S.A. 

(2000) TO PROVIDE FOR THE CLOSING OF CERTAIN ROADS 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

WHEREAS Section 22 of the Municipal Government Act, R.S.A. (2000) provides that a 

Council may pass bylaws for the purpose of closing and selling, leasing or holding the 

whole or any portion of any street, avenue, lane or public highway; 

AND WHEREAS a Plan registered in the Land Titles Office for the Southern Alberta 

Registration District as No. 0914112 includes a redundant road allowance in the City of 

Lethbridge described as follows: 

Plan 0914112 

Extra Road Area “A” 

(All as shown on attached Schedule “A”) 

AND WHEREAS the City Council has heard the objections of such individuals or 

interested parties as appeared or made written submission before it at the Hearing held 

on the 14th day of December, 2009. 


PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, DULY ASSEMBLED, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 

1. That a certain parcel or tract of land in the City of Lethbridge being registered as 

a road allowance described as follows, is hereby closed, that is to say: 

Plan 0914112 

Extra Road Area “A” 

(All as shown on attached Schedule “A”) 

2. Upon registration of this Bylaw in the Land Titles Office for the Southern Alberta 

Land Registration District and the issuance of a Certificate of Title to the City of 

Lethbridge, the City is hereby authorized to hold, sell or lease all or a portion of 

1

the said lands. 

3. This Bylaw shall come into full force and effect on the date of final passing 

thereof. 

READ A FIRST TIME this day of , A.D. 2009 

______________________________ __________________________ 


READ A SECOND TIME this day of , A.D. 2009 

________________________________ __________________________ 


READ A THIRD TIME this day of , A.D. 2009 

_____________________________ __________________________ 


2

BYLAW 5622 

----------- 


TO DESIGNATE THE VENDOME HOTEL 

AT 110 – 8 STREET SOUTH, LETHBRIDGE 

AS A MUNICIPAL HISTORIC RESOURCE 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

WHEREAS Section 26 of the Historical Resources Act, R.S.A. 2000 permits 

council to designate any historic resource within a municipality whose 

preservation Council considers to be in the public interest, together with any land 

in or on which it is located, as a Municipal Historic Resource; 

AND WHEREAS the preservation of the Vendome Hotel located on at 110 – 8 

Street South, Lethbridge on Plan 4353S, Block 8, Lots 17 and 18 appears to be 

in the public interest as described in the attached Schedule “A” Statement of 

Significance and Description of Character Defining Elements; 


PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, DULY ASSEMBLED, HEREBY ENACTS AS 

FOLLOWS: 

1. The City of Lethbridge is authorized to designate the Vendome Hotel 

located on Plan 4353S, Block 8, Lots 17 and 18 in the City of Lethbridge, 

Province of Alberta as a Municipal Historic Resource. 

2. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute any necessary 

documents on behalf of the City of Lethbridge in support of the Municipal Historic 

Resource designation. 

3. No person shall make alterations or repairs to the designated resource 

which have the effect of diminishing the enumerated Character Defining 

Elements. 

4. 1022760 Alberta Ltd., the owner of the property described in paragraph 

one shall accept total liability and hold harmless The City of Lethbridge from and 

against all financial and/or economic losses, suits, charges and claims for 

compensation or damages in any manner arising from the 

1

designation. 

5. This Bylaw shall come into full force and effect on the date of final passing 

thereof. 

READ A FIRST TIME this day of , A.D. 2009 

______________________________ __________________________ 


READ A SECOND TIME this day of , A.D. 2009 

________________________________ __________________________ 


READ A THIRD TIME this day of , A.D. 2009 

_____________________________ __________________________ 


2


Statement of Significance 

Vendome Hotel 

110 – 8 Street South, 

Lethbridge, Alberta 

Description of the Historic Place 

The Vendome Hotel, located at 110 – 8 Street South is a two-storey commercial 

building. 

Character Defining Elements 

The character defining elements as expressed in the form, massing, and 

materials of the 1910 two-storey commercial building such as: 

� The flat roof 

� The common bond red brick cladding 

� The flat parapet, stepped on the side facades 

� The brick pilasters 

� The corbelled cornice 

� The rowlock windowsills 

� The ghost image of the painted signage on the side of the building that 

reads, “ALBERTA ROOMS” 

� The pattern, style and construction of all original window and door 

openings 

3

BYLAW 5624 

¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨ 


PASSED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF 

THE SAFETY CODES ACT OF ALBERTA 

¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨ 

WHEREAS the Legislature of the Province of Alberta has passed the Safety Codes Act, 

Chapter S-1 2000, Revised Statutes of Alberta, as amended; 

AND WHEREAS the City of Lethbridge is an accredited municipality; 

AND WHEREAS pursuant to Section 66(3) of the Safety Codes Act, the City of 

Lethbridge as an accredited municipality may make Bylaws; 

a) Respecting fees for anything issued or any material or service provided 

pursuant to this Act, and 

b) Respecting the carrying out of its powers and duties as an accredited 

municipality. 

NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE, DULY 

ASSEMBLED, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 

1. This Bylaw shall be known as “The City of Lethbridge Building Permit Bylaw” 

2. In this Bylaw: 

a) “ACT” means The Safety Codes Act, Statues of Alberta as amended. 

b) “ACCREDITED MUNICIPALITY” means a municipality that is designated 

as an accredited municipality pursuant to the Safety Codes Act 

c) “SAFETY CODES OFFICER” means an individual designated as a Safety 

Codes Officer pursuant to the Safety Codes Act. 

1

d) All definitions contained in the Safety Codes Act shall have a similar 

meaning when used in this Bylaw. 

3. It is the purpose of this Bylaw to stipulate the conditions, requirements and fees 

for permits for the use, occupancy, relocation, construction or renovation of a 

building, or for the addition to a building, or for the reconstruction of a building 

that has been damaged by fire, earthquake or other cause. 

4. (1) Safety Codes Officers are hereby authorized and directed to enforce all 

provisions of the Bylaw. 

(2) The Manager, Inspection Services shall keep an accurate account of all 

permits issued and all fees collected and received under this Bylaw. 

5. (1) No person shall commence the use, occupancy, relocation, construction, 

renovation, addition, demolition or reconstruction of any building without first 

obtaining a permit from a Safety Codes Officer to do so. 

(2) A permit is not required for: 

a) Painting and decorating. 

b) Minor repairs not exceeding TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED 

($2500.00) DOLLARS in value or a single storey accessory building 

not greater than 10m² in building area providing it does not create a 

hazard and where matters affecting health and safety are not 

involved. 

c) Repair or alterations to any heating, ventilation or air conditioning 

system which are of a minor nature and which, in the opinion of the 

Safety Codes Officer, will not hinder the satisfactory operation of the 

system and does not involve the health and safety of the occupants 

of the building. 

6. To obtain a permit, an applicant shall first file with a Safety Codes Officer an 

application in writing on the prescribed form and each application shall: 

1) Identify and describe the work to be covered by the permit for which the 

application was made. 

2

2) Describe the land on which the proposed work is to be done by a legal 

description and when available by a street address that will readily identify 

the location of the proposed work. 

3) Show the use or occupancy of the building. 

4) Be accompanied by the required sets of plans and specifications in the 

form required by Section 7 below. 

5) Provide complete documentation to accurately establish the valuation of 

the proposed work. 

6) Give such other information as may be required by the Act. 

7. 1) Plans and Specifications shall be drawn to scale on substantial paper, and 

shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the nature and extent of the work proposed 

and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of the Act. 

2) Each set of plans shall state the building address, the name and address 

of the owner of the building, the name and address of the person who prepared 

the plans and when an agent represents the owner the name and address of the 

agent. 

3) Each set of plans shall include a site plan showing the actual dimensions 

of the lot or property and the location of the proposed work in relation to the lot or 

property lines and must include dimensioned set backs from all streets. 

4) If requested by a Safety Codes Officer, the applicant shall include with 

each set of plans, a survey certificate completed by an Alberta Land Surveyor 

showing the information required. 

5) If requested by a Safety Codes Officer, the applicant shall submit test 

results and all other evidence deemed necessary to show the work will be carried 

out in accordance with the Act. 

8. 1) Plans and specifications may be circulated by a Safety Codes Officer to 

other Departments of the City and Province to be examined for compliance with 

Orders, Regulations and Bylaws under their jurisdiction. 

3

2) Where an application for a permit has been made and the proposed work 

set out in the application conforms to this Bylaw and the Act a permit shall be 

issued provided the appropriate fee has first been paid. 

3) Plans which have been submitted for examination for which no permit is 

issued, and on which no action is taken by the owner for ninety (90) days, may 

be destroyed. 

4) The issuance of a permit or an examination of plans and specifications 

shall not be construed to be a permit for, or approval of, a contravention of any 

provision of the Act. 

5) No permit, presuming to give authority to contravene the provisions of the 

Act shall be valid except in so far as the work or use it authorizes is lawful. 

6) The issuance of a permit based upon plans and specifications shall not 

prevent a Safety Codes Officer from thereafter requiring the correction of work 

being carried out there under when a contravention of any provisions of the Act 

or of this Bylaw takes place. 

7) Every permit issued by a Safety Codes Officer shall expire and become 

null and void if the work authorized by the permit is not commenced within ninety 

(90) days from the date of issuance of the permit or if the work authorized by the 

permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of one hundred and twenty (120) 

days at any time after the work is commenced. 

8) If it appears to a Safety Codes Officer that special circumstances exist, he 

may extend the period of validity of the building permit when a written request 

with a satisfactory explanation is submitted with the prescribed fee. 

9) The Safety Codes Officer may refuse to issue further permits to a person 

who fails to obtain a permit for previous work, until such permit has been 

obtained by that person along with the prescribed fee. 

9. 1) Notwithstanding any other provisions contained in this Bylaw a Safety 

Codes Officer, upon receiving an application for a permit required by this Bylaw, 

may grant permission for the applicant to carry out preparatory operations before 

plans are thoroughly examined and approved and before a permit required 

hereunder is issued if it appears to him that there will be no requirement for any 

change in the size or position of the building. 

4

2) The Safety Codes Officer may refuse to issue further permits to any 

person who fails to obtain a permit for previous work, until such permit has been 

obtained by that person. 

3) The Safety Codes Officer may refuse to issue any further permits to an 

applicant who is in contravention of the requirements of the City of Lethbridge 

Quality Management Plan, including incomplete projects. 

4) Notwithstanding permission given by a Safety Codes Officer to allow 

preparatory operations to be carried out on a building before a permit is issued, 

the applicant: 

a) Shall not in carrying out the preparatory work contravene any 

provision of this Bylaw, any other Bylaw of the City or the Act. 

b) Shall not proceed beyond the stage of operations indicated by the 

Safety Codes Officer; and 

c) Shall be solely liable for all loss or expense incurred by him in the 

event that subsequent examination of the plans and application 

indicates that the building may not, in fact, be erected as shown. 

10. 1) No person shall without prior consent, in writing, of a Safety Codes Officer: 

a) Alter, erase or modify any drawing or specifications included with 

an application for a permit made pursuant to this Bylaw; or 

b) Perform any work differing from or enlarging the work for which a 

permit has been issued pursuant to this Bylaw or temporary 

permission has been given pursuant to Section 9. 

c) Breach of any of the conditions upon which the permit is issued. 

2) If before the work has been commenced or during the progress thereof it 

is desired to deviate from the application, approved drawings or specifications, 

notice of such intention to deviate shall be made in writing to a Safety Codes 

Officer whose consent shall be obtained before such deviation may be made. 

3) If a Safety Codes Officer after receiving a notice of intention to deviate 

pursuant to Subsection (2) considers it necessary, a new revised application, 

together with new or revised drawings and specifications along with the 

prescribed fee or as the Safety Codes Officer may deem necessary to desirable 

shall be furnished before a revised permit or consent to a deviation to an existing 

permit is issued by a Safety Codes Officer. 

5

11. 1) No person shall install, alter, repair or replace a heating or ventilation 

system or equipment without first obtaining a permit. 

2) Only the following shall be eligible to be issued a permit for the work 

described in Subsection (1): 

a) A heating contractor who is in possession of a valid certificate of 

proficiency in the heating trade as issued by the Apprenticeship and 

Industry Training Division of the Advanced Education and 

Technology Department of the Province of Alberta. 

b) A firm, company or corporation which employs a person as 

described in paragraph (a); or 

c) A person who in the opinion of a Safety Codes Officer knows the 

work involved in carrying out personally any heating in or about a 

detached single family dwelling which is or will be owned and 

occupied by such person. 

3) Every application for a permit shall: 

a) be made in the form prescribed by the authority having jurisdiction. 

b) include sufficient copies as requested of the specifications and 

scale drawings showing the work that is to be carried out. 

c) contain any and all other information necessary to establish 

compliance with this Bylaw or as required by a Safety Codes 

Officer. 

12. No person shall occupy or permit the occupancy by any person of any building or 

part thereof or permit any change in the existing occupancy classification of a 

building without first obtaining permission in writing from a Safety Codes Officer. 

13. 1) A Safety Codes Officer may by notice in writing suspend or revoke a 

permit if the permit has been issued: 

a) In error 

b) On the basis of incorrect information supplied. 

c) In contravention of any provision of the Act or of this Bylaw. 

6

2) Any person who tenders a permit fee pursuant to this Bylaw and is 

subsequently unable to do the work set out in the permit and who has not started 

the work, may for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of the permit request, 

in writing, that his permit be cancelled. Should the permit be cancelled, a refund 

of one-half (½) of the permit fee shall be made. A minimum of ONE HUNDRED 

($100) DOLLARS will be retained. 

14. 1) The fee for each permit shall be paid at the time of application is 

submitted. 

2) A Safety Codes Officer may place a value on the cost of the work for the 

purpose of determining the permit fee. In determining such fee, a Safety Codes 

Officer may require an applicant to submit an executed contract or bona fide 

estimate of the cost of the work when submitting the application. The valuation is 

to include all labor and materials and all lighting, heating, ventilation, water 

supply, plumbing, electrical, fire sprinklers, elevator equipment therein and 

thereon. 

3) If no work, including excavation, has been started before the issuance of a 

permit, the fee for the permit for the relocation, construction or demolition shall be 

as set out in the attached Schedule “A” which forms a part of this Bylaw. 

4) If the documents submitted for the application for a permit contain 

substantial errors or omissions and the documents have to be re-submitted for 

examination, a fee equal to one quarter (¼) of the amount required under 

Subsection (3) may be charged for each and every re-examination. 

5) The fee for a heating, ventilation or air conditioning permit shall be as set 

out in the attached Schedule “B” which forms a part of this Bylaw. 

6) If any work, including excavation, has been started before the issuance of 

a permit or verbal permission to proceed has been granted by the Safety Codes 

Officer, the permit fee shall be double the fee required by the Subsection (3), (4), 

or (5). 

15. Any person or corporation guilty of an infraction or breach of any of the 

provisions of this Bylaw shall upon conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding 

Ten Thousand ($10,000.00) Dollars. 

16. It is the intention of the City Council that each separate provision of this Bylaw 

shall be deemed independent of all other provisions herein and it is further the 

intention of City Council that if any provisions of this Bylaw be declared invalid, all 

7

other provisions thereof shall remain valid and enforceable. 

17. Bylaw No. 4819 is hereby repealed. 

18. This Bylaw shall come into force and effect on the 1 st of January, 2010. 

READ A FIRST TIME this _____day of ____________________________, A.D. 2009 

______________________________ ______________________________ 


READ A SECOND TIME this _____ day of __________________________, A.D. 2009 

_______________________________ _______________________________ 


READ A THIRD TIME this _______ day of _________________________, A.D. 2009 

_______________________________ _______________________________ 


8


BUILDING PERMIT FEES 

1. The building permit fee shall depend upon the cost of the proposed erection, 

alterations or repair of the building, based on the following fee: 

a. $6.50 for each $1000.00 or part thereof with a minimum of $100.00 for 

residential permits 

b. $7.00 for each $1000.00 or part thereof for commercial fees 

2. When an applicant applies for a permit to demolish a building, he/she shall pay to 

the authority having jurisdiction a flat fee of $40.00 plus $.60/m² of the buildings 

gross floor area, less the basement area. 

3. When an applicant applies for a permit to move a building that person shall also 

apply for a foundation permit and shall provide the required information to the 

Safety Codes Officer. 

4. When a building permit has been filed with deficiencies noted and a re-inspection 

is requested an additional charge of $100.00 for the first recalled inspection, 

$200.00 for the second recalled inspection and $500.00 for the third and 

subsequent inspections shall be paid to the authority having jurisdiction prior to 

the re-inspection. 

5. When an applicant applies for a permit to install a fire alarm, heat or smoke 

detector system, he/she shall pay to the authority having jurisdiction a fee based 

on construction value at $7.00 per $1000.00. 

6. When a change of use, renovations to a building or the construction of a new 

building occur a Safety Codes Officer may request an occupancy permit. The 

building owner or designated representative must apply and pay to the authority 

having jurisdiction $60.00 and to be paid at the time of permit application. 

ADDITIONAL FEES 

1. When an inspection is requested and the Safety Codes Officer finds the work is 

not ready for inspection, or the work or equipment does not meet the required 

standards, or the Safety Codes officer is unable to gain access for the inspection, 

an additional charge of $100.00 for the first recalled inspection, $200.00 for the 

second recalled inspection, and $500.00 for the third and subsequent 

inspections. 

9

SCHEDULE “B” – continued 

2. When a Safety Codes Officer finds that work has commenced before a permit 

has been obtained, the permit shall be double the amount as set out in Schedule 

“A”. 

3. When an applicant submits a request pursuant to section 10(3), the Safety 

Codes Officer may impose an additional permit fee for residential permits not to 

exceed $150.00, and for commercial permits not to exceed $5000.00 

1. FORCED AIR SYSTEM 

HEATING PERMIT FEES 

a) For each heating unit and/or system 

installed in a single family or two family 

dwelling, including replacement, 

alterations or extensions to the system or 

unit 

b) For each heating unit and/or system 

installation in other than a single or two 

family dwelling, including replacement, 

alterations or extensions to the system 

unit 

c) For each heating unit heat exchanger 

replacement 

2. STEAM, HOT WATER AND RADIANT HEATING SYSTEMS 

a) For each heating unit and/or system 

installed in a single or two family dwelling 

b) For each heating appliance and/or 

system installed in other than a single or 

two family dwelling (fee to be determined 

by B.T.U. input of heating appliances) 

10 

$55.00 

As per the 

Commercial Fee Rate 

schedule under the 

gas by-law. 

$30.00 

$40.00 

100, 000 BTU input or less $70.00 

100,001 – 200,000 BTU input $75.00 

200, 001 – 400, 000 BTU input $80.00 

400,001 – 1, 000, 000 BTU input $85.00 

Each additional 1, 000, 000 BTU or

SCHEDULE “B” – CONTINUED 


c) For each heating system altered or 

extended, the fee shall be as per above 

rates. 

d) For each steam and/or hot water coil 

installed 

3. For each mechanical exhaust system 

(Commercial) either new installation or 

replacement of an existing system fees 

shall be based on construction value and 

calculated at $7.00 per $1000.00 

11 

$60.00 

$15.00 

4. For each bathroom exhaust, kitchen exhaust 

and dryer exhaust system, in residential $55.00/System 

apartments exceeding five (5) dwelling units 

5. Installation or alteration of any automatic fire 

suppression system zone or part thereof. $75.00 

Plus for each sprinkler head $0.75 

6. Installation or alteration of an air to air exchanger $55.00 

ADDITIONAL FEES 

1. When an inspection is request and the Safety Codes Officer finds the work 

not ready for inspection, or the work or equipment does not meet the required 

standards, or the Safety Codes Officer is unable to gain access for the 

inspection, an additional charge of $100.00 for the first recalled inspection, 

$200.00 for the second recalled inspection, $500.00 for the third and all 

subsequent inspections until the infractions are corrected. 

2. When a Safety Codes Officer finds that work has commenced before a permit 

has been obtained, the permit fee shall be double the amount as set out in 

Schedule “B”

CITY COUNCIL MEETING - City of Lethbridge

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?