News

Good afternoon Mayor Crouse and City Councillors.  As you know, my name is Charlene Zoltenko, and I am the 2011 Chair of the St. Albert Chamber of Commerce. 
 
We last spoke to the Future Industrial Land Requirements Study prior to your recent decision to move forward with the Avenir/SAS application, which effectively removed the most desirable location for light industrial land zoning in St. Albert.  However, we know that this study is now going to be referred to the Planning Department to prepare a report outlining the best location for light industrial lands, given the reality of our situation today.
 
We are completely supportive of the Future Industrial Land Requirements Study, as a document to guide us through the maze of “how to get where we need to go” when it comes to sustainability and economic prosperity for St. Albert into the future. There are a few significant points in this work that we would like to draw to your attention as being particularly valuable in moving forward:
 
1. The first quote in the Executive Summary we would like to discuss is:
a. “The City of St. Albert has the opportunity to turn itself into a more sustainable community with the addition of a greater           industrial tax base that will not only improve the City’s fiscal position, but also, through a stronger local employment base,       enhance the lifestyle of its residents.  The degree to which St. Albert can capitalize on its potential will depend significantly       on the competitiveness of its industrial land base.”
 
Elsewhere in the study it states as follows:

“Studies throughout North America have shown expanding the tax base through residential development is neither a responsible nor feasible economic development strategy for any area.  Overall, non-residential and non-retail development provides the key to creating balanced, complete, and sustainable communities.  The continued growth in a community’s export-based economic sectors is critical to the continued prosperity of the community.”  (end of quote)
 
In our research, we have found a recent study done by Nichols Applied Management for another Capital Region community in which they state as follows:
 
“A recent cost-of-service analysis undertaken by Nichols Applied Management for a range of urban and rural Alberta municipalities has shown that non-residential properties typically yield municipal revenues that are higher than associated expenditures.  Conversely, residential properties generally yield municipal revenues that are lower than associated expenditures.
 
For example, the analysis found that for every dollar of revenue from non-residential developments, the range of municipal service expenditures was usually between $0.20 and $0.60.  In comparison, the analysis found that for every dollar of revenue from residential developments, the range of municipal expenditures was most likely in the range of $1.10 to $1.25.
 
This cost-of-service analysis, similar to others which have been undertaken in recent years, highlights the need to balance strong residential growth with continued growth in non-residential assessment.  This will remain a significant challenge for most of the municipalities in Alberta who have residential to non-residential assessment splits higher than, or in the range of 80/20.”  (end of analysis quote)
 
This particular report that I refer to, entitled Partnerships for Prosperity, was done for another municipality, and it clearly and strongly supports the findings and conclusions of our Industrial Land Requirements Study done by Millier Dickinson Blais and Watson & Associates Economists that is before us today.
 
In the case of St. Albert, our goal of an 80/20 assessment split is a long-term statement of our intent to turn our current ratio into a healthier one that will promote our sustainability into the future.  In many other Alberta communities, an 80/20 split would be deemed a dismal failure – for us it would be a great success.
 
Our report states:  “Whether or not 80/20 assessment split is achieved is irrelevant to the city’s future economic prosperity.  What is more critical to St. Albert is non-residential investment offering high-quality employment opportunities for local residents, spin-off economic opportunities for local business, and positive fiscal benefits for the municipality.”
 
2. The second quote from the Executive Summary that we wish to highlight is:
 
a. “Before looking for corrective mechanisms, there must first be an attitude change that industrial development is important to the community’s sustainability. Even more so, it must be believed that the community’s economic, social and environmental sustainability is impossible without industrial development. Arguments in favour can be found throughout this report.”
 
We are very supportive of this statement, as being the first and most important action that must be taken to see any success.
 
In this report, there is an identification of the Internal and External Perceptions that clearly show where we need to focus our efforts:

a.     Future development, based on current trends, is likely to be small scale and, to some extent, inwardly oriented
          (service- based).  People do not want heavy industry, but legitimate opportunities are being missed because St. Albert                is not ready.
b.     Existing city regulations can be a barrier to appropriate types of development, and, to some extent, may not be                            supportive of light industrial development.
c.     Past decisions have protected quality of life and made St. Albert an excellent place to live; however, they have also                   made it difficult to encourage future development in some sectors.
d.     Being part of the Capital Region has it benefits, but also exposes St. Albert to its strongest competitors and the                             challenges in the Capital Region.
e.     Infrastructure improvements in the area, like Anthony Henday and to some extent Ray Gibbon Drive, are “game                            changers” that will stimulate development.
f.      Developers feel that the City is not as receptive as it could be, but most developers are unsure of whether City staff,                City Council, or both are the issue.
g.     St. Albert has some great assets that can draw additional light industrial development.
 
It takes a complete commitment to an Attitude change in order for us to move forward in any meaningful way.  This will mean a culture change for the City as a corporation, and for the key decision-makers both in City administration and on City Council.  It is quite an easy task to speak glowingly of a commitment to economic development and sustainability (all of you did prior to the last election) . . . it is quite another matter to make the kind of hard decisions at every opportunity that lead in that direction.  Without the Attitude of belief in the critical importance of light industrial development, and the positive enthusiasm that is needed to take us in that direction, this report clearly states that we cannot succeed.  We need to understand and believe totally that industrial growth subsidizes quality of life.
 
We believe that there are some “small wins” that will retain and attract light industrial businesses to our community that are available without waiting for any additional studies.  We would like to work with you to make these changes happen so that our Chamber members are confident that efforts are being made to help them keep and grow their businesses in their community of choice – St. Albert.
 
With the projected economic growth in Northern Alberta, the potential of upgraders on our doorstep, the shift of light air traffic to Villeneuve, the close proximity to the CN Intermodal facility, and the planned completion of Ray Gibbon Drive connecting to the Anthony Henday, we are truly the best positioned to be the community that serves the North.  The City of Red Deer took advantage of the traffic bypassing the City on Highway 2 by working together with the County to zone light industrial development along Highway 2.  We have a similar opportunity with the future redesignation of Ray Gibbon Drive as Highway 2.  To date, all we see adjoining this major thoroughfare is residential development.
 
We encourage you to consider the model used in other communities where success is a way of life in acquiring land for light industrial development.  We need to operate under our plan, and not be stopped in our tracks by landowners willing to sit on their land and wait for residential zoning.  We know there are practices that work successfully in other municipalities.  We understand that the City of Edmonton has just purchased a large parcel of land on our boundaries, where they are poised to resell to owner/users and developers.  Are we in a position to move our land development forward in this way?  We know it’s effective and brings good results in cities that are aggressive and progressive in attracting light industrial development.
 
In conclusion, this Future Industrial Land Requirements Study is an excellent document that we can use as a guide in plotting our plans for the future sustainability of St. Albert.  Planning and Development can now move ahead in preparing their recommendations based on the findings of this report.  By the time this second report is received, you should have all you need to make the big decisions and get things moving towards putting our community on the right track.
 
We sincerely trust that one of the options you put forward to Planning and Development to guide their work is the inclusion of the recommended 290 to 360 gross ha as the land requirement.  You may, in your wisdom, also wish to recommend that they include their recommendation for a location that provides for a minimum of five years’ supply of shovel-ready industrial land that is available and ready for sale.
 
The St. Albert Chamber of Commerce is ready and willing to assist you in any possible way to jump-start the St. Albert economy and move towards sustainability for our city into the future.
 
I’d like to leave you with a couple of quotes from the City of St. Albert Economic Development Master Plan adopted by City Council in 2004:

·        Sound, long-term economic development ensures that future generations have the community resources to support a            similar quality of life enjoyed today.
·        Economic Development isn’t one person’s job . . . it is everyone’s job in one way or another
·        Successful, sustainable cities ensure that, in their short-term quest for wealth, they don’t squander the assets that                    define them.
·        Long-term community sustainability requires a diversified revenue base.  No community can survive on residential                    property taxes alone. 
 
I look forward to answering any questions you may have.