Opinion

Red Deer’s Hazlett Lake is “Opportunity Lost”?

Published

8 years ago

8 minute read

A lot of words have been written about our state of affairs in Red Deer. The fall-out from a depressed economy, being in a bust portion of a boom-bust cycle. Our declining population. Talk of diversifying our economy away from our continued reliance on the energy sector. Words are not actions, and it is worrisome. Is it fear or lack of vision that impedes us from following up on the words?
No matter how we dress it up, Red Deer is shrinking. Blame the economy, the stars or any number of reasons but it could have been different. Lethbridge is slightly bit smaller in population and area than Red Deer but Lethbridge is growing in this same economy. Lethbridge invested and is today investing in areas appealing to young families including recreational facilities. Lethbridge has a history of investing in facilities to encourage growth, education and tourism. They turned a man made slough into Henderson Lake Park and has never looked back.
Red Deer has a greater opportunity in having a real natural lake. Will Red Deer build a park? NO, they will likely plan on houses, and apartment buildings that may never get built, unless we go into a boom portion of the boom-bust cycle. This is the simplistic, easiest and safest plan with a low return on investment. It ignores the high-profile location and possibilities of the lake, but it has less risk. A wall will be built to hide the lake from Hwy 2’s traffic.
Remember, Hazlett Lake is a natural lake that covers a surface area of 0.45 km2 (0.17 mi2), has an average depth of 3 meters (10 feet). Hazlett Lake has a total shore line of 4 kilometers (2 miles). It is 108.8 acres in size. Located in the north-west sector of Red Deer.
Currently on the NADG.com website we will see a residential community around Hazlett Lake. Encompassing about 12 percent of the land north of 11A currently up for development. Phase I of probably 10 phases, will be home to 5,000 residents with the nearest high school on the other side of city on the east end. A K-8 school site to be located north-east of Hazlett Lake currently planned for a later phase.
On nadg.com:
“Hazlett Lake is a 350-acre master planned residential community located in North Red Deer at the intersection of Alberta’s busiest Highway -QE2 and Highway 11A. The community will consist of over 2000 new residential units and will be Phase 1 of Red Deer’s North of 11A Major Area Structural Plan. Additionally, this development will be the first new housing project in North Red Deer in 10 years”
So, please, the next time you drive north on Hwy 2, as you pass the Hwy 11A turnoff, look out the passenger window and check out Hazlett Lake.
That lake is part of the City of Red Deer, and is a portion of a Major Area Structure Plan north of Hwy 11A previously mentioned. So as you drive by, think of what you would like to see done with your lake.
One scenario that could compliment the lake and address the desire for a regional aquatic centre and a 50-metre pool is turning the proposed community centre on the northeast corner of the lake into a Collicutt Centre type of complex.
What is more natural than having an aquatic centre on the lake? You could have your 50-metre pool inside, a lake for scuba diving, kayaking, canoeing, paddle boating, swimming, under-water photography, fishing, sun tanning, races, to name but a few.
The winter could see skating, hockey, to complement the indoor ice rink, as well as ice-fishing and ice sculptures and sleigh rides, again, to name but a few. This would all be visible to the traffic on Hwy 2.
This Major Area Structure Plan takes in much more than a lake. It takes in about 3,000 acres of land for residential, commercial and industrial development. The potential for residential growth if maintained at 17.7 units per hectare and 2.33 residents per unit could see 20,000 new residents if the area split equally between residential, commercial and industrial users.
Collicutt Centre is the top used community venue in Red Deer. It is used by almost 60 per cent of the population. It is in the southeast corner of Red Deer and was a major impetus in the development of the southeast corner of Red Deer. Blackfalds used their new Abbey Centre as an impetus for very strong residential developments that have recently outshone Red Deer’s residential developments.
Would a regional aquatic centre built on Hazlett Lake kick-start development in Red Deer’s north at a time of a slowdown in the energy sector? Would a Hazlett Lake regional aquatic centre, visible from Hwy 2, create a tourism trade that would bolster Red Deer’s hospitality industry? Would a Hazlett Lake regional aquatic centre enhance our position as a sports destination? Would a Hazlett Lake regional aquatic centre ensure that everyone would have an opportunity to enjoy the lake? I hope so.
Then another option would be to close it off to the public, develop around it, build a private boathouse for the home owners holding passes, and build expensive homes to hide the lake from the citizens and allow developers to make huge profits.
It is up to the citizens to let the city know what they would like to see, but time is running out.
I think the Hazlett Lake is worth preserving, and I hope that when my grandchildren drive north on Hwy 2 just past the Hwy 11A turnoff, that they will be able to look out the passenger side window and see Hazlett Lake.
Perhaps they will be able to tan on a beach, watch a naturescape in action, paddle a canoe, swim, skate, maybe have a bonfire on a beach and roast a marshmallow. We do need to act now, before the plans get too entrenched in the least desired direction.
Please contact the city before it is too late.

Follow Author

Most Canadians say retaliatory tariffs on American goods contribute to raising the price of essential goods at home

Alberta / 41 mins ago

Cross-Canada NGL corridor will stretch from B.C. to Ontario

Business / 1 hour ago

B.C. premier wants a private pipeline—here’s how you make that happen

Business

Most Canadians say retaliatory tariffs on American goods contribute to raising the price of essential goods at home

Published on July 12, 2025

Todayville

77 per cent say Canada’s tariffs on U.S. products increase the price of consumer goods
72 per cent say that their current tax bill hurts their standard of living

A new MEI-Ipsos poll published this morning reveals a clear disconnect between Ottawa’s high-tax, high-spending approach and Canadians’ level of satisfaction.

“Canadians are not on board with Ottawa’s fiscal path,” says Samantha Dagres, communications manager at the MEI. “From housing to trade policy, Canadians feel they’re being squeezed by a government that is increasingly an impediment to their standard of living.”

More than half of Canadians (54 per cent) say Ottawa is spending too much, while only six per cent think it is spending too little.

A majority (54 per cent) also do not believe federal dollars are being effectively allocated to address Canada’s most important issues, and a similar proportion (55 per cent) are dissatisfied with the transparency and accountability in the government’s spending practices.

As for their own tax bills, Canadians are equally skeptical. Two-thirds (67 per cent) say they pay too much income tax, and about half say they do not receive good value in return.

Provincial governments fared even worse. A majority of Canadians say they receive poor value for the taxes they pay provincially. In Quebec, nearly two-thirds (64 per cent) of respondents say they are not getting their money’s worth from the provincial government.

Not coincidentally, Quebecers face the highest marginal tax rates in North America.

On the question of Canada’s response to the U.S. trade dispute, nearly eight in 10 Canadians (77 per cent) agree that Ottawa’s retaliatory tariffs on American products are driving up the cost of everyday goods.

“Canadians understand that tariffs are just another form of taxation, and that they are the ones footing the bill for any political posturing,” adds Ms. Dagres. “Ottawa should favour unilateral tariff reduction and increased trade with other nations, as opposed to retaliatory tariffs that heap more costs onto Canadian consumers and businesses.”

On the issue of housing, 74 per cent of respondents believe that taxes on new construction contribute directly to unaffordability.

All of this dissatisfaction culminates in 72 per cent of Canadians saying their overall tax burden is reducing their standard of living.

“Taxpayers are not just ATMs for government – and if they are going to pay such exorbitant taxes, you’d think the least they could expect is good service in return,” says Ms. Dagres. “Canadians are increasingly distrustful of a government that believes every problem can be solved with higher taxes.”

A sample of 1,020 Canadians 18 years of age and older was polled between June 17 and 23, 2025. The results are accurate to within ± 3.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

The results of the MEI-Ipsos poll are available here.

* * *

The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.

Business

B.C. premier wants a private pipeline—here’s how you make that happen

Published on July 12, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

At the federal level, the Carney government should scrap several Trudeau-era policies including Bill C-69 (which introduced vague criteria into energy project assessments including the effects on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors”)

The Eby government has left the door (slightly) open to Alberta’s proposed pipeline to the British Columbia’s northern coast. Premier David Eby said he isn’t opposed to a new pipeline that would expand access to Asian markets—but he does not want government to pay for it. That’s a fair condition. But to attract private investment for pipelines and other projects, both the Eby government and the Carney government must reform the regulatory environment.

First, some background.

Trump’s tariffs against Canadian products underscore the risks of heavily relying on the United States as the primary destination for our oil and gas—Canada’s main exports. In 2024, nearly 96 per cent of oil exports and virtually all natural gas exports went to our southern neighbour. Clearly, Canada must diversify our energy export markets. Expanded pipelines to transport oil and gas, mostly produced in the Prairies, to coastal terminals would allow Canada’s energy sector to find new customers in Asia and Europe and become less reliant on the U.S. In fact, following the completion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion between Alberta and B.C. in May 2024, exports to non-U.S. destinations increased by almost 60 per cent.

However, Canada’s uncompetitive regulatory environment continues to create uncertainty and deter investment in the energy sector. According to a 2023 survey of oil and gas investors, 68 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment in Canada compared to only 41 per cent of respondents for the U.S. And 59 per cent said the cost of regulatory compliance deters investment compared to 42 per cent in the U.S.

When looking at B.C. specifically, investor perceptions are even worse. Nearly 93 per cent of respondents for the province said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment while 92 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over protected lands deters investment. Among all Canadian jurisdictions included in the survey, investors said B.C. has the greatest barriers to investment.

How can policymakers help make B.C. more attractive to investment?

At the federal level, the Carney government should scrap several Trudeau-era policies including Bill C-69 (which introduced vague criteria into energy project assessments including the effects on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors”), Bill C-48 (which effectively banned large oil tankers off B.C.’s northern coast, limiting access to Asian markets), and the proposed cap on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the oil and gas sector (which will likely lead to a reduction in oil and gas production, decreasing the need for new infrastructure and, in turn, deterring investment in the energy sector).

At the provincial level, the Eby government should abandon its latest GHG reduction targets, which discourage investment in the energy sector. Indeed, in 2023 provincial regulators rejected a proposal from FortisBC, the province’s main natural gas provider, because it did not align with the Eby government’s emission-reduction targets.

Premier Eby is right—private investment should develop energy infrastructure. But to attract that investment, the province must have clear, predictable and competitive regulations, which balance environmental protection with the need for investment, jobs and widespread prosperity. To make B.C. and Canada a more appealing destination for investment, both federal and provincial governments must remove the regulatory barriers that keep capital away.