Introductory Meeting for Montgomery Place Local Area Planning Process (LAP)

Thursday May 28, 2015 at St. Dominic School auditorium

Notes by Barb Biddle


The process will take approximately two years, with meetings in the community the first year. Then the LAP will be drafted with consultation of community committee.

  • There will be a series of meetings on various topics; each topic with its own meeting.
  • We will look at the conditions of the community, then determine our vision, the issues and our goals for the future.

After meetings to determine all information and input, the plan will be written up in consultation with the Montgomery Place LAP committee. The final draft will be written after the committee responds to feedback from the community. The final draft will go to:

  1. Municipal Planning Commission
  2. Planning and Development Committee (City)
  3. City Council for approval.

All previous LAPs have resulted in 520 recommendations, which are 70% complete.

Survey Results

  • Proud of neighbourhood and historic roots
  • Love the trees – small town feel
  • Sense of community neighbours and beauty
  • “ No place like it in Saskatoon”

Issues from survey

  • Trains – longer, louder, more frequent
  • Speed of vehicles on narrow streets with no sidewalks
  • Increasing noise of trains and Circle Drive South
  • Infill sympathetic to the historic feel of the neighbourhood
  • Tough to get in or out – disconnect from rest of city – isolated by industry
  • Personal property maintenance/ storage/ business use
  • Safety/crime


  1. Land use – infill
  2. Adjacent use – southwest concept
  3. Traffic/trains
  4. Safety
  5. Municipal services
  6. Parks & recreation
  7. Roads & sidewalks
  8. Heritage & culture
  9. Other – property maintenance/noise/home businesses/speed/parking

A map of the community was presented and it was noted that the boundaries of Montgomery Place include a portion of vacant land west of the community – the city reps indicated these boundaries have always existed. (This was certainly not the case in 1946.) We may want to recommend a change to the boundaries – to exclude this southwest section.