Skip to content

Smart growth boils down to the bottom line

As a former city councillor and member of the former Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, I have held a keen interest in planning and development.

As a former city councillor and member of the former Edmonton Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission, I have held a keen interest in planning and development. I also recently completed a series of planning seminars and courses sponsored by the Edmonton Real Estate Board and the City of Edmonton Planning Department.

Whenever the question of smart growth arises, I note that some of the more experienced people in municipal government always raise the question of the need for critical financial analysis of proposed Area Structure Plans (ASPs) that include smart growth. I also note that the Gazette New Year’s message also directs attention to the fact that St. Albert council is apparently committed to incorporating smart growth in the newly annexed areas. We need to pay attention to what is going on or pay the price in high taxes.

I urge caution in incorporating the smart growth approach to new development. The St. Albert Chamber of Commerce, under the direction of some very able people, has taken a serious and critical review of smart growth as it is proposed by city administration. As a result of this examination, the chamber has raised some serious questions based on what we have heard from official presentations and the chamber’s own independent research. I have also conducted my own research, which included reviewing the results of what I consider to be badly planned smart growth projects in the United States. Many examples exist of smart growth creating demands by developers for subsidization by the taxpayer of these programs.

To its credit, our chamber carefully heard and reviewed the concept presented by city administration, which seems too ‘gung ho’ about smart growth for my liking. We also listened to an acknowledged expert in urban planning in the United States who had some important facts for us to consider before jumping into the smart growth pond. The chamber arranged a teleconference with Randall O’Toole, a senior fellow at a major planning institute and an acknowledged expert in urban planning.

O’Toole reviewed the results of many smart growth projects in several U.S. cities and came up with some startling facts with respect to the financial fallout of unfettered smart growth. He reported on several municipalities that ended up subsidizing smart growth because, when a city adopted smart growth without completing an in-depth financial impact assessment, the results have created huge public debt for new development that ultimately had to be borne by the existing taxpayer. And this could certainly happen here in St. Albert. When developers are required to follow planning directives put forward by municipalities that don’t meet their marketing objectives then developers, as a matter of course, demand that the municipality pick up any shortfall in infrastructure costs.

I carefully listened to a recent presentation on smart growth by one of our senior planning staff and at the end of the presentation, I pointed out that I had not heard one comment with respect to how one could assess the project without any financial analysis. As an aside, I have yet to obtain a detailed response regarding the financial implications of the latest Erin Ridge North ASP here in St. Albert despite a number of requests I have made directly to council.

The smart growth concept is not all bad. In fact, when smart growth concepts are used in older areas under redevelopment plans, they seem to benefit the community both from a planning concept and a financial concept. There are serious questions however as to whether smart growth fits in with newly annexed urban development. O’Toole is of the view that we ought to give more credit to developers and their knowledge and market expertise before we turn our planning administration over to planning development for developers. Developers will still have to stay within the parameters of our municipal and land use bylaws and plans and ASPs will still have to be approved by council. And finally, the bottom line is that any new project must contain an in depth fiscal impact statement to ensure that the development does not become a burden on the existing taxpayers.

Bob Russell, St. Albert

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks