I have visited some major cities around the world, including Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, London, Athens and Istanbul. A city can be a place where diversity and choices produce quality of life experiences. I believe that smart growth could improve the quality of life here in St. Albert.
I have lived in St. Albert for over 40 years; and followed with interest and participated in the smart growth workshops over the last couple of years. It was with dismay that I read about the criticisms of smart growth in Bryan Alary’s article in the Jan. 2 Gazette.
The current development model is, in my view, not sustainable and does not provide enough choices for the people who want to live here. We have given up this city to the automobile and the single-family detached home. I believe that many homeowners in St. Albert purchase single-family detached homes because there are few alternatives. I believe the reason that developers build this type of housing is that many don’t know anything else. A walk, bike or even drive down the “strip” that is St. Albert Trail should be proof enough of the wasteland that we have created with the current development regime. Six to eight lanes of asphalt literally divide this city in two. Large parking lots put pedestrians and automobiles at odds with each other and even automobiles at odds with each other (i.e., Wal-Mart-Home Depot parking lot fiasco).
The smart growth initiative is a process to gain back some balance. We need to deal with the paucity of housing choices, the paucity of transportation choices, the high costs of low-density development and its attendant urban sprawl. If we want to create a better place to live then we need to consciously create that place. The amount of green space in St. Albert is an example of the progressiveness of previous councils and the regulations that helped create a more desirable place to live. It would not happen through something as nebulous as market forces or the whims of developers. Be sure, most developers are more concerned with their bottom line than they are with creating a great place to live. I believe that smart growth is an opportunity to educate the public, developers and members of the chamber of commerce about the benefits of regulated planning.
The major criticisms of smart growth seem to line up along ideological lines. The St. Albert Chamber of Commerce chose to speak to a libertarian (less government is better) critic of smart growth. Because the development of roads, sewers and other utilities has always been subsidized or paid wholly by taxpayers under the current model, criticisms on that point are moot. The free market ideology will not solve the problems of urban sprawl. It will not create a city or community that is a place that citizens can proudly call home.
What is needed is some ideas (and regulations to back up those ideas) that will build a community that provides a diversity of choices in housing and transportation. The smart growth initiative is that set of ideas and regulations that will create a more liveable city and a better quality of life for its citizens.
Ian Sturges, St. Albert
