Bridging our way to a better city

Not only are bridges plenty in Saskatoon, they are also a hot topic these days.  The conversations run all the way from coffee row on up to City Hall.

Again, the reasons are clear.  Saskatoon’s oldest bridge—the “Traffic Bridge”—is condemned.  That bridge opened in 1907 and has not always been sufficiently maintained.  Saskatoon is now looking to replace it at a cost of some $30 million.  Two of the city’s other historic bridges also require significant repairs over the next five years.

At the same time, Saskatoon is looking forward to the opening of the new $250 million “South Bridge” that will finally close the loop of the Circle Drive perimeter expressway.  But before cars have even hit the asphalt on the new South Bridge, serious discussions are underway about building another two bridges to connect the growing industrial areas in Saskatoon’s northwest to the fast growing residential communities across the river in the city’s northeast.

The state of Saskatoon’s fabled bridges is a telling example of the challenge we and many other cities face with infrastructure, especially in times of rapid growth.    How do we both maintain the infrastructure we have while responding to the immense pressure to add new infrastructure to the inventory?

Let’sTOC has put forward some great pieces on the need for engineering innovations to help us build our roads, pipes, and sidewalks in cost-effective and durable ways.  It has also put forward some provocative ideas about innovative financing instruments for how to pay for it, such as the penny tax and ideas for the new LTIP program.  The dimension I am interested in adding to the discussion is how we can effectively reduce the amount of new infrastructure we add in the first place—by changing how we grow as cities.

This is not a new discussion by any means, as pointed out in Pamela Blais’ compelling book “Perverse Cities: Hidden Subsidies, Wonky Policy, and Urban Sprawl.”  In her book Blais explores why—despite almost three decades of debate in North America about the necessities and benefits of more efficient land use practices—many cities are showing fairly dismal results in curbing inefficient outward growth, which also drives demand for more infrastructure.

Her analysis demonstrates that while many cities have “talked the talk” they have not necessarily “walked the walk” of densification and smarter growth.  At best, results have been mixed.  According to Blais, one of the fundamental issues cities have to face is achieving more efficient land use.  This means moving to more accurate pricing of land development and the civic services that are provided to that land once development is complete.

Saskatoon has been wrestling with these questions most recently in the face of a growth boom that started around 2007.  City administration began crunching the numbers on the costs of future growth over the next 50 years under a “business as usual” approach (e.g., adding more lower density and car-dependent neighbourhoods).  This projection quickly revealed that if growth rates stay anywhere near their current pace, there is no way we could pay for all the interchanges, bridges, road expansions, and sewer and water infrastructure required.  And, we would likely face gridlock on many of our existing roads.

So, like many cities, Saskatoon has begun to make paradigm shifts in how we plan our future growth.  After a fairly extensive consultation through a process we called “Saskatoon Speaks” we have launched a new Integrated Growth Plan.  This plan aims to redesign our future growth map to accommodate at least 50,000 citizens (based on projected growth to 2050) through strategic infill within the existing City limits.

That being said, this paradigm shift presents some real challenges in prairie cities like Saskatoon.  Why?  Well, we are used to space.  We don’t have mountains or oceans hemming us in, and we’ve designed our cities to suit that reality—wide roadways with center medians, wide buffers separating arterial roads from neighbourhoods, low density subdivisions with curvilinear streets, and cul-de sacs separated from regional retail malls with expansive parking lots.

We take space for granted.  But, there’s still a price to be paid for it.  Every kilometer of roadway has to be swept and cleared of snow, and the potholes patched.  Every neighbourhood needs to be served by transit in some way, patrolled by the police service, and be within 4 minutes of a firehall.  There also has to be sufficient park space and leisure amenities to provide a quality of life.  Every meter of sidewalk and pipe we build has a limited lifespan, and eventually has to be repaired and replaced.  There are huge costs to do all of this work.

Like many cities, Saskatoon has been working off the notion that “growth pays for growth.”  But this notion has mostly dealt with new neighbourhoods bearing the costs of building the pipes, roads, and parks in the first place.  The costs of maintenance, repair, and operations are tallied afterwards and are generally borne by property taxes.

A recent City of Edmonton report measured the entire cost of a new neighbourhood development, and shows how development charges and new property taxes fall short of paying for the servicing and maintenance of new neighbourhoods.

According to Pamela Blais, one of the biggest culprits in contributing to inefficient growth models in our cities is a “distorted pricing system” that favours inefficient land development.  This has also been detailed by the Canada West Foundation in reports released under its Western Cities Project.  For Blais, the only way to truly achieve efficiency in land development is to truly make growth pay for growth, by charging more for less efficient land developments that are further away and more expensive to service.

Blais points to a number of examples of innovative pricing for land development, including Ottawa and Markham Ontario, both of which have begun charging more for greenfield development than for redevelopment of existing areas.  Last year, the City of Calgary implemented a significant increase to their development charges to better reflect the true costs of building and servicing new neighbourhoods over the long-term.

On her website, Blais also points to new financial instruments such as stormwater levy systems that charge more for users with big parking lots and roofs than those with lots of grass and smaller buildings as a way of generating revenue and establishing more fairness in pricing.  In an earlier Let’sTOC article, “No Longer Oblivious to the Impervious”, Mayor Carl Zehr detailed Kitchener’s experience with such a system.

In Saskatoon we will be implementing such a stormwater utility in 2013, and we are undertaking a full review of our development levies and charges to find ways to ensure that both new growth and infill development charges are structured to better reflect actual costs as part of our integrated growth plan.

It’s no small task to change the way we design cities to use infrastructure more efficiently—especially on the prairies.  One of the critical challenges is to ensure that the design of both infill developments and new neighbourhoods is done in a way that creates great neighbourhoods and high quality of life for residents.  We will have to change the way we get around, and get used to living a little closer together.

Saskatoon is making headway on establishing new policies to ensure infill doesn’t sacrifice existing neighbourhoods.  Just this month City Council adopted a newArchitectural Control District for the fabled Broadway corridor and is currently working on new neighbourhood infill design guidelines and new standards for downtown development through the City Center Plan.  As we see in many of our great cities, the vibrancy of neighbourhoods can improve with a mix of uses and more lively and diverse streets, but it has to be done right.

– By: Charlie Clark, Councillor, City of Saskatoon

Charlie Clark

Charlie Clark was elected to City Council in 2006. He is married to Sarah Buhler. They have two sons, Simon and Benjamin, and a daughter, Rachel.

Charlie has a Bachelor of Education from the University of Toronto and a Master in Environmental Studies from York University. He began his career in Alternative Dispute Resolution, practicing as a Mediator and a Conflict Resolution Trainer in a variety of government, business, and community settings.

More recently, Charlie worked in Community Economic Development and Housing, facilitating projects with the Core Neighbourhood Development Council, Quint Development Corporation, Indigenous People’s Program, Oxfam Canada, and the Saskatchewan Eco-Network.

As a City Councilor, Charlie serves on a variety of Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Advisories including:

Saskatoon Regional Economic Development Authority, Meewasin Valley Authority, Marr Residence Management, Planning and Operations, Municipal Heritage, Accessibility, Cycling Group, and the Broadway Business Improvement District.

In this personal life, Charlie expands his engagement in our community through his service on the boards of CHEP (Child Hunger and Education Program) and the Affinity Credit Union.

As a husband, father, or neighbour you might find Charlie building a snow fort or a cardboard box construction vehicle, playing squash, cycling, cross country skiing, canoeing, or camping in our great Saskatchewan outdoors.”