2009 12 01 |
This article, co-authored by Bernie Smith and Paul MacKinnon, first appeared in the “Afterthought” section, in the November edition of Halifax Magazine.
As the global economy reels, Council bemoans the lack of money to do all of the projects that Halifax Regional Municipality needs. Downtown, several prominent sites, fully approved for development sit vacant. Is there a solution? Is there a smart investment that this city, which espouses smart growth, can make to ensure our prosperous future?
The heart of this city (and indeed the whole of Atlantic Canada, if you subscribe to the hub city theory) is the urban core. The urban core still works and, by and large, pays for much of the municipality. But government leaders have woefully neglected it in terms of planning decisions and wise investment. In a city where the overwhelming majority of tax revenues come from property taxes, planning is economics. Planning is destiny.
In June, HRM Council approved HRM by Design. One of the key pillars of this plan is a focused effort to substantially increase the residential population of peninsular Halifax, which has lost 30,000 residents since 1960. This is upping the ante from the older Regional Plan, which anticipated a population increase of 25,000 for the entire regional centre.
From a cost/benefit perspective, the goal makes a lot of sense. The sewers are in the ground, the streets are paved, lighted and have sidewalks, and buses run here already. Each new resident in an already-serviced area represents pure profit in terms of taxes. With over 60 per cent of peninsula residents walking or busing to work, a population increase won’t add to dreaded congestion for suburban commuters. Intensifying the downtown with residents will also reinvigorate the commercial base and cause the creative industries and arts to flourish. Investing in the physical landscape of the downtown will benefit retailers and again bolster tax revenues. Council will spend the money throughout HRM; smart development in the core benefits all citizens. At the same time, this creates a great destination for the businesses and tourists we desperately want.
However, within less than a month of the approval of HRM by Design, we read of the approval of major developments that are at odds with this logic. First, came a program of residential construction in Bedford West, projected to house 18,000 people. Next, was the approved addition of 800,000 square feet of office space and a further 1,500 homes (put in context, the size of Windsor) in Dartmouth Crossing, eating up valuable light-industrial lands.
Maybe these have been in the works for years but HRM consistently continues to authorize development on the city’s fringes, to its own peril. Council’s rationale is that these developments are more or less in accord with the Regional Plan, and who are we to restrict where people live? But HRM has a responsibility to taxpayers, too.
HRM charges development fees to the developers, which are supposed to cover the immediate servicing costs. But, a recent Chronicle Herald article by Jim Meek, suggests that each new suburban house is being subsidized to the tune of $20,000, through undercharged development fees. No taxpayer signed up for that.
Aside from that, the added pressure on the road network, transit, sewers and other public infrastructure, all potentially make such development a major charge on the public purse and consequently on to our individual tax bills. Just how much additional capacity is available in the Mill Cove Treatment Plant? How quickly does this create a need to widen more roads leading to downtown? Did officials consider these costs when they granted approval?
Council is trying to cut budgets and find money to do priority projects throughout the municipality, so doesn’t it make sense to do a long-term cost-benefit analysis of such large-scale new developments? What are the 20-year servicing costs of these residential developments versus tax revenues? Are taxpayers, subsidizing these developments at the expense of important projects throughout the municipality? A thorough analysis would surely show that development in the core is the best option.
There are rumblings of no less than four new, massive residential projects coming forward. By what criteria will council say yea or nay? How can they support HRM by Design, with its emphasis on economically and environmentally sustainable infill downtown on the one hand, compared with these further decentralizing developments? This city already has financial demands for infrastructure that exceed its ability to respond. If additions to these demands can be halted or substantially reduced, this will assist Council with its budget demands. Business groups and citizens need to help Council see that what is right outside of City Hall, the heart of the city, is also the key to the economic prosperity of their own districts.