Every Frederictonian, in our own way, is an expert in how to make a city work for us and the people we care about. Better Fredericton wants to tap every resident’s expertise and bring good ideas to the table. By giving some background on issues that face our city, how we’re handling them so far, and highlighting solutions already on the go in other communities, this blog hopes to raise awareness – and expectations – of what we can accomplish together as a city.

Articles on Better Fredericton draw on the insights of life-long Frederictonians and newcomers, from a variety of backgrounds: small business owner; police officer; family doctor; architect; member of the Planning Advisory Committee; policy analyst; city planner; university professor; nurse; economist; filmmaker; elementary school teacher; epidemiologist; and the experience of living and working in 19 cities across Canada and around the world.

For the record, none are candidates in the May 2012 municipal election – but Better Fredericton hopes that this conversation will help inform the upcoming campaigns, and highlight the potential for good ideas and innovative solutions that can enhance life in our city. Elections are an excellent opportunity to find inspiration: from the talent and insight of every Frederictonian; and from looking at communities elsewhere that have already experienced and addressed the challenges we face.

Let’s talk – follow the twitter feed @betterfreddy, jot your thoughts on this blog – and this election, may the best ideas win. What issues matter most to you? What is Fredericton doing right? What could the City do better? What would you do differently? Is there anything you’ve seen other cities do, that we should do too? How can Fredericton be a Better Fredericton?

The City definitely has its challenges in leading our community towards sustainability. Although Fredericton’s population has grown just over 10% since 2006 to about 56 thousand residents, it has to plan around the needs and behaviours of over 90 thousand people spread out through the region, who come into the city to work, shop and play. Population density remains low, raising infrastructure costs and making it harder to efficiently deliver services. When thinking about managing everything from commuter traffic to solid waste management to water and energy conservation and so on, Fredericton’s got a lot on its plate.

Recent efforts show that the City is taking up the challenge. Since 2000, Fredericton is taking part in the Federation of Canadian Municipalities’ Partners for Climate Protection programme, that guides cities to track and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. So far, the City has completed the programme’s five milestones: measuring our emissions, setting a target, developing and implementing an action plan, and reporting results – as a city press release proudly emphasises, the first city outside British Columbia to do so. Bottom line:

Calculations for the 2000 to 2009 timeframe indicate total community carbon dioxide emissions in 2000 were 647 578 tonnes; and in 2009 were 652 801 tonnes. This represents an increase of 5 223 tonnes of CO2 emissions over this period (or 0.8%).

Fredericton’s population between 2000 and 2009 grew by 14 percent. This means that per capita greenhouse gas emissions (tonnes/person) went down by 12 percent over this time period. Maintaining virtually flat total GHG emissions in the face of a growing population; and achieving a large reduction in per capita emissions over this time frame is viewed as a success.

Source: First to Kyoto Community Update, City of Fredericton, January 2011

A per capita reduction over time is one way to look at the numbers, but makes it hard to compare how we’re doing compared to other communities, and how efficiently and sustainably Frederictonians are actually living right now. Using absolute emission numbers for the city and dividing by the population gives a more accurate picture: pro-rating the population stats from the 2006 and 2011 censuses, per-capita GHG emissions in 2009 was 12.02 tonnes/person. (Emissions numbers aren’t available for the greater Fredericton region.)

How does this compare to other communities taking action on climate change?

City	Tonnes GHG/capita
Copenhagen	2.1
Vancouver	4.6
New York	6.4
Montreal	7.2
Toronto	9.3
Fredericton	12.0

Source: Climate Leadership, City of Vancouver

A quick review of Fredericton’s programmes so far, and what is being done in other communities might suggest ways we can improve on our performance. City Hall has already taken some steps in making its own operations more sustainable: according to its July 2009 First to Kyoto Corporate Update, it has achieved a 17% reduction of GHG emissions through things like upgrades and replacement of municipal buildings, and idling and fuel reduction in its vehicle fleet. It’s also keeping a relatively “green house” of its own: after a retrofit of lighting fixtures and tightening heating and cooling control, among sixty city halls across the country rated by Toronto and Region Conservation, Fredericton’s placed fifth. But the government’s own operations is just a drop in the bucket compared to what we all contribute in our day-to-day.

Leading Frederictonians to live, work and play more sustainably is key. The City’s Green Shops and Green Matters Certified programmes appear to engage businesses and organisations to take action, but instead of setting hard targets on implementing sustainable practices or pollution reductions, it focuses on the number of activities that are being tried. For example, Green Shops audits for vague items and gives points when a group “improves building windows”, “adopts a scent-free policy”, “encourages litterless lunches” or “fixes leaky faucets”.

Similarly, Green Matters Certified tracks only “acts of green”, which can be just as non-specific: “promote reusable bottles”, “return beverage containers”, and so on. “Sustainability. By Design” is a powerful statement, but when each action item is so vague, and weighted identically towards an award – for example, a hard, important change like “replace fleet vehicles with high fuel efficiency vehicles” counts as much as a lukewarm “encourage environmentally-friendly forms of transport” – the programme depends very much on the participants’ own initiative.

As for residents, Green Matters offers similar advice pieces, from limiting air conditioner use, using electric kettles instead of the stove, recycling, and trying public transit, walking or biking instead of driving. There’s also an essay contest – but there’s nothing about minimum building efficiency standards, or making neighbourhoods and workplaces convenient to transit service. While these are all good ideas, and there may be some Frederictonians who were previously unaware of choices they can make to be more sustainable, they fall far short of the more fundamental changes that other cities are doing to achieve change: the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development emphasises the need for policy responses to improve the way people live.

For example, Vancouver’s Greenest City 2020 Action Plan offers some clear policy decisions a city can take to reach sustainability targets – in Vancouver’s case, to be the greenest city in the world by 2020. Broad goals are clearly linked to measurable targets, which are linked to specific actions the City is taking to get there:

Goal: Lead the world in green building design and construction
Target	Action
Require all buildings constructed from 2020 onward to be carbon neutral in operations Reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in existing buildings by 20% over 2007 levels	The City has adopted the greenest building code in North America Update the Building Bylaw to improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in both new and existing buildings Use price signals in permit fees for new construction as well as renovations to existing buildings to reward energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reductions All new building rezonings are required to meet the building industry’s LEED Gold standard for environmental performance
Goal: Create zero waste
Target	Action
Reduce solid waste going to the landfill by 50% from 2008 levels	Enforce disposal bans on recyclables Make recycling more convenient for apartments Collect and compost all food scraps from residences Develop policies that direct away from traditional demolition towards deconstruction and salvage of materials
Goal: Become a global leader in urban food systems
Target	Action
Increase city-wide and neighbourhood food assets by a minimum of 50% over 2010 levels	Grow more food in the city Make local food available in City-run facilities through a local food procurement plan
Goal: Make walking, cycling and public transit preferred public transportation options
Target	Action
Make the majority (over 50%) of trips by foot, bicycle and public transit Reduce average distance driven per resident by 20% from 2007 levels	Advance policies that encourage residents to reduce car ownership and use Shift investment to walking, cycling and transit infrastructure instead of building new roads Plan for complete communities to encourage increased walking and cycling and to support improved transit service

Source: Greenest City 2020 Action Plan, City of Vancouver

Of course, Fredericton has made some progress towards being a Green City – Frederictonians are steadily switching away from electrical and fuel oil heating (the sources of almost 60% of our GHG) towards natural gas; and backyard chickens were recently granted a trial, even before Halifax; and a net-zero energy townhouse project is underway – but there’s a lot of room for fundamental changes that can reduce our environmental impact, lower our infrastructure construction and maintenance costs, capitalise on jobs and investment into green industry, and help our city really become Smart and Sustainable. There’s more to it than a purely voluntary good ideas promotion.

There’s no shortage of ideas out there on how the City can start to fill in its shortfalls in green policy. Currently, Fredericton’s own Traffic Study doesn’t plan a role for public transit to reduce congestion; new subdivisions remain low-density and car-dependent; recycling is still not provided in apartments and condos; commercial development that could be centralised in a vibrant Downtown or walkable community are instead encouraged to disperse along the 18km Runway network; viable farmland within city limits is being lost to residential development (partly for that net-zero townhouse project, among other things). But action plans like Vancouver’s could help.

What do you think? Is Fredericton a Green city – Smart and Sustainable? What can the City do to help you make more sustainable choices in your day-to-day – from the house in which you live, to the way you get to work, to the way you eat? What about your workplace? How can Fredericton become a greener, better city?

Social media is one – of course the City has its own facebook page, where you can get updated on Fredericton services, plus you can show you “Like” what’s new and become a “Friend” of Fredericton. The Mayor and most of City Council have twitter feeds where they and residents go back and forth on important and not-so-important issues. You can get to know Brad Woodside – “Mayor of Fredericton, Doctor of laws STU, Love music, politics, travel, dolphins, Lennon, Laughter and Peace” – and his insights on Fredericton and passing thoughts on the new Brad Burger 2.0 at Relish.

But it can be hard to talk about big visions, good ideas or debate substantive policy in 160 characters or less. City Council and standing committees meetings give Frederictonians direct access to decision-makers – and there are plenty to choose from: Council itself, the Planning Advisory Committee, the Riverfront Advisory Committee, the Preservation Review Board, etc. Meeting schedules and agendas are posted on the city website; and when upcoming issues affect a particular street or neighbourhood – like a development proposal going to the Planning Advisory Committee – residents get notice in the mail about what’s going on and where they can present feedback to the committee.

But even open meetings are imperfect and can give a false sense of citizen engagement. Standing committee meetings occur on weekdays at noon, excluding Frederictonians who work outside Downtown or unable to take lunchtime off from attending. Agendas for meetings are released on the City website often only the same week of a meeting – and often un-publicised or highlighted – and it can be hard to consider an issue, talk about it with neighbours and compose a feedback presentation in such a short time frame.

Of course, engagement is more than just attending a meeting, but the chance to provide constructive and relevant feedback. At City Council, input from residents and experts is often a one-time opportunity to be heard, and councillors and staff have little time to consider public feedback or learn more before voting. In the case of development applications, opportunity for public engagement at committee or Council meetings happens after City staff have reviewed the application and made a recommendation – citizens’ feedback and alternatives aren’t formally part of the staff review process.

And when you’re talking about something as complex as a city, there’s often a degree of detail or technicality that escapes the grasp of the layperson, or makes it harder to see how an issue might affect the city as a whole. For example, the Planning Advisory Committee agenda this past 18th of January reviewed details like requests to build house additions or letting a building have a smaller side yard: it can be hard for Frederictonians to engage and paint the big picture of how our city should grow, when the attention of our Councillors, committee members and the public is so narrowly-focused.

In other cities, governments actively engage their citizens and give them the information, tools and opportunities they need to participate in decision-making. As opposed to simply reacting to an agenda item after City staff have already written their recommendations and committee members or Councillors are expected to discuss and vote, residents in other cities have their points-of-view included from the very beginning.

For example, the City of Calgary began its 2012 budget process – Our City. Our Budget. Our Future – by engaging residents about how the budget affects them directly. Their process recognised “emerging issues such as challenges in financial sustainability and growth management, along with a recognized need for improved transparency in decision-making and expectations for citizen engagement”. Calgarians used a Budget Allocator or survey pack that described what each city department does, their detailed budgets, and what an increase or decrease in budget would mean to the services residents received. The entire process was open to the public, so feedback didn’t just go to the City, but to Calgarians as well: ideas could feed on other ideas and get refined along the way. Not only was the City able to prioritise the budget to satisfy the needs of the people, Calgarians also came away better informed about what the city does for them and where their money goes.

As well, the City of Regina is empowering its residents through its community plan review process, Design Regina. Using an interactive online tool called MetroQuest, Reginans can get backgrounders and conversation starters on potential issues they face as the city grows, and how prioritising different interests (like public transit, easy car travel, lower taxes, etc) has implications on how Regina turns out in the long run. They also invited expert speakers to kickstart discussion and talk about best practices in other communities, raising expectations amongst Reginans and their City Council when it comes to development and city planning.

Finally, the City of Edmonton provides a Planning Academy of classes that help Edmontonians understand the planning and development process, and the roles and responsibilities of the City, developers, citizens and others. Residents who know how the system works are better able to contribute constructively and effectively – and the City listens: there’s a clear policy and standards directing the City to seek out and consider public feedback. What’s more, in partnership with the University of Alberta, Edmonton leads a Centre For Public Involvement that drives research and innovation in citizen engagement, to find the best ways to bring out and apply residents’ ideas.

What do you think? Do you feel engaged with Fredericton’s city government? Do you have enough information and opportunity to talk to the mayor and your councillor? How do you tell the City what your priorities are for your neighbourhood and Fredericton in general? Should public consultation be part of City decision-making? What could help you and your neighbours offer more constructive feedback?

Source: Atlas of York County, New Brunswick, 1878

For centuries, Frederictonians grew up, played, commuted and shopped along grid streets like these. They would’ve been pretty easy to remember what was where, and to give directions. Getting around traffic jams (horse and buggy accidents?) would be relatively straightforward – just turn away and go down the next block. You could quickly find out and take short cuts – just zig-zag at the intersections. Planning expansions would be pretty predictable – just make the street longer.

Source: Atlas of York County, New Brunswick, 1878

It also lent well to making interesting streetscapes. Ceremonial sites or buildings like schools or City Hall could get landmark locations at corners or at the end of a roadway. The Burial Ground mid-block interrupting Carleton St (“Charleton St”) provided a dignified vista looking up and down the street. Regular placement of parks every few blocks ensured everyone had good, predictable access to commons in which to meet and play.

View Larger Map

Newer developments, however, follow a more unpredictable plan. Fredericton’s neighbourhoods outside the original Town Plat favour patterns with crescents, bays and cul-de-sacs – or in road design-speak, warped parallels, loops and lollipops, or lollipops on a stick. Because these newer areas are planned and built by developers on privately-owned land, they want to make sure that more area is used for money-making homes, and less on unprofitable spaces like streets: while the Town Plat’s rectangular grid needs about 31% of the area for roads, loopy subdivisions use only about 27%.

Source: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation: Residential Street Pattern Design Fact Sheet

These suburban plans focus on making car traffic faster: with grids come intersections, each of which forces cars to slow down and, at high volumes, congest into gridlock. Suburban plans design streets to feed into collector or arterial roads, wider and with few intersections so cars can drive faster. They also focus on privacy and making it harder to get to individual streets: while grids make it possible for cars (and pedestrians) to take short-cuts and pass any which way, suburban plans force drive-through traffic to one or two main roads, and limit traffic along smaller ones to only those cars actually going to/from points on that road.

View Larger Map

In many of Fredericton’s new developments, however, using a non-grid suburban pattern can make getting around difficult. Connexions between subdivisions are often winding and complicated. For example, Crocket St in the city’s Northside, is a residential street with homes lining both sides of the road. But because it’s the only road connecting Cliffe St and Canada St as a route from Marysville towards the city centre, it carries a disproportionate amount of traffic, well over and above that of the residents who actually live there: according to the Capital City Traffic Study Update, 7 300 vehicles a day. (By comparison, Woodstock Rd, a major thoroughfare as provincial Route 102, carries 7 050; Clements Dr, as Route 105, carries 7 350.) Future developments off of Crocket St, in the usual suburban pattern, will increase the load.

View Larger Map

What’s more, suburban plans, with their dead-end streets and limited options for routes, force pedestrians onto those busy arterial roads to get around – potential safety hazards for children walking to school, and discouraging strolls to a park, convenience store or work. By limiting the options for short-cutting, they also increase the distance pedestrians need to walk to get from any given point A to point B. It also makes it harder to adapt zoning to mix in amenities: commercial areas or parks tend to be segregated away from residential streets to those arterial roads. The winding roads also make it hard to provide fast bus routes, and slow down emergency vehicles rushing to respond within the neighbourhood.

A problem with conventional subdivision loop and curl street patterns is that they inhibit walking and are disorienting and confusing to pedestrians as well as to drivers. They provide tranquility, safety and security at the expense of connectivity. They control traffic well but often create bottlenecks at peak times in predictable spots. By the 1990s the problems of suburban sprawl were becoming evident and a new movement called “Smart Growth” evolved to promote the design of communities that are more compact, with a mix of land uses, well-connected streets and sidewalks, and public transit that would encourage a change in travel behaviour so that the residents would walk and bicycle more and drive less.
Source: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation: The Fused Grid: A Neighbourhood and District Layout Model

One way to get the benefits of grid patterns – an open network of paths, able to mix amenities with residential areas, and shortened and simplified commuting – and suburban patterns – limited traffic on residential streets – is a pattern of quadrants, or a Fused Grid. There are blocks of crescents and cul-de-sacs like in the suburbs, but each has multiple access routes to an open grid of bigger streets that keep traffic moving, keeps amenity areas within a five-minute walking distance, and opens the potential for efficient, criss-crossing bus routes to the area.

Source: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation: The Fused Grid: A Neighbourhood and District Layout Model

Perhaps some of the problems with getting around Fredericton’s suburban neighbourhoods could be improved with elements of a fused grid network. If future roads and subdivisions were planned along these lines, our communities could be safer, easier to get around – by car, bus, on foot and by bike, whatever your fancy – and more adaptable to changing amenity needs like parks, schools and commercial areas.

The combination of continuous and discontinuous street grids:

• Optimizes the use of land for streets
• Secures tranquil and safe neighbourhoods
• Increases the potential for social interaction
• Optimizes infrastructure
• Assists district and regional traffic flow
• Encourages walking while positively discouraging short-distance driving

Source: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation: The Fused Grid: A Neighbourhood and District Layout Model

What do you think? How are the streets in your area? Do you always find yourself taking a long-way around, or do you have lots of short cuts to take? Is there only one road in and out of your area – and do you get traffic jams? What would make getting around your neighbourhood and to the rest of town easier?

View Larger Map

Fredericton has a Heritage Preservation by-law that applies to buildings within designated areas like the St Anne’s Point Heritage Preservation Area east of Downtown and various points around the city. Making changes to a building – including demolition – requires approval by the Preservation Review Board; a developer breaking the rules might be ordered to do “anything required to restore the land, building or structure to its condition immediately prior” under the provincial Municipal Heritage Preservation Act. There’s also a Design Review Subcommittee that can provide input on the design of new construction and alterations in the residential Town Plat, including architects and engineers. Through property taxes, every household in Fredericton contributes 89 cents a month towards the City’s Heritage and Culture programmes.

View Larger Map

While some other cities like Halifax, Toronto or Victoria recognise and protect individual buildings as well as streets and neighbourhoods, Fredericton’s preservation policy applies only to the areas listed in the by-law, and doesn’t apply to other notable areas or streetscapes, like the West Plat, or Downtown in general. The City’s Local Historic Places Register and the Fredericton Heritage Trust recognise some individual properties – the FHT with a plaque explaining the building’s significance – but beyond raising the appreciation of passersby, don’t confer any protection or prevent any modifications beyond existing by-laws.

View Larger Map

That said, better than using a stick to preserve heritage buildings, can be a carrot. Often times such older structures are seen as an obstacle to development: too small for modern use, too expensive to renovate, too complicated to bring up to current standards. But behind those difficulties can not only be cultural or emotional value, but solid economic value as well: a study of 3 000 properties across the province of Ontario showed that designated properties tended to resist downturns in the real estate market – 74% did as good as or better than the average property value trend in their communities – and sold as well or better than all properties generally. Incentives like property tax exemptions based on renovation costs or conversion to residences, or grants for conservation work, can pay off dividends in concurrent private investment, tourism spin-offs and the intangible benefit of character and presence a historic but living neighbourhood brings to the city.

A comprehensive study of the economic impact of rehabilitating and restoring heritage buildings was conducted by the Center for Urban Policy Research at Rutgers University in New Jersey. It compared the investment of $1 million in rehabilitation versus new construction.

Non-residential historic rehabilitation	New construction
Generated 38.5 jobs	Generated 36.1 jobs
$1 302 000 in income	$1 223 000 in income
$1 711 000 in gross domestic product	$1 600 000 in gross domestic product
$202 000 in taxes	$189 000 in taxes

Source: Heritage Canada Foundation

View Larger Map

The hardest thing with heritage preservation is often the start: seeing the value in heritage, and figuring out how to preserve it, in an economically-viable and responsible way. One option is active direction through incentives structured around adaptive re-use, like converting old warehouses or offices to apartments or condos, which can be one way for a city to both save historic buildings and promote people to move and live in rejuvenated areas. Another is Fredericton’s recent, creative land-swap acquisition of the abandoned York Street School, saving it from demolition and buying some time for ideas.

View Larger Map

This Saturday afternoon, some of those ideas just might come out: the Fredericton Heritage Trust will be hosting two experts on 31 21 January at the Knights of Columbus hall (170 Regent St at Brunswick St) from 2-4.30pm. Natalie Bull, Executive Director of the Heritage Canada Foundation, and Keith Brideau of Historica Developments, will discuss some examples just like ours, where cities found creative ways to work through the challenges and harness the potential of heritage buildings. (Edit: 31 January is the deadline to tell the City your ideas for York House.)

What do you think? What do Fredericton’s heritage buildings, streetscapes or neighbourhoods mean to you? What is their value – is 89 cents a month about right? What is the City’s responsibility towards the preservation of historic properties in Fredericton – to wield a carrot, a stick, a bit of both, or neither?

Walk Score is a neat programme that scores your neighbourhood based on how accessible basic amenities like banks, stores and school are on foot. It doesn’t take into account things like street layouts, traffic, topography or – especially important this season – the weather, but it does give a glimpse into another aspect of walkability: how your neighbourhood is designed to fit your needs, on foot.

View Larger Map

For example, Sunset Drive in the west edge of the city’s north side rates a walk score of 13/100, or “car dependent”. To get a cup of coffee, borrow a book from a library or go to a bank would likely require a car. As for getting to work, census data confirms that 88% of residents living in this area commute to work by car, whilst only 3% take public transit and 5% walk or bike.

View Larger Map

At another extreme, Queen Street in Downtown Fredericton rates a walk score of 90/100, or a “walker’s paradise”. Many of the essentials of daily life are easily reached on foot – and as for working, the census data shows that the majority of residents Downtown commute by walking, cycling or public transit – 54% – whilst 41% use a car.

Of course, not everyone can or would necessarily like to live on Sunset Drive or Queen Street, but based on Walk Score’s research, making Fredericton’s neighbourhoods more walkable is one way we can improve our environment and our health, and potentially improve property values and participation in the community.

What makes a neighborhood walkable?

• A center: Walkable neighborhoods have a center, whether it’s a main street or a public space.
• People: Enough people for businesses to flourish and for public transit to run frequently.
• Mixed income, mixed use: Affordable housing located near businesses.
• Parks and public space: Plenty of public places to gather and play.
• Pedestrian design: Buildings are close to the street, parking lots are relegated to the back.
• Schools and workplaces: Close enough that most residents can walk from their homes.
• Complete streets: Streets designed for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit.

Source: http://www.walkscore.com/walkable-neighborhoods.shtml

As Frederictonians, we’re lucky to have a setting in a river valley that give us plenty of opportunities to develop pleasant, enjoyable settings and streetscapes in which to walk. Things like zoning our subdivisions to allow a mix of amenities and services within walking distance of where you live, and designing a street and sidewalk network that gives us a choice of safe, enjoyable routes to stroll along, could help improve our city’s walkability.

What do you think? What’s your Walk Score? What can the City do in your neighbourhood to improve walkability?