1

breaking ground

greening the urban and regional landscapeConference Proceedings March 2002, Halifax

2

breaking groundgreening the urban and regional landscape

3

Breaking Ground

Greening the Urban and Regional Landscape

Conference ProceedingsMarch 20-22, 2002Pier 21 Halifax, Nova Scotia

DALHOUSIE FACULTY OF PLANNING AND ARCHITECTURE has amandate to provide high quality education, community outreach andresearch focused on the built and natural environment in all its aspectsand scales.

ECOLOGY ACTION CENTRE has a mandate to encourage a society inNova Scotia that respects and protects nature and provides environmen-

tally and economically sustainable jobs for its citizens.

EVERGREEN’S mission is to bring communities and nature together forthe benefit of both. We engage people in creating and sustaininghealthy, dynamic, outdoor spaces in our schools, our communities and

our homes. Evergreen is a registered charitable organization.

Presented by Dalhousie School of Planning, Evergreen and Ecology Action CentreCopy Editing: Frank Palermo and Dorothy LeslieDesign, Production, Editing: Kasia Tota and Jennifer MeurerContributors: Ravi Singh, Maria Jacobs, Graham Fisher, Lucy Trull, Luc Ouellet, Charlene Cressman, Heather Ternoway, Steffen Kaeubler, Jaret Lang, Pierre Heelis, Dave Stewart, Kasia TotaCover: Collage of art work produced by conference participantsPrinting: etc.Press

Poster design: Emerald City Communications

4

CONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Foreword

Conference Program

Opening Remarks Frank Palermo

Keynote Address Lucien Kroll

Conference ProceedingsGreening at Regional and Urban ScaleGreening at Community and Neighbourhood ScaleClosing RemarksBreaking Ground SnapshotsContest Submissions

5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

STEERING COMMITTEE

Frank Palermo, Susanna Fuller, Marcus Garnet, Mark Poirier, Graham Read, Susan Guppy, Beth Lewis,Peggy Cameron, Dorothy Leslie, Stephanie Sodero, Deborah Grant, David Mitchell, Joe Bidermann,Delaine Clyne, Chris Brackley, Holly Richardson

STAFF

Kasia Tota and Jennifer Meurer

SPECIAL THANKS TO VOLUNTEERS

Jamie Anfossi, Ravi Singh, Lucy Trull, Steffen Kaubler, David Mitchell, Kenneth Kam

MODERATORS AND RECORDERS

Deborah Grant, Howard Epstein, Graham Read, Mark Poirier, Doug Conrad, David Stonehouse, ElizabethCrocker, Susan Guppy, Jill Grant, Susanna Fuller, Ravi Singh, Maria Jacobs, Graham Fisher, Lucy Trull,Lindsey Mittelsteadt, Luc Ouellet, Charlene Cressman, Heather Ternoway, Steffen Kaubler, Jaret Lang,Pierre Heelis, Dave Stewart

PARTICIPANTS OF THE ART CONTEST

Dominik Drozdowski, Zoe Fairbrother, Sophie Watts, Mat Dunlop, Jennifer Watts, Mary Porter, JoyYourcenar, Michael Farrar

THE EVERGREEN CANADA INITIATIVE IS SPONSORED BY

The Millennium Bureau, Toyota, Suncor Energy Foundation, The Globe and Mail, Home and GardenTelevision, Canadian Gardening

THANKS TO OUR BREAKING GROUND SUPPORTERS

Nova Scotia Power, Atlantic Gardens Inc. Downtown Halifax Business Commission, Mountain EquipmentCo-op, Joe Bidermann Landscaping Design, Halifax Seed Company, Loomis&Toles

THANKS TO OUR BREAKING GROUND PARTNERS

PP’lovers Home GrownOrganic Foods Just Us

6

FOREWORD

Each year, the Dalhousie School of Planning together with many friends holds a public forum on some issueof importance and immediate relevance to the community. Previous forums considered topics such as:“Which way should Metro grow”, “Centers in the Region”, and “Halifax in Motion”.

In March 2002, thanks to a partnership with Evergreen and the Ecology Action Centre, the the focus was onthe environment. The conference was one of five to take place across Canada on the theme of “BreakingGround - Greening the Urban and Regional Landscape”. It formed a part in the Evergreen Canada Initiative(ECI) intended on “connecting communities with nature”.

The public forum started on the first day of spring. It marked a “break” in the seasons, and an extraordinaryopportunity to share insights, develop new ideas, and break the pattern.

The underlying assumption guiding the organization of the event was that “greening” is more than a tokenphysical gesture. Rather, it is an attitude and a culture that understands the environmental significance of ouractions, be it at the scale of an individual backyard, or the entire region.

For the first time perhaps, this forum “broke through” to attract a regional audience from the Atlantic Region.Participants from other towns and cities brought their experience and knowledge to the Halifax RegionalMunicipality, which is in the process of developing its first regional plan. It was an opportunity to celebrate ouraccomplishments, but to also challenge what currently exists.

At first glance, the wide range of topics presented in these proceedings may appear to be eclectic but there isa basic structure that starts with topics related to the regional scale, moves to community scale and finallyfocuses on individual, local initiatives. This is because “greening the landscape” cannot be reduced to asimple formula. We recognize that the undertaking is enormous, and we want to challenge ourselves toembrace this complexity.

Frank Palermo

7

Workshop 1

Green and Smart What are Our Choices?

Presenter: Melanie Hare, Urban Strategies;Panelists: Ion Startup, Neighbourhood Develop-ments; Patrick Moan, Dalhousie School of Planning.Moderator: Howard Epstein

Workshop 2

Trails and Trains: The CN Rail Cut Project

Presenter: Marcus GarnetPanelists: Therese Delorme, HRM; Mark Poirier,Halifax Urban Greenway Association.Moderator: David Mitchell

Panel Discussion

Planning the Regional Ecology; Lessons from

the Atlantic Region and Beyond.

Panelists: Neil Dawe, St. Johns Grand ConcourseAuthority; Jim Baird, City of Saint John; Don Poole,City of Charlottetown, John Charles, HRM; MelanieHare, Urban Strategies. Moderator: Mark Poirier

Workshop 3

The Tyranny of Standards; an Obstacle to

Green Development?

Presenters: Peter Klynstra and Cary Vollick.Moderator: Jill Grant

Workshop 4

Coming to our Senses: Urban Walk with Natural-ist Chris Brackley

Public Forum & Design Workshop

Planting the Town Green.

Design workshop and public discussion led byDalhousie School of Planning Students and SusanGuppy

CONFERENCE PROGRAM

WEDNESDAY MARCH 20TH, 2002

Welcome

Councillor Dawn Sloan

Denise Phillipe EvergreenSusanna Fuller Ecology Action CentreFrank Palermo School of Planning

Keynote Address

Lucien Kroll

THURSDAY MARCH 21ST, 2002

Theme: Greening at the Regional and

Urban Scale

Welcome

Frank Palermo

Guest Speaker

Ann McAfee

Co-Director of Planning, City of VancouverLife After Concrete: Creating a Greener

Vancouver

Panel Discussion

Integrated Protection and Restoration of Green

space at the Three Scales; Challenges and

Opportunities

Panelists: Carol Macomber, Capital District TaskForce; Anne Muecke, HRM. Moderator: Graham

Read

8

FRIDAY MARCH, 2002

Theme: Greening at the Community and

Neighbourhood Scale

Welcome

Susanna Fuller, EAC

Workshop 5

From Lean and Mean to Green and Clean;

Transforming Brownfield Parks

Presenters: Colin Morrell, Phase Remediation andSteve Armstrong, Dalhousie Dept of Biology; AnnMcAfee, City of VancouverModerator: David Stonehouse

Workshop 6

Urban Agriculture Local Food Production and

Distribution

Presenters: Marjorie Willison, Urban Farm Mu-seum; Geordie Ochterloney, Home Grown Organ-ics; Moderator: Susan Guppy

Workshop 7

Building Partnerships for Urban/Suburban

Green Space

Presenters: Neil Dawe, St. Johns GrandConcourse Authority; Nancy McMinn, City ofCharlottetown. Moderator: Deborah Grant

Workshop 8

Your Schoolyard is Your Neighbourhood Green

Space

Presenters: Denise Philippe, Evergreen; RheaDawn Mahar, Tree Canada.Moderator: Doug Conrad

Workshop 9

More Green Space (Technically Speaking) Solar

Aquatics in Your

Neighbourhood

Presenters: Claudiane Ouellet-Plamondon,Dalhousie Biological Engineering, Delaine ClyneDalhousie School of Planning.Moderator: Jaret Lang

Workshop 10

Pocket Wilderness; Experiencing Nature in the

Neighbourhood Backyard

Presenter: Patricia Manuel, Dalhousie School ofPlanning; Moderator: Elizabeth Crocker

Lunch time presentation

Local Success Stories

Minesville Community Association - GrantMacdonald; Glace Bay Portable Parks (Highland sodltd.) - Christine LeVatteCoastal Water Trail - Dave AdlerJohn Meagher Garden - Helen Maclean

Workshop 11

Colour It Green Art Workshop

Facilitators: Lucy Trull, Jamie Anfossi

Presentation

Defining the Way Ahead.

Key directives from workshop sessions.

Concluding Remarks

Presentation of Awards

9

Opening RemarksFrank PalermoDalhousie School of Planning

Welcome. It is appropriate that we shouldget together in this public forum on thefirst day of spring.

This is the break. An extraordinaryopportunity to share insights, develop newideas, and to break the pattern.

Each year the Planning School, with manyfriends and supporters from both publicand private sectors, organizes a publicforum on some issue of immediateimportance to the community. In recentyears we considered questions such as“Which Way Should Metro Grow”,“Centres in the Region”, and “Halifax inMotion”.

This year, in partnership with Evergreenand the Ecology Action Centre, the focusis on Greening the Urban and RegionalLandscape. This conference is one of fiveto be delivered across Canada, as part ofa three year Evergreen Canada Initiative.

Optimistically, I continue to believe thatthis is a significant opportunity and animportant moment in the history of cities.Change is pervasive locally and globally.We know that we can’t do things the sameway, follow a set pattern or try torecapture a nostalgic myth of the past.The challenge is enormous, andexpectations are great.

Opportunities are everywhere. Let mefocus on the Halifax Regional Municipality.

Work is underway on the Regional Plan,which must deal with growth,transportation, environment and quality oflife.

Ideas are being put together for a CapitalDistrict Plan which promises to celebratehistory and also define our future.

There is also work in progress on theWaterfront Plan, Barrington Streetrevitalization, and a TransportationStrategy.

This moment here and in many places isfilled with opportunity, an awareness thatthings have to change and a passionatebelief that it has to be done right. Wedemand and expect the best.

The environment is key to all theseconsiderations. The city that we build, theprospects for our region, the quality of ourlives, the legacy for our children is tied toour attitudes and values related to theenvironment.

There are two points to be made as acontext for the next two days:

First, the environment cannot beconsidered in isolation because it isaffected by everything else: land use,growth, and economic development. Ouractivities affect the air we breathe, thefood we eat, the ground we touch.

Second, I want to argue that theenvironment should come first. Inplanning and in thinking about the region

we must start with the ground. Nature andland must be seen as a basis for decisionsrelated to where growth happens, the formof our communities, our commitment totransit, our quality of life.

To help us recognize local potential,increase awareness and make adifference, we are very fortunate to havehere with us our keynote speaker LucienKroll, a distinguished planner and architectwith a long list of accomplishments. Iwould like to recognize just four qualitiesof his work.

For one, Lucien Kroll embracescomplexity and diversity, and resistsoversimplification. For someone like me,who believes that there ought to be someroom for chaos, this is a sign of quality.

Secondly, for many decades now he hasadvocated and practiced a participatorydesign process, or simply working withthose who will be affected by his designs.

Thirdly, his work has a broad scope anddepth of vision. It starts with the individual,and embraces a view of the planet.

Finally, his is an ecological approach.Ecolonia, a new community in theNetherlands and a new high school inFrance involved not only participatorydesign sensitive to community values, butalso the most stringent ecological designand construction criteria. This includedenergy, lighting, rainwater, toxicity ofmaterials, potential for reuse andrecycling, waste management on site, andgreen space.

This is a man of ideas and action andvision. Please welcome Lucien Kroll.

Frank Palermo welcomes participants on

Wednesday night

10

Keynote AddressLucien KrollArchitect and Planner,

Brussels, Belgium

The basic assumption underlying theBreaking Ground conference is that“greening” is more than a physical gesture.It is more than planting trees and rippingup lawn; it goes beyond rooftop andcommunity gardens and protecting coastalareas; it is even more than neighbourhoodparks, sensible growth strategies andenlightened development standards.Above all, it is a culture and an attitude.

It was therefore appropriate that theopening address was delivered by Mr.Lucien Kroll, a Belgian architect andplanner who dedicated his entire career todeveloping human ecological projects.Kroll practices a brand of architecturediametrically opposed to what he calls the“modern project.” This modern project isrooted in the linear, rational thinking asexpressed in the Roman military camp, inLeCorbusier’s “vertical city”, and today inthe monoculture of mass-producedsettlements. “The grid”, be it vertical orhorizontal, tends to obliterate all signs ofnature, and of previous human habitation.

To Kroll, the grey homogeneity of modern,sprawling, “global” landscapes is rooted ina militaristic attitude. This attitude praisessimplicity and mechanistic efficiency.

Unrestrained quest for profit producesplaces that are neither ecological norhumane (never mind inspiring!).

For many years Kroll has advocated(sometimes at the displeasure of hisclients), an attitude in architecture thatembraces local history, the diverse viewsof local people, and the complex web ofconnections that link culture and naturetogether. Our understanding (or lack ofunderstanding) of these links will alwaysbe reflected in the landscapes we create.

Kroll is adamant about the need forarchitecture to relate to its natural andhuman context. His great technicalcapacity, and a method of participatorydesign, ensures that what he advocates isnot an abstract concept. For example,one of his latest projects lived up to over60 ecological indicators. Only byembracing complexity and diversity in thedesign of human settlements, can wehope to create vibrant communities andpreserve (or recreate) natural componentsof the landscape.

However, the transformation is not a quickrevolution, but rather it involves a gradualreconciliation of our needs with the naturalenvironment. While Kroll’s work is basedon very clear and definite principles, heworks more like a homeopathic doctorthan a brain surgeon. For instance, whenasked to “improve” a decaying apartmentcomplex in East Berlin, Kroll did notchoose the easy path of demolishingeverything and starting from scratch.Rather than demolishing the complex,Kroll understood that it already containeda “living community” capable ofparticipaitng in decisions affecting theirlives. He worked with a sociologist to askresidents what changes they would like tosee: whether they preferred to have anextra balcony, tiles in the bathroom or abigger window.

Balconies were placed where the familieswanted them, as were other modifications.There is a hope and a faith in this

approach that residents know best; thatwith time, balconies will fill up withgreenery; and that in design “dialogue” isalways better than “monologue”. Thegoal is to stimulate residents to takecontrol of their living environment; as Krollonce observed, to paint one’s door adifferent colour in a long row of identicaldoors takes an act of courage, but to addyour colour to an already varied row isnatural and straightforward.

While there is an inherent gentleness inKroll’s approach to design, he is not afraidto make bold statements. In one case,when asked to address a speedingproblem on a major throughfare in a poorarea of Amencon (Normandy), he wentbeyond the usual asphalt speed humps,and proposed protruding earth mounds.The new hills transformed the straight,loud and dangerous road into a sinuousstreet. Municipal gardeners and localresidents were encouraged to plant andcultivate gardens on the hills. Car driversmay be a little frustrated, but accidentsare unknown on this “green” street.

Kroll is an idealist, but he also knows howto turn ideas to action. His numerousprojects, sitting comfortably in thelandscapes of Belgium, France,Netherlands or Rwanda testify to the factthat a design, no matter how brilliant,cannot be implemented without thecooperation of others (includingdevelopers). Asked whether his projectsare more expensive, he responded thathe is willing to work with developers tofind alternatives without compromisingdesign.

Members of the audience also askedwhether participatory design slowed theprojects down excessively. To thisquestion, Kroll asked in return “What isthe speed of an architect?”; an architectworks better when he can get othersexcited about his work, and this requiresdialogue. “Without complexity nothing issimple”, including greening the city.

Kasia Tota

Lucien Kroll delivers the keynote address

on Wednesday night

11

GREENING AT THE REGIONAL & URBAN SCALE

12

Guest SpeakerDr. Ann McAfee,Director of City Plans and Co-Director of Planning for the City ofVancouver

Life After Concrete: Creating a

Greener VancouverIn Vancouver, the post war years werebest described as “paving paradise”. Lowdensity development sprawled into ruralareas with a loss of agricultural andrecreational lands. In response, theProvince of BC established an AgriculturalLand Reserve. The Greater VancouverRegional District created a “Green Zone”around the region. The City of Vancouverbuilt Greenways and Wellness Walkways.It required developers to provide parksand public spaces. It also and adopted aTree and Landscape By-law. Someprograms have worked and others havebeen less successful. Ann McAfee’spresentation illustrated the package ofactions the Vancouver region has used togreen the urban and regional landscape.In her talk, she spoke about some of thekey initiatives undertaken by the City ofVancouver in the realm of “greening”, theirsuccesses and challenges.

After a few years of decline in the 1970s,Vancouver’s population has been steadilygrowing, and is now over half a million.The city’s land base has been fullydeveloped for many years. By the year2021 Vancouver could reach a populationof around 635,000, which will clearly placea lot of pressure on the city’s landresources, including green space.Population growth is beingaccommodated in new housing createdlargely through redevelopment and infill.These are expected to be able toaccommodate anticipated growth up to2021. Through a number of integratedstrategies and community initiativesVancouver is protecting and expanding itsnetwork of green areas.

When it comes to greenspace, Vancouver is reaping the

benefits of a general change of plans...

The regional growth strategy applicable tothe City of Vancouver is The Livable

Region Strategic Plan. The GreaterVancouver Regional District Board (aworking partnership of twenty-onemunicipalities and one electoral area)approved the plan on January 26, 1996.The Plan describes a growth strategy forthe region for a population of about 2.75million, nearly a million more people thancurrently live in the Greater Vancouverarea. The Livable Region Strategic Plan isintended to preserve and enhance thequality of life for the region’s citizens, andprotect the living environment. Theregional plan incorporates policies, targetsand maps, and is based upon fourfundamental strategies:

(1) Protect the Green Zone(2) Build Complete Communities(3) Achieve a Compact MetropolitanRegion(4) Increase Transportation Choice.

The implementation of the plan is multi-faceted, but the protection of green zonesis clearly at the top of the list and formsthe basis for other decisions.

The GVRD Green Zone comprises205,000 ha or 70 percent of the GVRDland area. Much of the Green Zone isprotected by government policies. TheGreen Zone includes:

Agricultural Lands 39%Parks 9%Watershed 24%Conservation (marsh) 16%Waterfront & Streams 12%

Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR)The ALR is a policy adopted by theProvincial government to protectproductive agricultural lands. Prior to the1970’s about 6,000 ha of agricultural landin BC was being lost annually. In 1973,4.7 million ha (5 percent of the province)came under the protection of theAgricultural Land Commission. Theamount of land in the ALR continues to beabout 5 percent of the province. The ALRpolicy sets out the boundary area fordevelopment and is meant to protectvaluable agricultural land. Release ofland from the AGR is guided by set criteriaand determined by the ProvincialAgricultural Land Commission.

Regional and City ParksRegional parks in the Vancouver regionamount to 11,400 hectares in 22 greenspaces. They are places for recreationand education and provide for a vast arrayof native fish and wildlife. Regional parksprotect sensitive habitats, landscapes andviews, big trees, and important heritagebuildings and sites.

The City of Vancouver has a parkstandard of 2.75 acres/1,000 people (1.11ha/1,000 people). The park standard ismaintained by requiring developers oflarge sites to provide park space on site.Developers of smaller sites payDevelopment Cost Levies, part of whichgo to maintain park standards in responseto growth.

13

Greenways ProgramGreenways in Vancouver are green pathsfor pedestrians and cyclists. They have alegacy dating back to the BartholomewPlan of 1928, with his vision of acontinuous waterfront parkway fromStanley Park around False Creek.Vancouver Greenways can be waterfrontpromenades, urban walks, environmentaldemonstration trails, heritage walks, andnature trails. Their purpose is to expandthe opportunities for urban recreation, toprovide alternate ways to move throughthe city, and to enhance the experience ofnature, community, and city life.

In 1991, Council appointed the UrbanLandscape Task Force to report on thecurrent use and future management ofVancouver’s urban landscape. In theirfinal report, Greenways-Public Ways, theTask Force recommended thedevelopment of a city-wide system ofGreenways. In 1995, Council adopted theVancouver Greenways Plan. Newinitiatives often require new funds. Tominimise the cost of the new Greenwaysprogram, Council looked for ways toreallocate existing resources (in this caseCity owned roads and street improvementbudgets) to the new Greenway use.

Vancouver’s City Greenways (www.city.vancouver.ca)

City GreenwaysThe proposed City Greenways-PublicWays network of fourteen routes will beapproximately 140 km long. Street rights-of-way will make up approximately 50% ofthe network. As a result of the legacy ofthe Seawall portion of the Seaside Route,30% of the network is already in place.While Greenways and Public Ways aregenerally evenly distributed throughoutthe city, routes are concentrated in areaswith greater population density and ahigher number of destinations such as thedowntown peninsula. When the network iscomplete, a City Greenway or Public Waywill be no more than a 25-minute walk ora 10-minute bicycle ride from everyresidence in Vancouver.

Neighbourhood GreenwaysNeighbourhood Greenways are smaller inscale and more local in focus than CityGreenways. They are not predeterminedlike City Greenways, but are designedand developed in response to localinitiatives. Neighbourhood Greenwayscompleted in the last few yearsdemonstrate a range of possibilities forpublic involvement in communityimprovement projects, as well as thecommitment and resourcefulness of localresident and artists. There are over adozen Neighbourhood Greenway projectsalready built or in various stages ofdevelopment across the city.

Blooming BoulevardsThe City of Vancouver often looks beyondthe regular mandate of the GreenwaysProgram and attempts to integrate thecommunity and needs of citizens inunique ways. These situations oftenevolve out of specific needs or desiresthat are expressed by a group of involvedcitizens. While such projects are notformally greenways, they enhance thequality of a community and create afriendlier pedestrian environment.

Green Streets ProgramThe City of Vancouver’s Green StreetsProgram encourages citizens to beautifytheir neighbourhoods by planting andmaintaining street gardens. This programalso provides an opportunity forneighbours to meet. Street gardens arelandscaped traffic circles and cornerbulges in neighbourhoods added by theCity as part of an on-going program toslow traffic and increase safety inresidential areas. The great thing aboutthe initiative that any one person or groupcan sponsor a “green street” project, andthe process is clearly laid-out on the city’swebsite. Volunteers are also recognizedduring the annual Green Streets GardenParty usually held in the fall.

The Wellness Walkways ProjectThe Wellness Walkways project is co-ordinated through the Greenways andLocal Improvements programs. Itcombines aspects of NeighbourhoodGreenways, the Residential StreetProgram (using local initiative funding),developer funding allocated forstreetscape improvements and otherfunding sources to improve access to andusability of the streetscape for a uniquemix of users in this section of the MountPleasant community.For example, in certain areas (aroundhealth care facilities etc.) patients andresidents may have a wide range ofmobility restrictions. The WellnessWalkways or circuits are meant to retrofitexisting public spaces to respond to thespecial needs of those with challengesposed by illness, disability or age.

The Wellness Walkways are composed ofseveral layers of improvements: basicstreet improvements (funded throughstandard local improvement processes);accessibility and safety improvements(funded through existing operating orcapital programs); and unique elementsthat allow for greater therapeutic use ofthe streetscape (to be funded primarilythrough external fundraising initiatives andlimited Greenways capital funds).

14

Vancouver City Tree Bylaw (1992)This bylaw provides for fines of up to$2,000 to anyone found to “remove,destroy, cut, deface, trim or in any wayinjure, impair or interfere with any streettree except as expressly authorized to doso by the Board of Parks and Recreation”.

Vancouver has also adopted a Tree By-law to regulate the cutting and planting oftrees on private property. If developmentrequires tree cutting then treereplacement planting is a condition ofredevelopment. Fines for unauthorizedcutting range from $500 to $20,000.

Vancouver BluewaysThe Vancouver Water OpportunitiesAdvisory Group is made up of volunteersfrom the public and private sectorsappointed by Council to look at waterrelated issues and opportunities for theCity of Vancouver. The group was formedin 1995. Over the summer of 1996, theWater Opportunities Advisory group held aseries of public meetings to hear whatother people had to say aboutVancouver’s waterfront and waterways.The group’s vision includes a “Awaterfront city where land and watercombine to meet recreational,environmental, and occupational needs ofthe City and its people”. This is to beaccomplished based on the principles ofmaximum access to waterfronts andwaterways (through transit links etc.);diversity of water based activities alongthe waterfront and in the water thatencourage industry, commerce,recreation, and education; Integration ofland and water visions; and environmentalsensitivity.

ConclusionsVancouver’s varied policies of “Greening”the city are now recognised as benefitingthe environment, health and recreation,community life, and the economy. Withtourism as a key industry, parks,walkways and other green initiativesencourage people to visit, and businessesto locate in the Vancouver area.

Vancouver has found that to green the cityrequires a variety of tools: regulation (e.g.ALR, Tree By-laws); incentives (seedsand plants for community gardens) ;reusing existing resources in new ways(roads become greenways); and requiringnew development to contribute to buildingthe city’s parks and public spaces.Together, many actions by many peopleare required to green a city. As CharlesLittle said:

“To make a Greenway is to make acommunity and that, above all else, iswhat the movement is about”.

http://www.city.vancouver.bc.cahttp://www.gvrd.bc.ca/

Kasia Tota

with assistance from Ann McAfee

15

Panel Discussion:

Greenspace at Three

Scales

Panelists:Anne Muecke, HRM Regional Planning;Ian Startup, NeighbourhoodDevelopments; Allan Eddy, Nova ScotiaPower; Carol Macomber, HRM CapitalDistrict Task Force;Moderator: Graham Read

The objective of this panel discussion wasto provide an integrated approach toplanning for green space at three scales:

(1) Regional Scale(2) Urban Scale(3) Community Scale

Anne MueckeAnne Muecke is currently working as aManager for the HRM Regional Plan. Thisproject is a long-term, high-level planningexercise, which will look twenty-five yearsinto the future and beyond, in terms ofscope.

The objective of this type of planningreview is to identify the values importantto residents of HRM.

Mrs. Muecke noted that it is veryimportant to recognize what she termedas “enduring values”, or simply values thatwill be reflected in architecture and

development and will therefore be aroundfor some time into the future. Enduringvalues may also reflect the importance ofother elements, such as natural settings,coastal areas or parks, which providerecreational opportunities and a place toreflect. In short, enduring values can beseen as the identity, or character, that acity or municipality creates for itself andwishes to maintain in the future.

Halifax’s first plan was completed 26years ago in the 1970s and was gearedtoward encouraging: (a) economicdevelopment, (b) infrastructure, (c)housing, and (d) roads. The plan wasmade with the assumption of cars beingthe main mode of transportation, and thishad an impact on the planning climate.For example, parks were planned as largeblocks of land, located outside of the city,to which people could drive on weekends.At this time, land not used fordevelopment or green space, wasconsidered to be without value.

The current planning efforts will focus oneconomic development and theenvironment. This plan acknowledges thatall land has value, to either the economyor to people as a place that is important tothem. The new approach realizes thatland is fragile, and the types of enduringvalues can be easily undermined byimproper planning or a heavy-handedapproach to development.

Mrs. Muecke suggested that planningmust look far into the future because theplaces we create and develop will be withus for a long time and will also affectfuture generations.

There is also the economic value ofHRM’s physical setting. Anne Mueckenoted that many people come to NovaScotia and HRM because of the “green,the blue, and the view.” This suggests thatforests, lakes, coastal areas and viewsshould be protected. Not only do theyreflect our sense of the beauty of theplace where we live, but also because

they are an attraction for HRM, affectingboth the tourism value of the area and thequality of life for residents. An attractiveplace can also be “loved to death” ifgrowth is not managed.

Finally, Anne Muecke spoke aboutdevelopment in very general terms. Sherelated that the new approach to planningin HRM will be focused on clusterdevelopment and higher densities wherepossible. She made it clear that greenspaces are also very important and thatdevelopment will be interspersed withgreen spaces. In addition she noted thatfragile land or land with high natural valuesnot suited to development will be identifiedin the planning process.

Ian StartupIan Startup, who is a small developer,spoke from the perspective of the buildingindustry, and his message was simple:plan ahead. Mr. Startup related severalstories in which development had failed inits delivery of homes that provided a senseof living space because of improperplanning.

He gave an example of communities inHolland that were well-planned and inconsequence were very “liveable.” Homeswere designed to work as a community,yet provided people with an individualsense of home ownership.

In Canada we still have a pioneer culture,in which we like to carve out a place in thewoods. We still perceive space to belimitless. This is very different fromHolland, and while we enjoy our space,modern developments do not encourage aa sense of close community.

Ian Startup concluded that it is, in part, theresponsibility of the building industry tobuild healthy homes and recognize thevalue of the environment in communitydesign.

Participants discuss greenspace maps

16

Allan EddyAllan Eddy, as a forestry Manager forNova Scotia Power, presented thecompany’s position on the managementof green space. Mr. Eddy noted that thecorridors beneath power lines areconsidered green space, and in total,Nova Scotia has over 30, 000 kilometresof powerline corridors.

He discussed how Nova Scotia Power isinterested in managing these areas asgreen spaces, and how the company ismaking an effort to reduce the use ofchemicals such as pesticides and topromote the corridors for use by people.

In addition to this discussion, Allan Eddyoutlined some of the challenges that facethe power company. These are:

(a) utilizing vegetation that is compatiblewith overhead power lines and planningnew developments that incorporate this intheir design

(b) at the streetscape level the companyhas to maintain both the power utilityinfrastructure and the trees that occupythe street.

Carol MacomberCarol Macomber represented the HRMCapital District Task Force, a new taskforce established to develop plans forHRM’s urban core. She spoke aboutgreen spaces in urban areas.

Ms. Macomber began by stating thatideally urban areas should have a densecentral core. This restricts sprawl andconcentrates transportation, making citiesmore efficient in the use of space.

She also noted that many people thinkthat undeveloped or vacant lots shouldautomatically be used as green space.She stated that this is not necessarily thebest use of these sites and not all unusedlots should become urban parks. Shedoes, however, recognize the criticalimportance of urban green space as well

as larger parks located outside of thecentral core. She added that the public atlarge should view parks and green spacesas an essential service.

In addition to her discussion on urbanparks and green spaces, she added thatthere needs to be a change in perceptionregarding green spaces that shouldextend also to our private homes:groomed lawns are not green spaces.She elaborated by stating that lawns offerlittle natural diversity and require lots ofmaintenance and the use of chemicalsthat are harmful to the environment. Theposition of the Task Force is that withinthe urban core residents should beencouraged to replace their lawns withwildflowers or vegetable gardens (thiswould have to be reflected in HRMBylaws).

Over and above this discussion, theurban/rural character of HRM was alsomentioned, along with the importance ofconnecting rural areas to the urban corewith trails. Carol notes that populationsare urbanizing and that the municipalitymust find creative ways to establish greenspaces within the urban core. She addsthat green spaces can be used as a wayto draw people downtown and that theyare better than malls in their ability toattract people to urban areas. Forexample, the Public Gardens is generallymore popular with people than ScotiaSquare.

Carol finished with a discussion on theimportance of street trees and argued thattree-lined streets are highly attractive andincrease the quality of life in the urbancore.

In this respect she disagreed with AllanEddy from Nova Scotia Power, who madea case for reducing the number of largetrees in new subdivision developmentsbecause they interfere with power lines.We have a choice of maintaining ourbeautiful streetscapes, or we can becomea city of small trees and shrubs.

Graham Fisher

17

Workshop: Green and

Smart: What Are Our

Choices?Presenter: Melanie Hare, UrbanStrategies Inc. Panelists: Ian Startup,Neighbourhood Developments andPatrick Moan, Dalhousie School ofPlanning;

Moderator: Howard Epstein, MLA

This workshop discussed the variousaspects of healthy growth managementfor the protection of greenspace. MelanieHare began by outlining some of themajor policies being implemented inCanada. She discussed some of theapproaches and tools being used andalso offered some suggestions on how toimplement effective growth management.

Patrick Moan then presented some of themain ideas of Smart Growth, whichinclude development that is morecompact, less reliant on car use and hasmore community amenities than standarddevelopment. He began by explaining theorigins of Smart Growth, and discussedwho supported this movement. Patrickconcluded by mentioning some of thefuture research that is ongoing in thisarea.

Ian Startup presented his neighbourhoodproject in Mahone Harbour, NS thatfollows some of the principles that Patrickand Melanie discussed. This projectreflects Ian's experience living in Hollandand included developing a sustainablecommunity on a 45 acre lot.

Following these presentations HowardEpstein asked for questions from theaudience. The consensus from theaudience was of a general acceptance ofthese ideas of growth management,however questions were raised aboutimplementation, particularly with respectto how these policies influencedtransportation strategies.

Focussing on Quality of LifeThe principles of smart growth have beensupported by numerous organizationsinterested in linking a region’s collectivequality of life and economic well being.This is not the same thing as claimingsmart growth agendas have radicallytransformed development patterns. Whatwe see are the early stages of amovement whose impact has not beenaccurately measured. Years will passbefore the impact of so-called smartgrowth will be fully understood. Certainlyall those pursuing smart growth agendasbelieve that a mixture of uses can bedelivered in such a way that satisfiesmarket needs, improves mobility, usesland more intelligently, and creates higherquality communities than have been builtover the past 50 years.

Quality of life is a central aspect of thesmart growth agenda. It is an agendawhich seeks to attract and retain top talentby creating communities that offer highamenity value. Significant amounts ofenergy, capital and cooperation havegone into developing smart growth

agendas in the United States. DavidCrombie, Chris Winter and otherCanadian observers of urban affairs havenoted that Canadian cities are losing theiredge to increasingly competitiveAmericans cities. Strong mayoralleadership and smart growth coalitionshave played a large role in this turn-around.

Smart growth has not done away with theconstruction of new communities in whichthere is strict separation of uses andcomplete reliance on the automobile forall daily activities. Smart growth agendasare in the earliest stages of alteringdevelopment patterns in places likeMaryland and Utah. Increasing numbersof projects on the ground however doindicate change is tangible. Examininghow various levels of government and theprivate sector support smart growth in avariety of geographical locations is auseful exercise. It allows for contrast andcomparison with one’s own environment.For example, if federal or state/provincialfunds are making it possible for localgovernment to create design centers that

Participants of the smart growth workshop

18

enable residents to visualize what a highquality, compact, mixed-use projectactually looks like, then perhaps otherjurisdictions might want to know how toaccess similar resources.

Community building as guided byelements of New Community Design is aninherently more complex process. It ismore difficult to design and build a highquality, mixed-use environment, thanproduce a conventional subdivision orstrip mall. In time, these difficulties shouldplace greater demands on planningprofessionals, making their jobs morechallenging. In the near future, smartgrowth agendas may be further advancedby the increased use of visualization toolsthat assist with both community designand long range planning.

Future ResearchConventional development has more thanfifty years of momentum behind it andchange will be experienced incrementally.The Bank of America, the largestarranger and provider of commercial andresidential real estate finance in theUnited States, has already committedover $350 billion over a 10-year period tocommunity development projects relatedto smart growth. Although this is apromising start, far more needs to happenbefore development patterns are to beappreciably altered. The majority of thebanking and investment industry stillfavours single-use projects. Wall Streetremains entrenched in investmentpractices that favour what is known andsafe. Typically, this translates into stripmalls and conventional subdivisionswhere a strict separation of uses isenforced.

New Community Design projects faceadditional obstacles. Fire departmentsfrown upon narrow streets that slow trafficto accommodate pedestrians andbicyclists. Developers who areinexperienced with multi-phased, mixed-use development will continue to favour

less demanding projects. Governmentbudgets in some cases will not allow forthe kinds of financial incentives changingdevelopment practices in places likeGaithersburg, Maryland and Austin,Texas. Exploring these impediments ingreater detail and rigorously ascertaininghow they are overcome in a variety oflocations may prove useful to policymakers seeking to increase regionalcompetitiveness by enhancing quality oflife through community design.

Ravi Singh

19

Workshop 2: Trails and

Trains: The CN Rail Cut

Project

Presenters: Marcus Garnet, HRMTherese Delorme, HRMMark Poirier, Halifax Urban GreenwayAssociation

Moderator: David Mitchell

The CN Rail cut project is a type ofundertaking best discussed at the localscale. At the moment, there are numerouspeople working together at the grassrootslevel, trying to create opportunities forpublic access to the rail cut.

A brief historical perspective on HRM’sattempts to secure public access to therail cut was presented. According to Mr.Garnet, the Halifax Parkland Strategy(1985) proposed a series of linkagesbetween greenspaces and campuses,which would result in a system ofgreenways that would extend existingparks. After privatization of CN Rail, theformer Crown Corporations surplus landholdings began to be sold off. This wasthe case in Halifax, where part of the cutbegan to be gradually sold to privateinterests. According to Mr. Garnet, thereis a movement currently afoot in NorthAmerica where trails are being laidbesides actively used rail lines. However,CN Rail does not support Rails with Trails,as it might generate legal liability in theevent of an accident. Nonetheless, localresidents are currently using the CN Railcut as an informal path system.

The growing interest in trails is based onpeople wanting healthier lifestyles and ahealthier environment. The most visibleaspect of this growing interest is theTrans-Canada Trail program, which is anattempt to connect all Canadian provincesthrough a network of multi-use trails. Thepublic health and environmental issuescreated by sedentary lifestyles, trafficcongestion, parking problems, autoemissions and land consumption byautomobile transportation, are all issuesthat can, in part, be addressed throughthe provision of trails.

The land owned by CN Rail includes therail cut, in addition to the land at grade onboth sides of the cut. The cut averagesabout 100 feet in width. There wereoriginally two rail lines within the cut.However 2/3 of one of the tracks hasbeen taken out, resulting in vacant railbed.

The Halifax Peninsula Rail cut representsnot only a physical connection, but also asymbolic one. It is a link to our heritage, toto nature, to each other and a link to thefuture. The link to history can be found inthe role that it played in bringing disasterrelief from across North America to Halifaxafter the Halifax Explosion, as well asbeing the starting point in the long voyageacross Canada for the many immigrantspassing through Pier 21. The rail cut is alink to the nation and the world because itconnects both the CN TranscontinentalRailway terminus and the Halifax OceanTerminals, with the rest of Canada andNorth America. The rail cut is an importantlink to nature on the Halifax Peninsula asit contains vegetation, as well as manytypes of birds. It also acts as a corridor forsmall mammals, and provides a glimpseinto the rock cut strata of the Halifaxregion.

The rail cut also acts as an ad-hoc bufferand trail system. An informal pedestrianroute already exists along most of itslength. It promotes shortcuts betweenstreets and neighbourhoods. It

source: http://www.region.halifax.ns.ca/greenway/

Presenters share their viewpoints.

establishes a buffer forresidential districts. In addition, arearesidents use it for personal fitness, aswell as a relief from their builtsurroundings.

No shortage of ideas has been associatedto the rail cut over the years. It has beenproposed that the excess land be used forresidential, or other types of development.A highway link between a proposedNorthwest Arm Bridge and a ThirdHarbour Bridge has been discussed.Some people and organizations havetalked about the possibility of using the airrights over the tracks for a highway link.Other ideas included: using the rail cut fora truck way and/or bus way, as a light-railroute, or as a commuter rail route for peakhour commuter service.

The proposed commuter rail route is stillunder discussion with CN. A studyundertaken by HRM concluded that 1/3 ofthe regional municipality’s population livesalong the catchment area of the proposedrail service. The catchment area isidentified as the area located within 1 kmof walking distance or 5 km of drivingdistance (park and ride) from theproposed service.

20

Both the region and the neighbourhoodsthat abut the rail cut would benefit fromhaving it open to public access. Theregion could benefit by having acontinuous extension of existing parks.The rail cut could act as an off-roadfitness trail, linking parks and campuses.It could also be a strategic trail linkbetween the harbour and the NorthwestArm. People from across the region coulduse it for nature appreciation, heritageinterpretation, as well as for its manyviews. The neighbourhoods could benefitby having the vegetation saved andmaintained. Existing graffiti andaccumulated garbage could be removed.Abutting properties could be protectedthrough the use of fencing. The differentuses could be managed through designand enforcement. Campus related trafficand parking could be reduced. Moreimportantly, the uncertainty factor wouldbe resolved. Even CN would benefit byreduced trespassing, increasedsurveillance of the rail cut, relief fromvegetation control responsibility, and areduced risk of debris on the tracks. Itwould be an opportunity for publiceducation and an enhanced public profile.

Opportunities for synergy exist. Relatedprojects and issues are currently beingdiscussed or planned by a variety of areaorganizations. The Bikeways Task Forceis looking at the possibility ofimplementing bike trails. St. Mary’sUniversity is discussing linking its FamilyCentre with Connors Field by a pedestrianbridge over the rail cut. Halifax ShoppingCentre is proposing a rail crossing to linkitself with area residential districts.Related issues being discussed includeCN bridge maintenance, the commuterrail proposal, as well as the NorthwestArm small ferry concept.

Following Mr. Garnet’s presentation, Mr.Poirier explained what led to the birth ofthe Halifax Urban Greenway Association(HUGA), as well their objectives, plans,and concepts for the rail cut.

A number of issues in the general area led

to the birth of HUGA. Around 1996-1997,land from the cut began to be sold off byCN Rail. In 1998, new owners blocked offthe existing right-of-way to Point PleasantPark. In 1999, there was a developmenton the waterfront that extended 100 feetinto the Northwest Arm, thereby cutting offa part of the view of the Arm. Theseissues, as well as opposition to rezoningof some of the land parcels, led localresidents to form HUGA in November2000.

There are numerous objectivesassociated with HUGA. The organizationis opposed to the creation of an industrialwasteland as a result of rezoning lands forindustrial purposes. HUGA is in favour ofprotecting the heritage aspects andnatural habitat that are part of the cut. Thegroup wants to encourage public accessto the cut, and is therefore in the processof advising HRM on the creation of anetwork of multi-functional trails(pedestrian and bicycles).

At a public meeting held to discuss therail cut project, many issues werediscussed. These included: managing

concerns of abutting property owners,unaesthetic fencing, more links to PointPleasant Park, and linking water accesspoints with the existing park system.There are also concerns of vandalism andliability associated with the rail cut project.Some property owners abutting the cut onthe north section (the south section hasfewer abutting neighbours) fear that theirprivacy would be jeopardized, and thattheir property might be trespassed.

A preliminary concept plan for the rail cuthas been presented to HRM. The conceptplan favours nature preservation, multi-purposes trail systems, and indicatespotential access points for public use.HRM is currently reviewing the plan. Thenext step in the process will be decidingwithin the next couple of weeks on thetype of phasing that HRM will berecommending. HUGA will be looking forcorporate sponsorships to make theproject a reality. HRM will proceed withland acquisition through the negotiation ofdevelopment agreements. HRM iscommitted to the project.

Luc Ouellet

source: http://www.region.halifax.ns.ca/greenway/

21

Panel Discussion: Planning

the Regional Ecology;

Lessons from the Atlantic

Region and Beyond

Neil Dawe, St. John’s Grand ConcourseAutority; Jim Baird City of Saint JohnPlanning; Don Poole, City ofCharlottetown Planning; John Charles,HRM Parks and Open SpacesMelanie Hare, Urban Strategies Inc.Moderator: Mark Poirier

Neil DaweThe idea of a Grand Concourse began in1989 and since 1992 the City has been de-veloping it as a green space system in St.John’s. Mr. Dawe offered seven importantpoints for the success of this project:

1.The plan is based on systems based planning,

focusing on both the built and natural environ-

ments;

2.The plan is to be a part of the regional frame-

work and should be based on habitat require-

ments;

3.Mapping of important habitats and corridors us-

ing both GIS and GPS technologies;

4.Link and identify ecology to social and economic

benefits in order to receive funding;

5.Develop “ Best Practices”;

6.Promote awareness of the project

7.Develop a system to monitor and

generate feedback on what you are doing.

Mr. Dawe stressed the importance of usingboth science and research to quantify theproject.

Jim BairdJim’s approach to greening Saint John is“working with what you’ve got.” Saint Johnis an industrial city with a large oil refineryand pulp mill. As a result, the port is inte-gral to the city’s economic viability. SaintJohn is an old city with a lot of industrialland for conversion into greenspaces.Rockwood Park, a large park in the centreof the city, is an important area for residents(much like Point Pleasant in Halifax). An-other important green space in the city is adowntown graveyard where people actuallywalk through it, instead of around it, becauseof its greenery. Jim listed a number ofprojects the city has initiated over the yearsin order to bring green spaces back into thecity.

One successful project is the greening ofdowntown King Street. In the early 1980sthe street was void of green areas. Thecity expanded pedestrian areas, plantedtrees and flowers, beautifying the area andmaking it more pleasant for area residents.The city is also involved with “ Communi-ties in Bloom” which promotes individualgreening. Another project is “ greening thethruway” a project which saw a cementmedian torn out of a divided highway andflowers planted in its place. The final projectJim described was greener parking lots.Parking lot owners are encouraged to re-place cement barriers with planters andother green objects such as trees and shrub-bery.

Grand Concourse, NF

Grand Concourse, NF

Rockwood Park, NB

22

Don PooleDon Poole is a planning and developmentofficer at the city of Charlottetown, PEI.Don’s presentation opened with an expla-nation of how the city of Charlottetown islaid out. The downtown core has foursquares with a central square in the mid-dle. The city is currently undertaking many“greening” projects throughout the city.These initiatives include planting trees,shrubs, and a variety of flowers. One projectthe city is quite proud of is the brownfieldreclamation study undertaken on the EastRoyalty landfill site. The city is also activein a “rails to trails” program that aims to con-vert abandoned rail lines into usable pathsfor pedestrians and cyclists. Finally, Dontalked about the city’s “ Communities inBloom project. Recently the city won thetop award in this yearly competition.

Melanie HareMelanie Hare is an Associate with UrbanStrategies, a planning and urban design firmbased in Toronto, ON. Melanie has beeninvolved in numerous projects in citiesacross Canada and the United States. InSarasota County Florida, the firm was hiredto develop a regional plan. The regionalplan involved using a set of natural basedsystems to develop the plan. Urban Strate-gies has also been involved in the TorontoWaterfront Plan. Toronto’s waterfront spans26 km and 70% is publicly owned. Many ofthe properties are contaminated and needto be cleaned. Other areas along the wa-terfront include beaches, and private devel-

Victoria Park, PEI

opments. Another project the firm hasworked on is the development of the Uni-versity of Waterloo’s technology park lo-cated on the school’s north campus. Thecity of Waterloo has an “environment first”policy and also has a strong smart growthplanning strategy based on itssubwatershed.

John CharlesJohn Charles is currently working with theParks and Open Spaces Division of HRMParks and Recreation. Since 1999, Johnhas been working toward the developmentof an Open Space Plan for the recentlyamalgamated Halifax Regional Municipal-ity. With the amalgamation of 19 former mu-nicipalities, HRM is now responsible for 634park properties. The Parks and OpenSpaces Division is also responsible for read-ing and analyzing 19 former municipal openspace strategies in order to develop oneconcept for the entire region. The region isdeveloping its new open space plan

Charlene Cressman

using principles found in landscape ecology.The guiding vision is to have a sustainable,integrated resource management plan thattakes into consideration both current and fu-ture needs.

WatPark, University of Waterloo

23

Presenters:Peter Klynstra, Landscape Architect;Cary Vollick, Landscape Architect;Doug Conrad, Landscape Nova ScotiaModerator: Jill Grant

Workshop 3: The Tyranny of Standards - An Obstacle to

Green Development?

Standards have insidiously invaded ourlives. They have become institutionalised.They have become a substitute forthinking. How do standards affect thegreening of the urban and regionallandscape?

Peter KlynstraPeter Klynstra started this invigorating talkby pointing out how pervasive standardsare in our daily lives, yet how more oftenthan not, the so-called standard applies toa small part of the population. Thesession continued with Klynstra askingthe audience if anyone found the‘standard’ plastic seats in the auditoriumcomfortable - no one did, demonstratingone downfall of such standards.

Part of the problem with standards lies inwho develops them. In philosophical andpsychological terms, these people are‘pragmatic reductionists’, those who havethe misguided belief that everything canbe explained in simple terms.

Standards have not always existed. It wasonly in the last five years that the Provinceof Nova Scotia developed the standardCoupling Act, ensuring that fire hydrantsand hoses meet the same size standardso that they may fit together. It seemsintuitive that this compatibility wouldoccur, although the development ofstandards was necessary to ensureconformity from place to place. Thisexample illustrates that standards are notalways a “ bad thing.”

Mr. Klynstra showed slides to illustrateexamples of standards and their relation-ship with greening:

- Naming streets after trees (ie: Oak,Beech) represents a ‘greener’ attitude.

- A policy standard of power being an above-ground utility has not been challenged; instead, trees are trimmed to conform to power lines and safety standards.

- Standards for asphalt can create an environment which is difficult to naturalize.

- The mentality that certain elements, required by standard, should be implemented, whether they make sense or not.

- Streets: Municipal standards often have no relevance to the actual context. While wider streets may providegreening opportunities (e.g. medians),narrower streets serve to slow traffic. Whynot have twelve foot wide unpavedstreets? This standard is acceptable forsnowplows, fire trucks, and ambulances,which have long been reinforcing agentsfor the standard street width. Many streetsin HRM do not meet the standard. Manystreets are much narrower, and theseplaces have the highest home sale prices!

Places like the Battery in St. John’s, Newfoundland could not have been builtby any municipal development standards,and prove to be popular places to live.

The Sophoclean notion that you canpackage information you could know,present, and understand, helped to createstandards; Socrates, on the other hand,believed he knew nothing, and would thus

Standards can be impediments togreening the urban and regionallandscape. Part of this problem lies inthe perception of ‘greening’; is itbiodiversity preservation, maintainingvegetation, groundwater protection, or acertain attitude towards development?Some of the problems with standards areas follows:

• The minimum becomes the maximum.

• The maximum becomes the minimum. • Standards can be the the only thing applied to the problem. • The ISO problem - standards serve to

institute and perpetuate a bad decision.

engage in dialogue to solve problems. It isthis approach that we must take in orderto model our designs to real life criteria,not necessarily only to pre-packagedstandards. Another problem is implement-ing standards without questioning them.

Cary VollickCary Vollick turned our attention toBayer’s Lake, the “standard whipping boyof what is wrong with suburban develop-ment”, to show local examples of some ofthe principles presented by Mr. Klynstra.What began as a low-speed, lightindustrial park, rapidly became today’s BigBox retail park; vehicular traffic skyrock-eted from about 5000 cars a day, to thatmany vehicles in an hour!

Only one of these sites is landscaped tothe road, the Price Club. Street trees arefound along the entrance driveway, andthe store’s loading zones are buffered.The remaining Big Box retail establish-ments in the business park have con-formed to the same standards.

24

Standards for required parking spaces, forexample, are determined by the squarefootage of the building, rather than theexpected number of customers frequent-ing a particular location. With a standardof four parking spaces per thousandsquare feet, Sears and Walmart havecomparably sized parking areas. Walmartreceives a constant flow of customers,while Sears is a furniture outlet withsignificantly less traffic. Without consider-ing alternatives, or having inherentflexibility in the standards themselves, alot of land is paved over.

Applying a uniform approach to Big Box isnecessary for equitable treatment, yet itcreated unintended results. Businessesattempting to conform to standardrequirements often end up fighting theterrain, rather than working with it.Achieving the maximum number ofparking spaces, irrespective of the terrain,not only incurs an immense cost, butappropriates capital from the landscapingbudget. And according to Halifax bylaws,‘landscaping’ is defined as a change ofmaterials from hard surfaces. This meansthat beach stone, which is prevalent inBayer’s Lake, qualifies as landscaping.

Vollick presented encouraging alternativesto these standard examples. The BlueCross building in Dartmouth does notmeet industrial park standards, but it is amuch greener example of development.While they did not spend the required 2%of the cost of construction on landscaping,the developer decided to work with theterrain and maintain 95% of the existingvegetation. A fire lane was threadedthrough a stand of old pine trees that wereto be preserved. Innovative examplesmay not meet ‘standards’ but often createmore liveable and green environments.

In order to prevent the replication of sterileplaces like Bayer’s Lake, standards mustbe engaged in a thoughtful and criticalway. The impetus must be put on thedeveloper to meet or exceed standards,and to work with the terrain in achievingthese objectives.

Doug ConradDoug Conrad enlightened the audience asto why standards do not always work, andhow bad work can take place, eventhough standards are implemented. Theprocess in determining standards isderived from past practicalities, and maynot seem relevant today. For example, thesize of fuel tanks on the space shuttle isrelated to the width of two horses’ rearends. The width of chariot wheels gave usroad standards; railroads determinedtunnel widths, which then dictated themaximum size of fuel tanks. This was notsomething that NASA experts calculated.

Bad work can be attributed in somecircumstances to the project biddingprocess involved in development. Alandscape architect will draft specifica-tions, which are passed on to the builder.These go out to tender, and the contractorselects the lowest bidder - often the leastqualified company - who looks to cutcorners to make money. A generalcontractor and the general public often donot see value in the landscape. There is agreat need to educate the public,especially homeowners. Education canhelp to ensure that landscaping andpreserving existing vegetation is auto-matic, rather than an afterthought.

Figure 1. An overview of Bayer’s Lake Business Park

(http://www.businessparks.com/parks/bayerslk.html).

Standards can only be as effective as theyare implemented and enforced. Standardsare enduring, responding to cultural values,and are difficult to change. As planners, wemust challenge and adjust the standards tobe more reasonable, and not simply applythem blindly. Standards are often based onelements that are no longer relevant in thepresent context. In assuming that we donot know all the answers, we should striveto design to criteria (terrain, neighbours,etc.) rather than just trying to satisfyminimum or maximum standards.

Heather Ternoway

25

PLANTING THE TOWN

GREEN

Design Workshop and

Public ForumLed by Dalhousie School of PlanningStudents and Susan Guppy

On the Thursday evening of the BreakingGround Conference, the planningstudents organized a public forum in theExhibition Room at the university. Theevening was well attended by students,faculty, planners and members of thepublic.

The objective of the evening was to lookat various green spaces within the Halifaxpeninsula and find ways to link themtogether by trails, parks or pedestrianpathways. It is vital that people canaccess green spaces easily within walkingdistance of their homes. Linkagespromote connections between areas andresidents of the city so that green spacesdo not exist in isolation. Connecting thesespaces with trails or greenways means

better access for pedestrians and cyclists(without having to battle automobiletraffic).

Participants were divided into foursections, each looking at two parks andthe potential green corridors to link them.The four areas that were chosen forconsideration were:

1. Halifax Commons and Point

Pleasant Park

2. Willow Spur Line and Seaview Park

3. Connections between Halifax

Peninsula and Halifax Mainland

4. Cogswell Interchange and Halifax

Waterfront

The evening started with a talk from PeterBigelow who is a Parklands Planner withHRM. Peter spoke about the potential formore green spaces in HRM and thecurrent projects that planners are workingon.

Participants at the Thursday night charette

Next everyone broke into the four groupsto talk about the potential for linkages.Peter was on hand to help out the groupsas were John Charles (Open SpacePlanner with HRM), Wayne Groszko(Pedestrian and Bike Coordinator withHRM), and Jan Skora (Park Planner withHRM), and Jim Donovan (Planner withHRM).

After the groups brainstormed their ideas,they presented them to everyone. Thereseemed to be a lot of potential forlinkages and a lot of enthusiasm about theidea of making these kinds ofconnections. Some of the ideas were:

IDEAS:

- tearing down the Cogswell

Interchange (a much talked about and

publicized project already);

- turning Lady Hammond Road into a

boulevard to meet up with Agricola

Street (which is already a boulevard),

and

- and creating a waterfront walkway to

stretch the length of the peninsula and

along the Bedford basin.

At the end of the evening the ideas andsketches were taken back to HRM forpotential use in future projects. It was agreat way to bring these ideas togetherand have something on paper that couldthen be shown to others working on theseor similar projects in the region. Whetherany of these ideas will come to be is notknown, but the evening allowed forinteresting discussion and provided aforum for exploring the possibilities.

Thank you to all who attended and aspecial thank you to Maria Jacobs forproducing all of the base maps that wereused in the workshop.

Lucy Trull

26

?

Linking Open Space Linking Open Space Halifax Peninsula Halifax Peninsula

??

?

Linking Open Space Halifax Peninsula

Mapping by Jason Alan Rokosh, Nova Scotia College of Art and Design

27

GREENING AT THE

COMMUNITY & NEIGHBOURHOOD SCALE

28

Workshop 5: From Lean

and Mean to Green and

Clean; Transforming

Brownfield Sites

Presenters:Dr. Stephen M. ArmstrongColin Morrell (Armstrong MorrellIncorporated); Dr. Ann McAfee, City of

Vancouver; Moderator: David Stonehouse

Polluted “brownfield sites”, found invirtually every Canadian city, present amajor challenge in terms of clean-up cost,environmental pollution, and publicawareness. In Part I of the workshop Dr.Stephen M. Armstrong and Colin Morrelloutlined the remediation capabilities ofArmstrong Morrell Incorporated. In alaboratory presentation, the speakersdescribed KMS, one of the technologiesused to address these current environ-mental problems.

The Kuryluk Mineral Separator (KMS)Concentrators Heavy Metal RecoverySystem is a new and innovative technol-ogy, invented and developed in AtlanticCanada. It was originally developed forthe purpose of separating gold fromprecious metal ores. The KMS Concentra-tor has since been adapted to recoverheavy metals (i.e., mercury, lead, copperand zinc), heavy alloys (i.e., brass), andprecious metals (i.e., gold and silver),from various material matrices - primarilysoils and mineral ores. The technologyworks in conjunction with standardscreening equipment. KMS has thecapability to process up to 15 tons of soilper hour, and can work for 24 hours a day.The technology, which uses only water, iseffective in recovering metals in themetallic form or heavy compound. Themetals can later be recycled thus addingvalue to the remediation project.

Mr. Morrell emphasized the many costadvantages of the technology due to thethe fact that it is a simple method, and canbe used on-site. Unlike traditional

methods of remediation, contaminatedsoil does not have to be transported tofar-away facilities, but rather can be“removed, recovered and reused” on-site.

Mr. Armstrong explained how the KMStechnology can be amended to addressorganic contamination by combining thecurrent system with bioremediation.Inorganics and organics can be treated atthe same time. The combined technolo-gies have the potential to replacetraditional chemical remediation proc-esses within the oil industry. With thiscombination approach, contaminated sitescould be cleaned first of heavy metals andthen of a possible oil contamination.Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Morrell proceededto demonstrate the removal of mercurywith a KMS Concentrator through amobile laboratory presentation. Theprocess has been described by PhaseTechnologies as follows (see simplifieddiagram below):

“The heavy metal /compound bearingmaterial is fed to a hopper (H) through amaterial feed pipe (FP) tangentiallyentering the hopper. A fluid is fed to thehopper through two types of fluid feedport: an upper feed port (FF) and avelocity feed port (VF) positioned below.The fluid, fed through fluid feed ports (FF),acts as a suspension medium allowing thematerial to separate according to theweight and specific gravity of the particles.The fluid, fed through feed ports (VF), isdirected vertically upwards through thebase of the unit and acts as barrier tolighter materials while simultaneouslyallowing heavier particles to migrate to thebase of the unit for accumulation in thecollection chamber (CC). As material isfed to the hopper, the lighter materials aredisplaced upward and exit the hopper viathe tailings pipe (TP).”

Following the demonstration, the audi-ence raised a number of questionsregarding the use of the technology.Points of interest included the limitationsof KMS as well as the existence of anygovernment regulations regardingcontaminated soil.

In conclusion, Mr. Morrell expressed hisregrets about the fact that this innovativetechnology has rarely been used inCanada, although it has found popularityin overseas sites. A recent example hasbeen the use of KMS in Copenhagen,Denmark. Reasons for the lack of usagein Canada include the fact that Canada'sregulations do not encourage the clean-upof metal contaminated sites. He sug-gested that this void may, in part, be dueto the fact that unlike in some Europeancountries there is no shortage of space inCanada and therefore there is neither theland use pressure nor the public aware-ness to restore contaminated lands totheir former state in this country.

<<m e a n

KMS

c l e a n <<

29

Dr. Ann McAfee, Director of City

Plans VancouverIn her part of the workshop session, Dr.Ann McAfee shared Vancouver’sexperience in redeveloping old industrialsites. In particular, she focused on thecity’s efforts to turn the downtown FalseCreek Basin area brownfield into anattractive residential neighbourhood.

For more than a century, the landsurrounding False Creek had been usedfor commercial and industrial purposes.At the turn of the last century, False Creekwas lined with sawmills and lumberyards.Later on, steel mills, warehouses, anincinerator and many other industrialfacilities were established in the area.Construction industries were increasinglytaking up large portions of the waterfront.

In the 1960s industry began to leaveFalse Creek. The industrial sites becameabandoned eyesores in the heart ofVancouver. In 1970, the city council madea landmark decision to rezone much ofFalse Creek for housing and parks. Dr.McAfee outlined the various steps taken(as well as hurdles encountered) by thecity in its ambitious effort to regain thisprime downtown location for Vancouvercitizens. Two slides presented at thebeginning of her discussion compare thestate of decay in False Creek in the mid1960s to its current residential vitality,underscoring the success of far-sightedcity politics.

In preparation for this project, thegovernment gathered landownerstogether for a land swap, wherebyownership was shifted in order to createparcels of land large enough for develop-ment. At the beginning of the developmentproject, there was a great deal ofreservation and resistance. However,once investors were convinced about theprojected success of the project, a racebegan between private and publicinvestors for initial development projects.False Creek Policy Broadsheets wereapproved by City Council. This document

sets out, for planning purposes, suchissues and policies relating to shoreline,waterfront walkway, land use, density,parks and public open space, urbandesign, soil conditions. This led to anofficial development plan followed by areazoning and building approvals. Guidingprinciples for development in this areaincluded consideration of water use,housing, open space, communityservices, and traffic circulation. Trafficcirculation was designed to minimize caruse, separate modes of transportation,and only allow for minimal parking.Subsequent to the creation of theseguidelines, developers came up withproposals to implement these principles.

www.ffwd.cx/images/vancouver.jpg

Some of the old on-site buildings weredesignated as heritage buildings. Topreserve the integrity of such buildings,the city retained approval rights prior toallowing development of and around theheritage sites. This placed furtherlimitations on permit approval. As aresult, old industrial buildings are now putto creative use, housing art galleries, retailstores, restaurants, a community center,offices and residential developments.

As a logical result of the site’s primewaterfront location, access to waterfrontwas a major priority. The City had a longheld Council policy expressing anintention to acquire City ownership of theshoreline for public access. A trail systemfor pedestrians and bicycles was en-dorsed by the city in 1972-74 around

False Creek. The subsequent Broad-sheets noted above, mandated a publicwaterfront walkway, to separate pedes-trian and bicyclist.

One of the primary objectives of theCouncil was to create more residentialspace downtown. There was an explicitobjective of providing for mixed-incomehousing to integrate various age andsocio-economic backgrounds as well asdifferent styles of housing. Considera-tions were made for market-rent housing,seniors residence, and social housing.Half of this housing is low-income. A laterdiscovery of the city was that peoplewould also be willing to live in this area inhigher densities and therefore high-risebuildings are also found.

In order to implement these broad-basedideas, strong measures were necessary inorder to bring plans to fruition. Publicownership of key land tracts, such as thewaterfront, was necessary. Instead ofselling off certain pieces of land, the cityretains ownership but leases it out, thusmaintaining its ability to exercise controlover its use.

Today the development of False Creek isa success story. Approximately 100,000people live within walking distance of theirplaces of employment, in an attractive anddynamic neighbourhood. The downtowncar use has dropped significantly. Theneighbourhood unites residential andrecreational use, providing wide amenityspaces downtown. Dr. Ann McAfeemade it clear that the most importantelement in the success of this project wasa council that included open-minded andprogressive far-sighted individuals who,despite many reservations, managed tobring these concepts to implementation.Dr. Ann McAfee closed her presentationwith the humorous yet apt observationthat while current planners take credit forinnovative developments in False Creekarea, it must be noted that they are simplyriding on the tails of work that wasinitiated 30 years ago.

Steffen Käubler

g r e e n>

30

Workshop 6: Urban

Agriculture - Local Food

Production and

Distribution

Presenters:Marjorie Willison, Urban FarmMuseum; Geordie Ochterloney,Home Grown Organics; DavidMcCall, NorthEnd CommunityGarden AssociationModerator: Susan Guppy

For this workshop, each member of thepanel gave a brief presentation on urbanagriculture and their role in the communityin trying to promote it. The floor was thenopened to questions and culminated in abrainstorming session of all participantsaddressing the following question: Whatcan we do to make urban agriculture areality?

Marjorie Willison started off the paneldiscussion with a summary of the currentstate of international food production. Hermessage was that given currentproduction levels and the adherence toconventional agricultural techniques, wesimply will not have enough food to feedthe world’s growing population. Thecurrent farming practices that dictateNorth American food production areinefficient and costly. For every 16calories used in traditional farming, onlyone is produced, resulting in a deficit of -15 calories.

Current farming practices also havedetrimental effects on the environment:58% of worldwide petroleum consumptionis used for the growth, process andtransport of food. Much of this isunnecessary. Food can be grown easily,efficiently and most important, locally.

Marjorie then spoke of the possibilities ofurban agriculture, of community gardensand rooftop vegetable patches. There arecountless areas to plant and grow foodsuch as vacant lots, parking lots orbackyards. Fruit and nut trees can begrown instead of ornamental trees. Localfood production reduces the need fortransportation costs and fuel; it reducesdependence on other areas for food andalso puts people in touch with their food

and where it comes from. Communitygardens also aid in the camaraderie andcooperation amongst neighbours, thecontact with nature and the outdoors, andand the general aesthetics of a community.Vacant lots become green spaces filledwith what Marjorie terms “ ediblelandscaping.”

What are some of the obstacles to startinga community garden? Marjorie outlined anumber of them:

Lack of municipal government supportAvailability of gardening consultants andresource contactsAvailability of good quality soil and landNeighbourhood acceptanceVandalismAccess for allAccess to waterZoning

Geordie Ochterloney told us the story ofhow he came to be the owner of Home

Grown Organics. Home Grown Organics

is a local company committed to providingaffordable, organic produce forHaligonians. Geordie’s journey startedwith simply planting seeds in hisapartment. He later traveled and beganlearning about agriculture. He had beenthinking about looking for a job overseasbut later realized that he wanted to bringhome what he had learned and dosomething here in Halifax.

Marjorie tells the group about the importance of urban

agriculture.

David shows the group maps of the locations of the

community gardens.

Moderator Susan Guppy gets the discusson started

31

Home Grown Organics has grown toserve over 550 members and continues togrow. The business consists of a generalstore in the north end of Halifax andweekly home deliveries of organic foodboxes. They also provide ecologically-friendly cleaning supplies, organic bread,eggs and starting this spring they will beselling seedlings. Their mandate is notbased on maximizing profits but inproviding support, resources andinformation for people to be able to growfood for themselves.

David McCall has been a member andproject coordinator for the North EndCommunity Garden Association (NECGA)since 1999. David was studying cropecology and researching the effects ofpesticides when he realized he was moreinterested in preventative measures. Thisled to his interest in promoting sustainablecommunity gardens. The first garden wason Brunswick Street (where it remains)and later the NECGA planted a secondgarden near the water tower on the NorthEnd of Robie Street.

The successes have not been withoutobstacles however. The main challengeshave been funding and land acquisition.At the Robie Street location there has alsobeen a problem with water access.Because of safety laws about open water,the group found it difficult to provideenough water to the garden. They laterrectified this by using water hosesconnected to taps across the street fromthe garden.

David reiterated the importance ofgrowing organic food. He warned againstbuying organic products from majorcompanies such as the Superstore. Theseproducts may be organic but they aregrown on massive corporate farms inplaces far from here and profit largecompanies such as General Mills. It issimply not necessary to depend uponthese companies for our food. Locallyproduced organic produce is possible andlogical!

Anyone can join NECGA for a $10membership fee though no one is turnedaway if they are unable to pay. NECGAplans to plant two more gardens thisspring.

David and Geordie answer questions from the audience.

One of the members of the audience signs up to be on

the Food Council.

The participants gather around Marjorie. The group

consisted of academics, students, and interested

members of the public.

The presentations triggered a lot ofenthusiasm from the listeners. After thequestion period Marjorie began writingdown ideas for further action. This listwas later presented to the rest of theparticipants of the conference. Some ofthe ideas on the list were:

Establish a food council to move food

agenda forward

Join the ACORN Food Conference

Identify and protect/develop growing

sites; i.e. parking lots, old farms, fruit

trees and shrubs on city land

Protect and collect natural water

resources

Make food growing a part of new

developments and require new

subdivisions to have room for

community gardens

Marjorie reiterated that it takes a group ofcommitted and enthusiastic individuals tomake something happen, but that we canstill do things for ourselves in our owngardens. At the end of the workshop anumber of people signed up to be a partof a food council. The group has their firstmeeting on May 25, 2002 at the CaptainWilliam Spry Centre. Perhaps this groupwill be new advocates of urban agriculturein HRM and the energy of this day will not

be lost.

Lucy TrullAll photos by author.

32

Workshop 7: Building

Partnerships for Urban/

Suburban Greenspace

Presenters:Nancy McMinn, City of CharlottetownNeil Dawe, St. John’s Grand ConcourseAuthority

Moderator: Deborah Grant

To initiate the session, Deborah Grant ofthe Downtown Halifax Business Commis-sion acknowledged the difficulty inbuilding a partnership between variouslevels of government, and between thegovernment and the public. It is an areathat all organizations struggle with, yet it isincreasingly important as local govern-ments are struggling to do more with less.The City of Charlottetown and the GrandConcourse Authority have been able todevelop effective partnerships in creatingopen space projects.

Charlottetown, PEINancy McMinn spoke of her parksplanning experience in Charlottetown.One of her responsibilities is establishingLegacy Parks created through variouspartnerships. The main reason for theselegacy parks is to make public parksplaces where people gather, rather thanplaces that people avoid. Residents andvolunteer groups are involved in all stagesof park planning, including pre-develop-ment, design, implementation andmanagement. Partners contribute inwhatever form, including time, money orsweat equity.

Two examples of legacy parks inCharlottetown are described as follows:

Grafton St. EastThe area was originally an abandonedcoal yard. It is located at the end of theEast Bridge, one of the main routes thatenter into Charlottetown. For many yearsthe people wanted to do something withthe unsightly area. In the 1970s there wasa proposal for development, but residents

opposed it. Later, the rail lines abuttingthe property were abandoned ,and in the1990s designated as part of TransCanada Trail.

In 1999 the municipality decided tocommission the area as a legacy park.The biggest response came with thegroup called the IODE Lake of ShiningWaters. They were asked if they wantedto take ownership of this unused park.This group started by initiating discus-sions with the provincial governments foradditional funding. With the volunteerefforts of the group, and funding from theprovincial, municipal and federal govern-ments, the park flourished. There have,however, been growing pains. Residentsabutting the park felt overwhelmed by theefforts of volunteer groups. From thisexperience, the following lessons weredrawn:

- There is a need to balance the efforts ofthe various groups involved. -The impact of an election must be con-sidered to ensure that commitments to theproject is maintained.- Plan for maintenance.

Maintenance has become a largeexpenditure. Because of the success ofthe efforts and the attraction of high-endfacilities the park requires a fair amount ofmoney to maintain. The volunteer groupsare now working on a number of activitiesthat will raise money for the maintenanceof the Joseph A Ghiz Park.

Rochford SquareThe other legacy project is the RochfordSquare in historic downtownCharlottetown. The park was noted asbeing “tired”, needing revitalization. Theidea was to re-create a park based on aVictorian design concept. The neighbour-hood took ownership of the park byinitially adopting a flowerbed. The primaryfunding came from the Kiwanis group asthey were looking for a millenium project,and this park has also flourished. Thelessons learned from this legacy park are

as follows:

-The need to communicate effectively.Because there are a number of groupsand possibly differing agendas, thecommunication of the goals and proc-esses have to be clearly communicated toall involved.-Commitment. With the number ofpartners involved, there can be problemswith keeping commitments to the agreedupon tasks. Because of this, a clearunderstanding of the tasks and expecta-tions need to be confirmed on paper.

To overcome some of these challenges,Ms McMinn recommended the following:

-Have a design ready. It acts as aguideline and focuses the groups involvedon a common and agreed goal. Thedesign and goal allows the groups topursue the project together.

-Maintain and foster a positive relationshipbetween these groups. This can be donethrough meetings, activities, and opencommunication.

Currently the Legacy Parks Project hasother ideas for partnerships, such as: asports field for minor baseball, a skate-board park, an experimental farm and aCharlottetown streetscape plan. All ofthese projects require partnerships andthe Parks and Recreation and Culturedepartments will learn from the lessons ofthese two initial projects. The overall goalis to allow partnerships to create legacies.

The Grand Concourse, St. Johns NFLDMs. McMinn during her presentation

33

The second speaker was Mr. Neil Dawe.He is a Director of the Grand Concoursein St. John’s Newfoundland. The GrandConcourse is a 100 km trail systemaround the city. It links important destina-tions and runs along bio-diversestreambed corridors. It uses the materialfrom the area, and works with the naturaltopography. In order to legitimize thisprivate-public partnership, a provincial actwas passed in 1995. Next, a master planwas developed to guide future actions. Animportant legislation on access rights ofthe trail system enabled riparian zoneprotection. Since 1940, property ownerscan no longer own property within 15meters of any watercourse or body. Thereare 3 major streams near St John’s thatprovide habitat for a variety of wildlife andan excellent trail system enjoyed by all.

Mr Dawe shared recommendations withthe workshop participants for pursuing thistype of project, including:

- A vision has to be clearly articulated. itshould identify what is unique about thearea. This can help in attracting funding.The vision should also include guidingprinciples such as design with nature,taking clues from the local environment byusing local material, community basedinvolvement, incremental growth, andallowing culture and history to tell a story.

-A need to confirm community support.Ensure that representatives from eachgroup attend the meetings. In this case,Trans Canada Trail was a significantcontributor.

-Seek a champion and allow someflexibility by adjusting an application tomeet their needs. Do not make thelimitations on an application for partner-ships too stringent. Find a way that thegroup can contribute and allow them totake some ownership. In the case of theGrand Concourse, the initial championwas Paul Johnson. He contributed theinitial sum of money and was an enthusi-astic promoter.

-Write a clear document that confirms amaintenance plan. The plan needs toprescribe a specific standard of mainte-nance. These standards are in turndirected by policy.

Define clearly the objectives and out-comes. Social objectives may includecommunity health, an appreciation bylocal residents. Another objective can bethe economic impact on the GDP and ontourism.

Have an ecological project that is basedon bio-diversity and habitat. Encouragethe careful use of the environment, forexample, have a sinuous trail as opposedto a rigid and defined trail.

Further lessons that Mr. Dawe shared withus and that he felt contributed to thesuccess of the development of the trail/open space system are listed as follows:

Think big! Have trails that are 30 km long,10 km and 1km.

Organize activities and programs thatinclude the youth. The park becomes aneducational tool.

Have inspirational aspects in the park thatattracts people to use it.

Embrace training and technology. Try newsoftware and technology. It attracts peopleand also assists is presenting the projectin a progressive way. Mr Dawe showed a3-D map that emphasized the streamscorridors and gorges around St. Johns.

Work with the municipal planningstrategies and land uses by-laws andensure the trail system policies andoperation are included when updates orreviews are made.

Define the planning boundaries on themap.

Develop a master plan. The Plan acts as

a guideline and keeps everyone knowl-edgeable and informed as to the focusand potential of the project. Also makesure the plan is implementable.

-Build the project incrementally with manysmall steps. The steps become mile-stones and give a sense of achievement

-Do not chase partners, let the success ofthe small accomplishments attract them.

-Have pilot projects and build on theirsuccess. Have a product of success thatyou can use in order to attract otherfunders.

-Have membership, which attractsownership and commitment.

-Set goals realistically and build from thesmall successes.

-Formalize commitment from the partnerson paper.

-The project needs a full time, dedicatedstaff.

ConclusionSuccessful implementation of open spacesystems is exemplified in these two areasof Atlantic Canada. Ms. McMinn and Mr.Dawe have been able to accomplish whatmany trail system projects struggle with.Similarities between the two speakerswere evident with their willingness to trynew ideas, and to learn from their pastexperiences. Both speakers also stressedthe importance of a clear yet flexible planthat would guide volunteers. In listening tothe two speakers, there was a feelingamongst the workshop participants thatthese two cities definitely warranted a visitsometime in the near future.

Maria Jacobs

34

Workshop 8: Your

Schoolyard is Your

Neighbourhood

GreenspacePresenters: Denise Philippe, Evergreenand Rhea Mahar, Tree Canada

Moderator: Doug Conrad

This workshop explored the role thatnatural or naturalized school grounds playin contributing to healthier urban land-scapes and ecological functioning withinthe city.

In addition, this workshop had aninteractive component. Two site planswere given to the participants, one foreach group. One plan was for a city highschool; the other for a rural elementaryschool. Each group was asked to drawand present a landscape plan for aGreening School Grounds program.

Denise and Rhea first introduced theorganizations with which they work.Evergreen is a national not-for-profitorganization. It has three programstreams - Learning Grounds, CommonGrounds program, and Home Grounds.Learning Grounds is the school-basedprogram. It has worked with over 1000schools across Canada. CommonGrounds works with communities at large,and in public spaces beyond the schoolground.

Programming is delivered through:restoration, resource development,grants, training, facilitation and buildingnetworks and advocacy.

Tree Canada Foundation is a nationalnon-profit organization whose mission isto facilitate tree planting in both urban andrural communities. This is done through anumber of programs including GreenStreets Canada and Greening Canada’sSchool Grounds.

What kind of schoolground

movement are we talking about?School ground greening is often aresponse to school grounds designedaccording to a “functionalist ethic”expressed in most of the schools that wesee today. This means that ecologicalconcerns are not addressed, social oreducational needs of students are notmet, and the school relates poorly to thelarger surrounding community.

Responsive school ground greeningprojects can range from beautificationprojects (wanting school grounds to lookbetter), to projects that include environ-mental enhancement and outdoorlearning as goals. School groundnaturalization is a particular form ofgreening, and is an alternative approachto landscaping that blends environmentalconcerns. The latter can address habitatloss and biodiversity decline by plantingnative plants.

The benefits of these projects in the eyesof the education community (i.e. teachers,parents, administrators) are that theyoffer:- a living example of a growing ecosystem- an opportunity to learn from directexperience- shelter from UV rays- a less hostile and more creative area forplay- a reduction in violence and vandalismthrough an increased sense of ownership- a reduction in maintenance requirements

and chemical use- an excellent model for environmentalrehabilitation, community stewardship andstudent citizenship- an opportunity to meet school accredita-tion goals- ways to involve ESL parents- increased pride in the school

From an environmental or regionalgreening perspective, these projects helpto address some of the following issues:- the lack of accessible green space in thecity;- the need for more sustainably designedand maintained urban landscapes, anecologically literate citizenry, and activecommunity stewardship;- a stronger sense of place;- water quality improvements by providingpermeable landscapes that slow run-offwater and offer additional filtration;- improved water quality through areduction in chemical use in landscapemanagement;- improved air quality through treeplantings;- climate change (by reducing the urbanheat island effect- pavement is replacedwith plantings, which means lessreflective surfaces in our cities); and areduction in energy consumption whentrees are planted around buildings.- urban biodiversity- habitat loss and fragmentation. Someschool ground projects re-create habitatspaces (riparian, meadow, forest,wetlands). Other projects provideincreased connectivity between greencorridors, consequently decreasingspecies isolation and fragmentation.

So why are schools committed to

change?There are many reasons for whichschools pick up the challenge of creatingan outdoor classroom and habitat area ontheir school grounds. For many, it is NOTto meet regional greening goals. And hereis where an opportunity may lie. Regard-less of the motive, transformation involvescertain processes.

Workshop participants engage in

developing schoolground greening plan

35

Parents, teachers, and students mobilizeto involve large components of theircommunity. Through organizations suchas Evergreen, Tree Canada, etc., schoolcommunities are encouraged to: inventorytheir sites; develop a design; collaborateon implementing and stewarding theproject, and ensure long termsustainability. The latter may be achievedthrough ongoing outdoor/experientiallearning using the school ground as aneducational resource.

Through this mobilization, schoolcommunities are not only creating greenspaces that improve the ecological valueof school grounds in urban areas, they arealso educating children and youth alike onthe potential of nature in the city.

Regional land managers can use thisenergy, these green spaces and corre-sponding projects to weave together atruly liveable, sustainable urban fabric inany municipality or region.

The challengesThe picture is not all rosy, however. Thereis lots of opportunity, but where are thechallenges?

These projects are grassroots, and do nothave the benefit of systemic support:- No district or provincial-level policy inmost of the country- No funding, and decreasing budgets forground maintenance and improvement.- Overworked teachers- only the verykeen and committed take on theseprojects. Often projects are inspired andpropelled along by parents.- Short term life cycles (of naturalizedareas) due to teacher/parent turnover andcompeting interests within any oneschool.- Lack of knowledge/training in mainte-nance departments on environmental andeducational benefits of such landscapes,how to cost-effectively manage them, orhow to involve the overall community instewardship.

- Lack of knowledge/training amongstteachers on how best to use schoolgrounds as educational resources.

What can we do?The following are ideas for next steps.

- Develop policy with school boards. Forexample, environmental regulations in thestate of Maryland require new schoolsites to develop environmental options. Inresponse, Maryland’s State Board ofEducation has developed an environmen-tal education by-law that requires studentsto benefit from a multi-disciplinaryenvironmental education, which is partlydelivered through innovative schoollandscape programming.

- Co-management strategies. The City ofWinnipeg is responsible for maintenanceand upkeep of school grounds beyond thespace immediately surrounding thebuildings. Naturalists employed by themunicipality to work on parkland naturali-zation also lend support to (and facilitatethe development of) school groundnaturalization projects.

- Options for sharing resources. Funds,expertise, maintenance resourcesincluding staff and machinery, can all beshared. Funding options expand whenworking with a larger network of people,and possibly expanding money sources tothose outside the tax base.

- Ensure schools, their staff and commu-nity, as well as school boards are invitedto regional visioning meetings. Whenorganizing such events, ensure meaning-ful participation by schools is possible.

- Lay out your regional greening visions,goals, strategies in such a way that schoolgrounds are quite clearly part of the map.

- Work with developers to include schoolsas part of the overall community design,and possibly use the green space to moreeffectively address water managementissues. A great example is in British

Columbia’s East Clayton development,where two schools have been designedas the heart of the community, right downto the way that water flows as part of thedevelopment’s green infrastructure. Also,Strathroy, Ontario developed a school sitethat is partly used for a storm-watermanagement pond.

- Secure school grounds through landpurchases, and use the school communityas the stewarding agency.

- Co-deliver training for management staffon maintaining naturalized/restoredlandscapes.

- Co-design new schools with facilityplanners so that open spaces serve bothecological and cultural heritage functions.Much of this information is contained inpolicy guidelines developed by Evergreen.

Next, Rhea Dawn Mahar presented some

exciting Nova Scotia initiatives.

Schoolground Projects in Nova

ScotiaNova Scotia has its share of barrenschool grounds. In 1994 a survey wasdone photographing and reporting on thestate of twenty-seven Halifax City schoolboards.

The survey revealed a trend of city schoolgrounds into one of three generalcategories or rings. It was clear that theouter ring includes schools that havenatural areas on them. Closer to the citycentre, schools generally have expansesof mowed grass areas. The inner ringschools are dominated by asphalt.

The benefits of natural areas are obvious,and natural history lessons are abundantin these habitats. For example, FlemingTower elementary school in Halifax hasboth granite and slate rocks on the slopebehind the building. The granite supportsthe growth of moss, while the acidic slatedoes not. The presence of this environ-ment offers exciting opportunities for

36

lessons in both ecology and geology.

Another exciting example comes fromEcole Beaufort (currently under the threatof closure). This urban school began itsgreening program in the spring of 1995 byadopting a stewardship project for thelarge Elm trees growing on the perimeterof the school. Planters were also placedon top of the asphalt surface. Each classin the school since 1995 has beenresponsible for one-half of a planter.Each year they could plant whatever theywished.

A berm was also created by digging upasphalt, and bringing additional soil toplant native species. Students paintednew benches that were installed beneaththe large Elm trees, creating a wonderful“outdoor classroom” environment.

At LeMarchant St. Thomas school,planning to replace the large lawn thatdominated the school yard got underwayin autumn 1995. It was part of the NovaScotia Model Schools project. In 1997/98an outdoor classroom was installed alongwith a serpentine pathway and severalgardens.

Robert Jamieson is a rural Eastern Shoreschool that has numerous gardens,outdoor classrooms, and schoolyardcomposting. Since they are located onthe coast they utilize eelgrass as a mulch,and a carbon source for gardeningactivities and composting.

In the Antigonish Education Centre anentire lawnscape was turned into anetwork of paths lined with apple treesand habitat sites. Planning began in Juneof 2000, and the entire school andsurrounding rural community ofHeatherton was incorporated into thevision. It paid off. A planting wasorganized for the Antigonish Food Bank inthe “Plant a Row, Grow a Row” program.

Harry R. Hamilton began restoring a pondhabitat near their school on Earth Day,

1995 by pulling out an abandonedwrecked car from their property’s wetarea. The school has naturally takenownership of the site, and did not takewell to a proposal that would see a 1000-home subdivision upstream from thepond.

The school and the community gotinvolved, and delayed construction whilenegotiations continue between thedeveloper, the municipality, the schooland the school board. The school wantedto see the downstream bog preserved asa park, as it has an important watershedfunction, and impacts the school pond.Unfortunately, the HRM Park and OpenSpace Department was not willing tochange their “park circles model” to adoptthe downstream bog as a park.

The school never let up their enrollment ofthe community. In May 2000 at a functioncalled Nature Night, a panel of studentsquizzed a panel of adult experts withgrilling environmental questions . Theseadults included politicians, the developer,a local environmental group, and RheaMahar. From that night, the developmentofficer of the area was ordered to resolvethe dispute of the land next to the school.In June, 2000 all the players were invitedto the school site for a meeting, and anEnvironmental Impact Assessment wasordered, which was completed in January2001. Finally, a Conservation Area wascreated in February 2002 based on thevalue of the pond as an educational

resource. For more information pleasecontact Rhea Dawn Mahar, PO Box 481,Halifax, NS B3J 2R7 at (902) 876-1309.

QUESTIONS1. What to do with schools that close orare about to close? Response: Generallyif a school is proposed for closing they donot receive funding to green theirgrounds, even if they survive a firstreview. History has shown that schoolsusually do end up closing within five yearsonce they are stringently reviewed.

2. Vandalism: How do you deal with that?Response: Preventative planning anddesign, work with police for lines of visionfor their patrols. Involve as many peopleas possible in the planning, surveying,and planting stages to create a sense ofownership of the project in the neighbour-hood.

3. Funding sources? Response: Thereare many; with Evergreen and TreeCanada being two that are out there. InNS, the NS Teachers Union is nowfunding curriculum-based projects.

4. Technical and Logistical Support?Response: See Tree Canada websiteand Evergreen website, and call RheaDawn Mahar in Atlantic Canada.

Prepared from the notes of Denise Philippe

and Rhea Mahar

Photo source: www.evergreen.ca

37

Workshop 9: More

Greenspace (technically

speaking) - Solar Aquatics

in your neighbourhood

Presenters and Moderators:Delaine Clyne, School of Planning, andClaudianne Ouellette-Plamondon,Department of Biological Engineering,Dalhousie University

The presentation began with a briefintroduction to solar aquatic technologyand a description of the research projectthat both Delaine and Claudianneparticipated in with other architecturestudents. The project involvedresearching both positive and negativeeffects of solar aquatic wastewatermanagement systems and the plausibilityof applying that technology to the HalifaxRegional Municipality (HRM). Thepresentation concluded with aninspirational talk from Delaine about asmall South American community(Gaviotas) that was developed anddesigned with unique and eco-sensitivetechnologies to help demonstrate thatenvironmentally, economically, andsocially sustainable developments arepossible.

Solar AquaticsSolar Aquatic systems are an effectiveway to address wastewater managementby bringing together science, nature, andtechnology. This ecological wastewatertreatment system uses bacteria, algae,

plants, and aquatic animals to imitate thenatural purification process of freshwaterto break down solid and liquid wastes.Although all sewage treatment systemsuse bacteria to break down waste, SolarAquatics use a higher level of biodiversityto treat a wider range of contaminants.This helps to avoid the usage ofunnecessary chemicals that traditionaltreatment plants require.

Enclosed in greenhouses, Solar Aquaticsystems house a number of tanks, eachserving a different purpose or stage alongthe cycle of wastewater treatment.

The treatment process occurs in sixstages with retention time varying,depending upon the concentration ofwastewater and the degree of purificationrequired. In the first stage (known as the “Headworks”), raw sewage passes througha screen leaving behind coarse inorganic

Solar Aquatic tank

debris. The sewage then passes throughan aerated grit chamber where inorganicsand and gravel settle out.

The next stage is known as “ Blending.”This process involves the breaking downof floatable organic solids and is the stagewhere biological treatment first begins.

Sewage from the Headworks enters theBlending tanks where it is mixed usingfine bubble aeration. Airborne bacteria inthe bubbles break down organicchemicals into carbon dioxide, nitrate, andwater. The system also breaks down fats,proteins, and starches that are

Solar Aquatic process

38

Solar Aquatic facility being used to grown various plant

species

Bear River, home of solar aquatics facility.

metabolized by downstream organisms.Nitrification is the third stage of theprocess. In this stage, nitrogen andphosphorous are removed by plantsgrowing at the surface of the solar tanks,Root systems from the plants further helpto catch suspended solids while micro-organisms and small animals (like snails)feed on the solids. Remaining sludge isrecycled back into the blending tanks formicrobial reseeding and reprocessing,with the balance sent to reed beds fordewatering and composting (this is thefourth stage).

Denitrification occurs as the fifth stage ofthe process in the form of a marsh. Theclarified water is run over a stonesubstrata converting nitrite to nitrogengas. Marsh plants remove pathogenicbacteria and absorb phosphorus.

The final stage is Disinfection. This stageuses ultraviolet lamps to disinfect thewater and make it potable. After thisstage, the water can be reintroduced tothe community or safely discharged.

The fact that Solar Aquatics usegreenhouses versus conventional large-scale, industrial looking structures is asignificant benefit gained through theusage of Solar Aquatic systems. Treatingsewage and wastewater in an attractivefacility has spawned numerous benefits tothe local community such as aquaculture,plant nurseries, and tourism.

Source of images and information: Macy, C. Ed. 2001.Greening the City. Ecological Wastewater Treatment inHalifax. Halifax, NS: Faculty of Architecture DalhousieUniversity.

Jaret Lang

A local example of such benefits is in BearRiver, Nova Scotia. This small communityof about seventy-five homes has receivedecological praise from around the worldfor adopting Solar Aquatic technology aswell as exemplifying ecologicalwastewater treatment in action. Thegreenhouse facilities are in stark contrastto large, odour producing conventionaltreatment facilities, which few residentswould consider an asset in theircommunity.

The student research group exploredopportunities for using and applying thistechnology in 18 different locationslocated throughout HRM (mostly occurringalong the waterfront of PeninsularHalifax). Cost-benefit analyses, alongwith geography, and socio-economicbenefits to the local community, wereused in determining location andfeasibility of the Solar Aquatic facilities.

Existing government policy and unwillingmunicipal engineering staff were cited astwo large barriers to further pursuit ofsolar aquatics technology in HRM -despite the fact that Nova Scotia isalready home to two successful existingfacilities in Bear Lake and Beaver Bank.

Another view of the Bear River Solar Aquatic facility

39

Workshop 10: Fostering a

Sense of Wonder and

The Value of Pocket

Wilderness

Presenter: Patricia ManuelModerator: Elizabeth Crocker

The grand scope of environmentalism hasfocused almost exclusively at a global ornational level. Efforts to protect ournatural environment often occur at a largescale. A scale that is often incomprehen-sible to most. Often, we can’t see thetrees in spite of the forest.

Professor Patricia Manuel, in her sessionentitled “Pocket Wilderness: ExperiencingNature in the Neighbourhood Backyard”,asked us to refocus our communalattention on wilderness from the grandscale of ecosystems and sensitive areas,to neighbourhood pockets of undevelopednature. We overlook the small sections ofwilderness in our neighbourhoods anddevalue its collective importance. Wemust not only focus on protecting largewilderness, we must also remembersmall wilderness. In this case, we mustfocus on the trees that make up the forest.

Small pocket wilderness, whether wetlandor woodland, exists in many of ourneighbourhoods. Our children play andfrolic in these unofficial wilderness parks.These small pockets are often children’sfirst (and sometimes only) exposure towild nature. It is in these neighbourhoodpockets that children first observe thechange of seasons and its effect on thenatural environment. The cycle of treesand leaves. The metamorphosis ofcaterpillar to butterfly. The transformationof spring peepers from jellied egg totadpole to tiny frogs. It is in thesewilderness pockets that a sense ofwonder in the natural environment isfostered in the next generation.

Children need a connection with nature intheir communities if we expect them, asfuture environmental stewards, to protectthe wilderness they inherit. As such, thereis an incalculable value in leaving somewilderness alone. There is sometimesvalue in doing nothing.

Little spaces exist too!! They areembedded in our neighbourhoods. Pondsare skated on. Woods are trekkedthrough. Birds and wildlife are observedand enjoyed by all. These pockets aretaken for granted by all the inhabitants ofa neighbourhood as part of the communalfabric- taken for granted until they aregone.

The only way to have children appreciatenature is to have it in their backyards.Most grown children have a fond recollec-tion of their neighbourhood wilderness. Itwas a place that was mysterious yetfamiliar. Communal yet secretive. Wildyet safe. It was a place we called home.It was a subconcious connection with theearth and the physical place of ourspiritual development. It was the placewhere we learned that snakes eat frogsand green apples can hurt your tummy.

Pocket wilderness in spring. Pocket wilderness in summer.

40

The provision of pocket wilderness is afundamental matter of social equity.Wilderness should not be a luxuryenjoyed by the privileged. It should be aright enjoyed by all. The urban environ-ment needs not only to provide greenspace in the form of cultivated parks andgardens, but also wilderness areas leftuntouched for songbirds, insects, andvegetation.

Pocket wilderness does not stand achance against as of right developmentunder the current legislative regime. Thisregime does register social equityconcerns. Although a percentage of thedevelopment may be left as open space, itis usually the undesirable areas, or thosedifficult to develop.

Pierre Heelis All photos by Patricia Manuel, Dalhousie University

Pocket wilderness responds to severeenvironmental change. The seasonsaffect pocket wilderness in varied ways.From budding leaves, to lusciousgreenery, to brilliant fall foliage, to elegantsentries of winter storms. The mostsevere environmental change is develop-ment.

Our regulatory framework does not oftenrecognize the value of leaving smallwilderness undeveloped. It has beendesigned on a larger scale for largersystems. The Nova Scotia Department ofthe Environment protects all wetlandsover two hectares. But what of thoseneighbourhood wetlands that aresmaller? Do they not deserve to beprotected?

Pocket wilderness in winter Pocket wilderness after development.

41

Mineville Community

Association

Grant MacDonald is President of theMineville Community Association ("MCA").For the past 2 years the MCA hasperformed a number of projects of benefitto the community. These projects arefocussed on the environmental, healthand recreational needs of the community.The MCA was awarded the RecreationNova Scotia Mayflower Award for itscommunity volunteer involvement, and theHalifax Regional Development Award forits excellence in cooperation in 2001.Grant presented the accomplishments ofthe MCA in the last 2 years, whichincluded trail building and numerous othercommunity activities.

Glace Bay Portable Parks System

Christine LeVatte, a Landscape Designerwith the Highland Sod Farms in Sydney,Nova Scotia spoke about a concept ofPortable Parks. In Glace Bay a concernedgroup of citizens recognized that theclean-up of downtown vacant lots was keyto initiating the revitalization of a dyingdowntown core. Downtown businessesand the tourism sector recognized adesperate need to bring people back andprovide an atmosphere to keep themthere. Thus, the Portable Park concept, aGreenSpace solution, was born. Christinepresented information about this simpleconcept, that addresses many needs andis particulalry useful in the context of smallcommunities.

John Meagher Garden

In the early 1990s, a small piece ofproperty on the Northwest side of theHalifax Arm was donated to the City ofHalifax. It was then known as EdmondsGrounds, a mature forest of pine trees onthe lonely slope above the Arm.Unfortunately, valuable property isexpensive to landscape and maintain,leaving the future of the land ambiguous.Enter John Meagher - retiree, gardener,rhododendron breeder, eccentric andgoodwill ambassador. Mr. Meagher hasnot only provided a generous donation forthe planting of a prized collection ofrhododendrons, but he also maintainedthe space as well. Helen MacLean fromHRM Horticultural Department, Parks andOpen Spaces expanded on the events ofthis unique and continuous cooperativeevent.

Coastal Water Trail

In Nova Scotia “greening” must beconnected to the province’s spectacularcoastline. Dave Adler, Director of theCoastal Water Trail spoke about a newinitiative which will result in the creation ofa trail covering one of Nova Scotia's most

Community Succes Stories

David Adler speaks about the Coastal Water Trail

Coming to Our Senses: Urban

Walk

On Thursday March 21st about a dozen ofconference participants took theopportunity to take a walk in the Halifaxurban area with naturalist Chris Brackley.The objective was to become more awareof the sensory and emotional differencebetween the green and greyenvironments. Although the walk tookplace shortly after a “spring” snow storm,participants could still appreciate theintristic appeal and value of open andnatural spaces on the working industrialwaterfront of Halifax Harbour.

spectacular coastlines from Halifax toLunenburg. The coastline will bringtogether ecological protection witheconomic development opportunitiescentred on ecotourism and low impactuse.

42

Closing RemarksFrank Palermo

We have arrived at the end of nearly threedays of deliberation on how to breakground in the greening of our landscape.We have heard a truly amazing array ofideas from citizens, public servants,academics and even one politician. Wewere very fortunate to host speakers fromvarious parts of HRM, other Atlantic cities,Toronto, Vancouver and Brussels, and Iwould like to make some final observa-tions. This is what I heard:

1. First, if we take a long-term view, theenvironment is a capital asset. Here inHalifax Point Pleasant Park is veryimportant, in Toronto it may be the DonRiver Valley, in New York it is CentralPark. What these places have incommon is that because of someone’sforesight, these green spaces are key tothe quality of life, and they are good forbusiness.

2. Secondly, there are places that takeseriously the “environment first” idea.Places such as Waterloo, Ontario haverecognized that the environment mattersto what we do, and what we do matters tothe environment. This recognition goeswell beyond open space, and determineswhat form our communities take.

3. Thirdly, there is magic in working withdiversity and complexity. We should besuspicious when someone tries to sell usan overly simple solution. Let’s worktowards a quilt of green.

4. Fourthly, the message that we heardover and over again was “work with whatyou have”. This includes school groundsas new community forums; trees andplanters in parking lots; marigolds on themain street; walkways and coastal trails.There is a great potential in local action,and there are many small but important

things that can be done. They can beinspired by the qualities of the localenvironment.

5. We need to re-think and re-imaginechange. This includes how we operatestandards, how we treat our schools, ourfront yards, our backyards and streetintersections.

6. Finally a participatory process is crucialfor change to happen. We cannot leavethe job of determining change to a fewpoliticians, bureaucrats or planners. Weneed to be engaged, and own the processof change

So what are the next steps?

There is no question that a lot of energyand passion was generated here in thelast couple of days. A new food council isin the works, as are other networks. Thisenergy must be nourished and allowed toflourish.

We must be connected to plans. Thereare many different reports being prepared,and we should be involved. I think thatwe should also start an on-going discus-sion-reflection-action group consisting ofthose truly interested in the life of this city.

Pilot projects are one way to try out newideas. There are many ideas; let’s putthem into practice! Solar aquatics, streetimprovement projects, protecting urbanwetlands are just a few of the possibilities.

Finally, we must find a way to get themedia and the politicians interested inthese issues. There is a great need todevelop a strategy to increase awarenessand real discussion.

Change required persistance andimagination. Bold steps and broadstrategies as well as small gestures andpatient nurturing are required and must beinterconnected. Greening is an attitude atall scales. It’s an approach, it’s not achoice.

43

BREAKING GROUND SNAPSHOTS

Keynote address by Lucien Kroll...

Design Charette...Art contest...Welcome address by

Councillor Dawn Sloane...

Reception...Artists at work...

44

The Myth of Weeds

You want to believe in

this pebbled pod inevitability

seedling cracks, milkweed corona

born to spin in the spring wind.

There is this need to split, to float,

to seek a predestined renaissance

beneath the inculpated ground.

You dream of cotyledons unfurling,

forcing roots through receptive soil

tracing the secret ways of worms,

forget about the random cruelty

of capricious breezes, ignoring

the equal possibility of ending

a barren white bit of floss

hard-contrasting black asphalt.

Joy Yourcenar

Colour and Song

Lupine seeds scattered

in an empty lot,

Blue Jay babies born in my backyard,

colour and song

in my North end neighbourhood.

Zoe Fairbrother

Art and Literary Contest

Participants

Children

Dominik Drozdowski - DrawingZoe Fairbrother - Drawing and poemSophie Watts - Drawing

Youth

Mat Dunlop - Video and photograph

Adults

Jennifer Watts - Short storyMary Porter - Photo collageJoy Yourcenar - Photographs andpoemMichael Farrar - PhotographsJamie Anfossi - Maquette andphotographs

Thanks to Mountain Equipment

Co-op, Home Grown Organics, and

P’lovers for generously donating gift

certificates for all participants.

Contest Submissions

45

The Church Garden

There is a garden along the side of St.

John’s United Church on Willow St. in

Halifax. It was created by the children

who attend the church as part of their

experience of learning about their faith.

The garden is a story of people in the

church wanting to connect their faith to

the natural environment around our

church, of offering children opportunities

to experience the miracle of life, and of

offering a place of beauty to our

neighbours in our community who live

near to or pass by the church.

When we first proposed the idea of

creating a garden (just one or two small

plots) to the church committee

responsible for the property, we were

given permission but advised that the

garden wouldn’t last long - it would be

damaged and destroyed by people who

pass by the church. The adults interested

in developing the garden spoke about this

possibility and decided we would go

ahead anyway - this would be an act of

faith and persistence. The experience of

mending broken things (gardens and

hearts) would provide valuable learning

experiences for those involved in the

project.

We are coming into our fourth planting

season for the garden. It has included

perennials, annuals, vegetables, herbs,

tripod wooden structures covered with

towering bean plants, and lots of weeds.

For several Sundays in the spring and fall,

children from the church school can be

seen preparing the garden, planting seeds

and bulbs, watering, weeding, harvesting

and putting the garden to rest. We have

harvested our seeds for planting in the

spring season. And we have prayed in

the garden recognizing and thanking God

for the beauty of all creation and our role

and responsibility in caring for our earth

and neighbours.

There has sometimes been some damage

done to the garden but most often it has

been from cats and wind. The

congregation has responded with great

delight to a place that has been

transformed from a patch of grass next to

a brick wall to an eclectic garden full of

many surprises and much pride on the

part of the gardeners. We would often

find transplants and slips of plants lying

for us on the ground as people dropped

them off on their way into church.

What does this have to do with planning

and greening our communities? As a

person of faith, I find it challenging to think

of how I look at the urban landscape from

a faith perspective. I have seen what the

garden has meant to the people in my

congregation and I have a sense of how

this act of caring has been appreciated by

our neighbours. The values that I carry in

my heart, based on my faith, influence

how I experience a sense of place. These

include the importance of places of

sanctuary, places of hospitality, places of

engagement with the community (our

neighbours), and places of invitation to

pause, reflect and be renewed. The

garden has been a small step in how our

church has begun to live out these values.

Although it would take an enormous

amount of work it is a small start in

changing its image from a towering

structure based on a triumphalist attitude

of religious glorification to a more humble,

welcoming place of community.

Within a ten minute walk from my house I

can pass by a Muslim mosque, a Buddhist

temple, an Anglican church, a Roman

Catholic church, a Jehovah Witness

meeting hall, a United Church, an

Antiochian Christian Orthodox church, a

Seventh Day Adventist church, a Lutheran

church and a Faith Tabernacle.

Significant structures and gathering points

within the community. It is interesting to

think of what the landscape of the

community could look like if we, as multi-

faith neighbours, decided to

environmentally create places of

hospitality, sanctuary, and renewal on our

properties based on our understanding of

what these concepts (or others) mean

from our own faith traditions. The

possibility that such a physical

intersection of wisdom, culture and faith

could offer to the community as a whole is

tantalizing.

Although our property at St. John’s is

limited in size we have discussed the

possibility of creating an outdoor labyrinth

- an ancient tool used for spiritual

meditation. As I walk to church I try not to

covet my Anglican neighbours huge yard

and dream of what a community garden

might look like on that spot. Putting to

use the gifts that we have from our faith

heritage can be significant offerings to the

community as a whole and to our

understanding of how to recognize and

live with our natural environment in a

holistic and community focused way.

Jennifer Watts