The housing development dilemma

The Annapolis Valley is one of the most productive agricultural sub-regions in the country, with a growing season currently conducive to the production of a wide range of niche goods.

The family farm is still possible here and for centuries the work of farmers has served the well-being of all Nova Scotians. Setting aside the question of whether this constitutes a “right to farm” - one that trumps other’s rights to their property or the rights of the rest of us to clean rivers and air - it would be a shame to render the Valley home to ad hoc development, especially development that overruns the best land.

Still, the Valley is in the midst of historically profound changes, where a young population is leaving for the diversity of opportunities and culture of urban life. Attracting folks from away to bring their life savings to retire in the long fall and quiet of the Valley is one of the more plausible futures for our region. While retirement-oriented suburban development brings increased health care costs down the road, these will be borne by all Canadians, as they are elsewhere in the country.

Housing developments in the region offers employment, a greater tax base for municipalities and the income and sales tax those who retire from away pay here. It brings talent to the region and it draws visitors as family and friends seek to share in the delights local communities offer.

It’s no wonder, given these counter-considerations, that municipalities are caught on the horns of a dilemma, with a passion on both sides to which they are perhaps unaccustomed.

The Wolfville experience

Wolfville, because of the presence of the university, proximity to Halifax, a liberal political culture and a critical mass of folks with a commitment to building a progressive community, faced these challenges early. And while no Wolfvillean would let me get away with saying that mistakes in development haven’t been made, the Town could have done much worse.

Wolfville has taken the pressure for development interests, for the most part, as an opportunity to define and uphold community standards. It has offset some of the negative features of development with effective bylaws and it has adopted a planning regime that is governed, most of the time, by central principles, such as architectural integrity.

These principles are employed increasingly under a process of development agreements, with extensive public involvement. Some developments have been denied, others limited or altered, and generally developers realize that as they come to Wolfville they must bring their best plans. Though this may be a bit of a romanticized version of recent history, the experience of Wolfville may still be useful to others.

Central to their (relative) success is the fact that Wolfville has come to resist the claim that those who own property have an unchecked right to do with it as they wish. This doesn’t mean that property owners have no rights, but that these are exercised against a backdrop of community interests.

Chance to leave a legacy

Decisions about development accordingly take the economic advantage of the community. They encompass the interest the community has in quality development in measure with the recognition that those who own property have justifiable claims to advance against those who would unreasonably constrain or harm them.

In the end, how well this balance works turns on the legislative means provided by the Provincial government; the intelligence and community mindedness of councillors and developers; the reasonableness of those affected by their decisions; the absence of serving one’s self or one’s friends first and best; and the like.

It requires that those who sit on planning boards understand the differences available in development standards and always aim high, even if this means holding out until developers are prepared to do the right thing. For instance, high-density housing developments, while perhaps required in Metro or Edmonton, aren’t needed in most Valley locations, even in developing public housing. Living here has its advantages and these should be recognized and protected as we move forward.

Development provides opportunities for communities to control their futures in the public interest, to leave a legacy of which all of us will be proud. It makes sense to protect our best agricultural land, just as it makes sense to attract retirees to the Valley with first-rate, well-designed, moderately dense developments that leave us room to breathe.