Relief for our growth pains

Re: “Big picture, bigger challenges; Facing common problems with growing populations, municipalities in capital region can compete or co-operate,” the Journal, May 11. An obvious way to deal with the capital region’s “problems” is to limit growth.

Do we want more growth or need it? Almost no one in authority seems to ask this question.

Yes, regional governance and co-operation between municipalities must be part of the solution. But we also need a new system for financing our existing settlements and maintaining a stable economy that does not depend on growth.

The Journal map showing all the municipalities fusing into one continuous built-up area is truly scary. In Britain this would qualify as a conurbation.

Conurbations are blots on the landscape, taking hours to drive through and including kilometre after kilometre of ugly industry.

I don’t see any gain in having explosive growth, only a continual erosion of quality of life with endless rush hours, more pressure on our parks and river valley, and more loss of agricultural land and beloved green spaces.

Why can’t we afford to have traditional agriculture on our doorsteps? One answer is that under the present system, agricultural land has little value in generating taxes compared with industrial land.

Apparently, no significant amount of agricultural land could be saved in Edmonton’s recently approved Horse Hill development plan because Alberta has no laws supporting retention of agriculture. This must change.

The province needs legislation enabling a green belt around the Edmonton conurbation. It must be wide enough to force further development far away into rural areas where it is needed.

Only then will we find relief from our growth pains.

P. J. Cotterill, Edmonton