Imagine Fredericton

Growth Strategy and Municipal Plan

Post by mvasic, May 15, 2017

Share your thoughts on the Growth Strategy!

The Growth Strategy is now available for download here! Please tell us what you think in the comments section below!

Categories:

15 thoughts on “Share your thoughts on the Growth Strategy!”

  1. Jason Jeandron

    I’ve had a quick look at the draft document (May 15, 2017) and continue to be disappointed by the lack of attention paid to Indigenous and early European (Acadian, Loyalist, English, French) heritage. I’d have thought that the exceptionally weak 2 sentences about the first 12,000 years of the history of Fredericton (page 11) should sum up the need to identify and record that history before bulldozing it for new development. Huge numbers of municipalities across Canada (many much smaller than Fredericton) work towards identifying Indigenous heritage prior to destroying it through development. Many of the growth potential areas listed on the maps in the report are in locations of high potential for the presence of significant Indigenous heritage (habitation, resource gathering, ceremonial). The City must require developers to provide heritage assessments before they destroy our non-renewable cultural resources.

  2. Chris Grady

    The City of Fredericton continues to claim ownership of the NBEx grounds. This land was given to Agriculture Society #34 in the mid 1800s. The documents of the day gave final say to the Minister of Agriculture.
    Mission Statement of Agriculture Society #34:
    “The object of agriculture society #34 is to encourage improvement in agriculture and enhanced quality of life for persons living in the community by developing educational programs, events, services and facilities”
    The vision of the exhibition is to accomplish the objective in producing the provincial exhibition, other exhibits, programming, and fundraising activities.
    This land and its intended purpose in perpetuity is dedicated to farming in NB. It is not up to the taxpayers of Fredericton to tell the farmers of NB what will be done with this property. The City Council should start behaving with the responsibility of the Provincial Capital City. NBEx land belongs to agriculture in NB for the promotion and advancement of agriculture in NB. It is not available for housing or industrial development.

    1. Oliver Dueck

      Why can’t the NBEx relocate, or at the very least, why can’t we reconfigure the current property so that the land isn’t under-utilized and can be a greater contributor to Fredericton’s prosperity?

  3. James Terhune

    There need to be more “mixed use areas” in existing areas of the city. There are many areas, especially near the edges of the city limits, where the land isn’t being used effectively. These could be built up and act as hubs for the nearby neighbourhoods as well as the faster-growing areas outside of city limits.

    1. Calvin Taylor

      Agreed!

    2. Oliver Dueck

      I strongly agree with this. The growth strategy does make some mention of possible mixed-use nodes throughout the city but I believe it should be a top priority. If we don’t move in that direction then the vast majority of residents will continue to live in suburban neighbourhoods that lack walkability and easy access to services and amenities.

  4. Please to see some mention of accessible communities including recreation infrastructure. We do notice that the design of age friendly communities is noticeably missing. We have the oldest population in Canada and we are significantly behind in planning accessible, age friendly communities in preparation for our high rate of disability (second highest in Canada) and aging population. There is much infrastructure that needs change to ensure our communities are not only walkable but wheelable. Many of our roads, curb cuts and sidewalks are very dangerous for those with limited mobility including those who use canes, rollators, wheelchairs, scooters. Would like to see this emphasized in the plan.

    1. Calvin Taylor

      Agreed!

  5. Zachary Cogswell

    Proper skatepark? How about giving this city a bowl? Hiring a company that can give us a proper skate park would do tremendous things for this city. The outcome of revamping Kimble has been astonishing, kids are being active, staying out of the streets and “vandalizing” private property. Giving us a more accessible skatepark down town would also draw more tourist and give the children something to get excited about visiting. Most of us skateboarders travel to Nova Scotia because even the smallest towns have beautiful LARGE skateboard parks and are always being used. If provided we would look after the park, we will make sure the premises is clean and looking presentable.

    Please consider us when planning future plans for Fredericton. We are the future and the present, I am a working man that would love to stay in Fredericton but there isn’t much interest to keep me here. I don’t go to the bars and drink all weekend, id like to stay active but it’s hard when there is so many laws and restrictions for skateboarding.

  6. Samantha

    I’m happy as long as the two private parking lots in downtown Fredericton (Westmorland/King corner, and the corner of Regent where the old bus station used to be) are turned into actual useful space!

    As a downtown resident, I’d also love to see the FREX and multi cultural centre revitalized – the frex building is very run down and uncomfortable to visit (ineffective air conditioning), and the parking is a huge, ugly, hot lot…

    I’m excited at the potential for better public transit (Sunday service, maybe!?)

  7. Daniel Ganong

    Being a mature skateboarder in this city, who has been involved in the skateboard community for years, I think an integral part to helping the downtown area become more alive is the addition of a world class skate park. Fredericton lacks in this area. Having just gone to Nova Scotia to skateboard, it was astonishing that small towns like Liverpool, Chester, Mount Uniack, and even Hubbards have proper skateparks – yet we, a capital city, have nothing to compare to them. I do know Kimble park has been redone, and thay was much needed, but not even close to what I have seen in these small towns.

  8. Calvin Taylor

    Parking downtown is a problem, as private parking lots seem like extortion rackets and parking on the street is a lottery.

    Barcelona superblocks;
    https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/may/17/superblocks-rescue-barcelona-spain-plan-give-streets-back-residents

    What I see we can do to be more like barcelona and create vibrant, walkable and workable cities.
    1. Lower speed limits in side identifiable blocks, and make the inner block traffic one way. Cars should not have the right of way.
    2. Make it easier to have a small business in residential areas, corner stores, barber shops, cafe’s, and art stores are the cornerstones of a walkable, livable city.
    3. Parking solution for this city needs to be found, the private lots in the city are not friendly to use, and more expensive than street parking. When the street parking is clogged with employee’s feeding meters all day, patrons can’t find parking to visit businesses.

  9. Ian Robertson

    Increasing the population density within the existing city boundaries, on the surface appears to be a “sensible” approach. However, as with most endeavours, successful implementation depends on the details.

    Particular care must be taken in dealing with existing (single family) residential areas – especially in the existing St. Anne’s Point Heritage Preservation Area – as well as other areas that have previously been identified for study as possible heritage preservation areas. Possible “densification” of these areas requires a different set of rules and degree of sensitivity. These locations should be properly studied for heritage value – and even then be considered to be of lower “desirability” for possible density increases.

    Many existing single family residences have secondary suites (typically “basement apartments”) – legally conforming or otherwise. The City of Fredericton currently appears to consider “basement apartments” as the only type of secondary suite to be permitted. The National Building Code of Canada identifies a secondary suite as being located anywhere in a single family residence – below, above or on the same storey as the primary residence. Existing single family homes, as well as ones to be built in the future could be designed in such a way as to allow for the (future) inclusion of a secondary suite. An increase in the availability of good quality secondary suites could help address a reasonable component of future housing demand with “minimal” visual impact on “traditional” neighbourhoods and housing styles – and help make home ownership more affordable with the rental income. However – current bylaws must be revised to allow this to happen.

    Environmental attributes of possible increased residential density must be taken into consideration. A development on Cliffe Street several years ago (on City owned land) allowed a long-established frog pond to be obliterated by the developer – and did not require the developer to set aside a portion of the property for green space. Development/densification must be environmentally responsible.

    Design Guidelines should be considered as a requirement for all “densification” projects, and perhaps these projects should be required to have an architect and a landscape architect as part of the design team.

    It appears that a number of densification opportunities have already been lost – particularly in the area of Knowledge Park Drive/Corbett Centre and Bishop Drive. Various entities in this general area, whether institutional (Chalmers Hospital, Fredericton Mall, Regent Mall, Hugh John Flemming Forestry Centre, Knowledge Park, Corbett Centre) commercial or other use, are a big draw for vehicular traffic – yet have little in the way of residential accommodation within a reasonable walking distance. Rather than creating “one use ghettos”, why aren’t more mixed-use (including residential component) developments required in these areas that have the highest vehicle traffic flows?

    Allowing for higher (residential) densities does not mean just “cramming”/shoe-horning more people/buildings into existing neighbourhoods or every piece of apparently “vacant” land. Certain guidelines for green spaces must be established and adhered to. Appropriate setbacks from roadway right-of-ways must be established – particularly to allow for streetscape trees/greenery – on both public (City owned) and private property. Some existing “vacant” lands should be allowed to remain that way. Twenty five years is a long time, so there is lots of time to plan for and implement a strategy for the possible population increase predicted. There is lots of time to “do it right”.

    Municipal plans come and go, with many loftily-stated goals/objectives remaining unfulfilled. What measures will be in place to see that these objectives are actually attained – and within a reasonable time?

  10. Matt

    As a young family who lives downtown, I’m saddened to see the focus of urban density in my neighbourhood. Part of the charm of Fredericton is the ability to live in a neighborhood, in a house, in the downtown core of the city. You are not relegated to only living in the burbs or outside the areas. I’ve already seen multiple large buildings go up within a 2 block radius (York-Westmorland, Victoria-Aberdeen) in the past 5 years, without any changes/improvements in traffic patterns (lights, calming). The fear will be when these units are not getting rented, or the ones that they are competing with now are no longer getting rented. It’s a downward spiral cycle of empty units, landlords not being able to afford/willing to upkeep them and so on.
    All this is based on a population growth estimation that I believe is not realistic and doesn’t take into effect the outmigration of our young and newly settled who eventually move onto bigger centers.
    Overall, I’m unsure why the City would contract this design to a Toronto firm to determine the future of Fredericton, and feel it misses the mark in many areas.
    Fredericton’s future is not one of massive growth with skyrises. I’m not afraid of change, but I don’t think we should complete alter the spirit of the city based on these incorrect assumptions.

  11. Don Flatt

    I agree on the direction of the imaginefredericton project but would love to see some interest in redeveloping the old bridge that extends to the north side of the river at the library. Turning this bridge into a walking/cycling trail would have tremendous results in encouraging and expanding the range of outdoor recreation opportunities available and minimizing downtown traffic. As a resident of the north side near the Westmoreland Street bridge, I’m dismayed at the current pedestrian/cycling access along the side of the bridge. The sidewalk seems like an afterthought on a bridge designed for cars and trucks. The grading is poor on the bridge and water pools in many spots along the path. The tunnels that provide bridge access are routinely blocked by giant pools of water, Every pedestrian and cyclist I know dreads doing the walk or cycle across the bridge. If the old bridge by the library were rebuilt as a trail, not only would this provide a cycling loop around the city engaging both bridges but it would also encourage more cycling and pedestrian traffic from the north side around the Main Street corridor. I think redevelping this old bridge should be one of the priorities of this project. It could also become yet another tourist attraction as well if done properly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

example: Inger Jenset

The Newsletter Admins will always get a copy of the newsletter sent to them.

Newsletter Admin Email Address
1

1200 × 350 is best

Follow the project