Green Infrastructure

During the period 2003 through 2010, the Green Infrastructure Partnership played a prominent role in leading change and assisting with implementation of the Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia. “I see my years of chairing the GIP as helping to get the ball rolling and ideas disseminated, on green infrastructure, all of which has subsequently been taken up by others to a much greater degree of implementation and success. Our efforts in the first decade of the 2000s moved the state of-the-art of green infrastructure to a more mainstream level,” said Paul Ham.

The desire to mitigate environmental impacts provided a driver for a ‘green infrastructure’ movement that is water-centric and is founded on a natural systems approach. In 2007, the first Beyond the Guidebook guidance document provided a clear distinction between natural and engineered green infrastructure. “Two complementary strategies can ‘green’ a community and its infrastructure: first, preserving as much as possible of the natural green infrastructure; and secondly, promoting designs that soften the footprint of development,” wrote Susan Rutherford.

“Collaboration between the Partnership and Asset Management BC is a success story because it is relationship-based and founded on respect and trust. The genesis for operationalizing both the Partnership and Asset Management BC in 2010, and for our shared commitment to collaboration, is a mandate to implement action items spelled out in Living Water Smart. We embrace and commit to Shared Responsibility in order to move ideas and approaches forward through the 4Cs – Communicate, Cooperate, Collaborate, Coordinate,” stated Kim Stephens.

“At conferences, it is great to hear about the amazing work that everybody has done. A couple of years ago, Mike and I concluded we also need a bit of space to talk about how we have screwed up. Once we became co-chairs of the Asset Management BC community of practice, we could make our safe space forum idea happen. We did not want it to be a bitch session. We wanted it to be a learning session. We wanted everyone to think through how we contribute and how we add to the solution to help the conversation be productive for everyone involved,” stated Gracelyn Day.

Two unifying threads weave through Part D. Thread One was that the provincial government provided green infrastructure leadership during this period, with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs mantra being: Today’s expectations are tomorrow’s standards. Thread Two was the regulatory requirement that Metro Vancouver municipalities develop integrated plans pursuant to the rainwater (aka “streams and trees”) component of the region’s Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan. This provided a reason for convening for action!

“We define a balanced approach as one that creates liveable communities and also protects stream health. During the period 2006-2011, the leadership teams for the intergovernmental Water Balance Partnership and the cross-sector Green Infrastructure Partnership aligned efforts and collaborated to deliver program elements under the umbrella of convening for action. With hindsight, this was a golden period when the influence of the Georgia Basin Initiative peaked. Success built on success and the successes came in rapid succession,” stated Kim Stephens.

“Looking at the length of the list of milestones and reflecting on the array of initiatives, it is amazing how much we were able to pack into such a short period of time. A phrase that best describes this era is commitment to collaboration. Senior government, regional government, municipalities. We were all in the room learning together, working together, sharing. It truly was a team approach. We were outcome-oriented. Our mantra was create livable communities and protect stream health,” explained Richard Boase, a principal player for event delivery during the period 2006 through 2011.

“In 2008, the recession was not a great time to introduce Living Water Smart. We knew that rather than spread ourselves too thin, we had to hunker down. We focused our efforts on legislative reform and what would become the Water Sustainability Act. Living Water Smart was broad sweeping. The Province did not have the capacity to implement everything at once. We had to put our investment in what was needed badly…an update of the legislative framework. The Partnership showed that they were able to fill a gap with the convening for action program,” stated Lynn Kriwoken.

“The Water Balance Model and Green Infrastructure partnerships were formed within a year of each other, in 2002 and 2003. The Water Balance Model Partnership came first because this scenario modelling tool was developed as an extension of the Stormwater Guidebook. Our initial successes raised awareness and interest such that the UBCM leadership gave us a platform at their 2003 UBCM convention. This resulted from the advocacy of Gibson Mayor Barry Janyk. Kim Stephens asked Chilliwack’s Dipak Basu to help tell our WBM story,” stated Ted van der Gulik.

“Housing should be about building homes that people can afford in communities that work. We should be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and be seduced by simplistic solutions. There is a relationship between infrastructure services, open space, employment, etc. All those things are supposed to be brought together in plans and reflected in development decisions. And they are not anymore. I want to do what I can to help the current generation of decision makers understand what it is about regional planning that has got us to this point,” stated Ken Cameron.

“The Partnership for Water Sustainability hosted an inter-regional and intergenerational gathering. We had representation from five regions in southern British Columbia. We brought together alumni and current local government staff to engage each other in roundtable group discussions. Some of our ambassadors suggested that we host focused regional forums on specific areas of concern. Some believe field visits similar to the Showcasing Green Infrastructure Innovation Series in the 2000s can again lead to further cooperation and sharing,” stated Rémi Dubé.

“Gaps between vision and reality are, of course, standard in politics. What makes this one frustrating to water-sustainability experts is how close to success the green infrastructure push came before it got derailed. Through decades of effort, planning had become policy, and policy had started to become practice. Now the question is whether the high profile of floods, droughts, and population growth will put green infrastructure back in the spotlight—and, if so, whether the decision-makers within Metro Vancouver’s municipalities will correct course,” stated Pamela Swanigan.

“Asset Management concepts have been around long enough for staff and elected officials to have an awareness of the issues. We need to truly begin addressing the struggle to implement. One of the big priorities for me this year is to just start bringing Asset Management back to reality. The theme that I am now promoting is this, just tell us your story because people can learn from stories. It does not have to be perfect. We know it is not perfect. But do not be afraid to tell the story. Passing on knowledge really is about the stories,” stated Arnold Schwabe.