Stadacona Residents Reach Summit On Controversial Residential Redevelopment

It must have seemed like they had spent weeks in their quest to scale Mount Everest.

With two meetings seemingly scheduled at the last minute and a developer not willing to consult further about their concerns.

But shortly before 5 PM today property owners on the 400 block Stadacona Street East made the summit and securely planted their neighbourhood flag on the summit of City Hall’s iconic clock tower as Council voted 4 - 3 against lifting a controversial zoning bylaw amendment.

Councillors Kim Robinson, Doug Blanc, Crystal Froese and Mayor Clive Tolley in the Committee of the Whole opposed the zoning bylaw amendment - effectively killing any Third Reading.

The move effectively kills plans to amend the zoning bylaw to allow a multi-family unit in what is now a single family home neighbourhood.

Council was set to give third and final reading that would have changed the zoning of 476 Stadacona Street East from R1 single family dwelling to R2 multi-family residential.

The move which would have allowed Evco Developments from Regina to build a proposed five-plex on what is now a vacant lot that a single family home previously sat on.

THE VACANT PROPERTY AT 476 STADACONA STREET EAST WHERE EVCO DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSES TO BUILD A FIVE-PLEX HOUSING UNIT IF THEY CAN GET THE NECESSARY ZONING - MJ INDEPENDENT FILE PHOTO

“We feel very good about it. I think they were all very open minded people. They were all willing to discuss this issue with us,” property owner Jamie Wallace told MJ Independent immediately after leaving Council chambers.

“And Councillor (Kim) Robinson kept his mind open and I think made the right decision there.”

At the August 27th Council meeting Councillor Robinson had voted against tabling third reading of zoning bylaw amendment along with Councillor Dawn Luhning.

During Monday’s Council meeting Councillor Robinson seemingly flip flopped on his previous support for the zoning bylaw amendment to now be the deciding vote against it.

Councillor Robinson did not give a detailed reason why for his seemingly change of heart during the Council meeting.

MJ Independent asked Wallace how he felt after it seemed like the residents had seemingly lost after two previous occasions the issue was to be dealt with.

“It did feel like some members (of Council) were trying to force through the vote especially without informing the community in any way of some of the background details. It felt very rushed so we were glad it was tabled the last time,” he said.

“The goal of the developer was trying to get the lowest priced lot in the city and try to force this project onto it,” Wallace said.

He said tabling the zoning bylaw amendment’s third reading to amend the zoning bylaw allowed the residents to conduct more research into what the proposed five-plex development entailed.

The research was part of his presentation to Council.

Wallace Addresses Council

Wallace had just delivered a passionate speech to Council where he highlighted the residents’ concerns about the impact a five-plex development would have on their single family homes.

He had just told Council that even if the rules allowed the development to proceed once the zoning bylaw passed that councillors were required to “act in the best interest of the municipality.”

“Do not just speak to the economic benefits of the community,” he told Council going on to challenge them to look at the impact to the neighbourhood. Something that at the present time is not built into the zoning bylaw.

“It’s not necessary for this development to happen in this way.”

Wallace called the 476 Stadacona Street East empty lot “the cheapest lot in Moose Jaw” and there was plenty of other lots available and more suitable for the proposed five-plex.

“There is no need to force this into this community.”

Wallace openly questioned what the development would really be like with the developer “unwilling to spend $30,000 to $50,000 (for a better lot) is not the best developer for this property.”

He claimed it would lead to the cheapest construction, cheapest interiors, that in the end would deteriorating rapidly. The rapid deterioration would not bode well in possibly 10 years time, he said.

Wallace said Evco’s previous comments that the proposed development would increase property values was a generalization and the issue was much more “complex”.

On the issue of similar developments Wallace pointed out the examples were not similar enough to the 400 block Stadacona Street East to be relevant.

Another issue Wallace raised was the neighbourhood there’s no service with 150 mm water pipe and that in neighbourhoods with multi dwelling units similar to what was being proposed had 200 mm and 250 mm waterlines.

How do we know when everybody showers are we going to be able to shower at the same time, he asked.

PROPERTY OWNER JAMIE WALLACE SPEAKS TO COUNCIL - MJ INDEPENDENT PHOTO

The major issue for property owners, though continue to be parking in the neighbourhood.

“We could be adding up to 15 cars added to this area,” he said pointing out it was unknown how many people would be living in each of the units.

“There was barely room for five vehicles (parking on the proposed development,” he said, adding the average of 1.8 vehicles per family would add at least nine more vehicles looking for a place to park.

Although Wallace’s property is now a rental he did live in it before going on the state he knew what it was like trying to find a place to park from his 15 years living there.

He worried that being in a close proximity to a crosswalk, an intersection as well as a school could lead to children darting out and them being hurt or worse.

“It becomes a very dangerous situation,” he said.

He went on to ask Council to fulfil their role and vote against the zoning bylaw amendment.

Councillor Froese Has Concerns

Councillor Crystal Froese spoke in opposition to the proposed zoning bylaw amendment and went on to call for changes to the policy to allow developments to fit into the neighbourhood.

“I just don’t feel this property should be zoned R2,” Councillor Froese said.

“I’m a big supporter of development, but there are other areas more suitable,” she said, adding the issue at hand raised issues with the character of the neighbourhood that perhaps needed to be addressed through a policy change.

COUNCILLOR CRYSTAL FROESE SPOKE ABOUT THE NEED TO CHANGE POLICY TO ALLOW THE CITY TO HAVE A ROLE IN ENSURING PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS FIT AND DID NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT NEIGHBOURHOODS - CITY OF MOOSE JAW PHOTO

“This has opened up a conversation on (neighbourhood) design,” she said

Councillor Froese pointed to downtown development where historic continuity was encouraged as an example what the city should look at when it came to re-development of neighbourhoods,

Post Council Comments

It’s something Wallace could agree with as he spoke to MJ Independent in City Hall’s foyer.

Asked about perhaps developing a duplex on the vacant lot Wallace said it’s a project the neighbourhood would support,

The only problem is it would mean the property would need to be zoned R2 and the property owner could not be restricted on what to build.

“In principle I wouldn’t have an issue to put a duplex there. The issue is you need to redone it to R2 and the big problem is once that’s done the City has no recourse they can’t hold the developer to his word,” he said.

“There is no opportunity to play any role after it (zoning) has been changed.”

A developer could develop the property in any way they see fit - including a five-plex - as long as the development fit the R2 multi-unit dwelling format.

He said it was something the City would have to develop through a policy change to ensure the City had a role to play in how developers announce projects and the final result.

Asked what he thought about Evco Developments refusal to further consult with residents after Council tabled final reading Wallace was not impressed.

“It really seemed like almost a lazy approach. Not only did they not want to discuss anything with the community, but they also in their responses to us almost picked silly examples of things to try to justify the project,’ he said.

Wallace said residents were not opposed to redeveloping the property,

“Nobody wants to see a vacant lot and even more broadly we want the City of Moose Jaw to do well. We want them to get their tax revenue. We are not against development by any stretch of the imagination. We just want an appropriate development put on that land.”

Wallace said there was wide variety of properties in newer developments or in the City’s inventory that would be better suited for a five-plex development if Evco Developments we’re still wanting to build one here.