Cory Hare wrote a story in the Oct. 23 Gazette entitled ‘Church group applauds Habitat project.’ I requested a meeting with the ministers. However, I was forewarned in advance by Pastor Dean Kurpjuweit that the group is resolute in its decision and there wasn’t any hope of changing its mind.
We decided to meet anyway. On Nov. 9 Gerry Kress and I met with Kurpjuweit and the Rev. Dave Wulkan. The meeting went very well. Kurpjuweit stated that he informed Hare that he believed that the process by which the Habitat for Humanity project was approved was flawed although he didn’t question the results. I think that they were surprised to find out that we were willing to support some development on the property but nothing as dense as the project’s 30 units. We are in favour of five duplexes (10 units) along Arlington Drive. What was encouraging was that Wulkan and Kurpjuweit found merit in this proposal and stated that although they would not oppose the 30-unit proposal, they are willing to support the five-duplex proposal.
The following are our concerns and have nothing to do with the ministers’ position.
The North Ridge Habitat for Humanity project only had 10 applicants. The homes in this project are fully integrated into the community and, unlike this project, are impossible to distinguish from their neighbours. They have yards, garages and privacy. This project has none of these advantages. What happens if no one is interested in the project’s units? There has never been a survey undertaken to determine just how many of St. Albert’s residents are truly interested in the housing units that this project will provide. Would it not make sense to undertake such a survey before this project commences? One of our greatest fears is that this project could go on for years. Council has stated that Habitat has to finish this project in three years. What if the interest and funding are not available to complete the project in this time period? What penalty will Habitat suffer? Perhaps a strong finger wagging from council?
The project is aimed at families with incomes ranging from $34,000 to $54,000. Because of condo fees, taxes and maintenance, the minimum income will need to be closer to $40,000. The average single mother has an annual income of $28,000. Just who are we trying to help here? The economy is nowhere near as robust as it was back in 2007 when the Capital Region Board first applied the pressure on council that got us into this situation. The region’s real estate is now a buyer’s market and families with the income level required for this project can find good accommodations that do not carry the stigma of ‘affordable housing.’ Edmonton has a major Habitat project of 47 units under way in Castledowns. Would it not make sense to wait and see how successful this project is before we undertake a project that will compete with it?
At one time Akinsdale had three school grounds. Contrary to statements made by the Protestant School Division, these school grounds, which were transferred for $1 to the school divisions with the exception of Elmer Gish, which was transferred for the cost of servicing ($28,000), were never intended for the purpose of generating revenue for the divisions. The sale of these properties was viewed as a betrayal by the city at the time and, after this, all new school properties were declared reserves. This meant that if the school divisions did not build schools on the properties, they reverted back to the city for parkland. With the sale of this property to Habitat, Akinsdale has now lost two of its three school properties.
There is a need to separate the city’s planning process from council so that politics do not drive the process as has happened in this case. The city once had a municipal planning commission that provided some separation. It was eliminated by a short-sighted council a few years back. It is clearly time for its resurrection.
Dave Evans, St. Albert
