A group of residents successfully persuaded city council to maintain the existing zoning on a property on Stadacona Street East because changing it would negatively affect area parking and children’s safety.
Twelve people attended the Sept. 11 regular meeting because council was preparing to vote on a bylaw change that would rezone 476 Stadacona Street East to R2 medium-density residential district from R1 large-lot low-density residential district.
The change would have let developers construct a two-storey, five-suite townhouse on a corner lot that has been vacant since 2021, after city hall issued a demolition permit to tear down the previous one-unit dwelling.
However, after a presentation from homeowner Jamie Wallace, council voted 4-3 against changing the bylaw. In favour were councillors Heather Eby, Dawn Luhning and Jamey Logan. Opposed were councillors Doug Blanc, Crystal Froese, Kim Robinson and Mayor Clive Tolley.
Parking problems
Wallace’s main concern was parking, considering that block is always jam-packed and there could be 15 extra vehicles connected with the townhouse depending on how many people — like college students — move there.
Wallace — who has lived at his property for 15 years — also knows that dangerous ice shelves form when residents don’t move their vehicles during snow removal. Moreover, there’s barely any room during the winter to park because of the snow buildup.
Think of the children
Wallace’s second concern was the safety of children who walk to the nearby Catholic and public schools. He noted that motorists are more likely to hit kids when the latter run out from between parked vehicles.
A study from 2017 suggested municipalities should prohibit parking near specific locations, specifically pedestrian crossings, intersections and schools, he added. This property includes all those factors.
An ‘inappropriate’ location
Many residents believe rezoning the property would be “inappropriate,” while the proposed changes would not benefit the everyday well-being of people who live there, said Wallace.
“We believe that city council should do what’s right for the people in that area, including those of us who own properties there, live there and who attend school at St. Marguerite and drop their children off there,” he remarked.
Council should act in the municipality’s best interests, and while some councillors believe the project should proceed because the idea fits the property, that isn’t sufficient justification since members must consider the needs of area residents, he continued.
This may be one of the cheaper lots in Moose Jaw, but that doesn’t justify this project going there, Wallace said. Instead, council should realize there are similarly priced lots elsewhere where this project could go.
“There is no need to force this giant project into this small community, especially when it would detract from the everyday function of that community,” he stated.
Devaluing properties
Rezoning this lot would devalue the surrounding properties, Wallace said. Moreover, the developer could construct the suites — with 15 proposed bedrooms — using cheap materials, which will eventually deteriorate and cause problems for the area.
“My own property is right across the street from this … . My property will be looking at a giant, two-storey blank wall,” he remarked. “That is my investment vehicle (and) my retirement vehicle. And that will detract from rents I can bring in for that property and the property value as a whole.”
The developer claims infill buildings usually increase prices for neighbouring properties, but Wallace said the statistics show that claim is “complex” since one can’t assume that will happen, especially with townhouses.
Wallace also refuted the developer’s claim that this project would be similar to ones he constructed in Regina. The homeowner noted that one project was built in a commercial district while another was a bungalow.
Sewer issues
Area residents are also concerned about how the underground water and wastewater infrastructure would be affected with five extra suites — with accompanying bathrooms and washing machines — attached to the main 150-millimetre line, Wallace said. In comparison, properties with multi-suite buildings usually have a 250-millimetre line.
“How do we know that when everybody is showering and using their water that we will be served by those water mains? What if … we can’t wash our clothes and we can’t have a proper shower?” he stated.
Wallace added that council should do what’s best and deny the bylaw change.
The Moose Jaw Express will have a separate story with council’s comments on this matter.
In response to some providers blocking access to Canadian news on their platforms, our website, MooseJawToday.com will continue to be your source for hyper-local Moose Jaw news. Bookmark MooseJawToday.com and sign up for our free online newsletter to read the latest local developments.
