Jason Stockfish, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter | [email protected]
Council was presented with a community petition regarding Parks Canada’s approval of a privately built high-density, rental-only apartment complex at 801 Connaught Drive.
Jasper residents Helen Schwarz and Bob Covey, who presented the petition during council’s committee of the whole meeting on March 8, explained they were well aware of the need for more housing in Jasper, but their primary concerns regarding this development are two-fold.
First, Parks Canada permitted variances to their own development rules to allow the project to move ahead when they wouldn’t allow similar variances for an affordable housing project on adjacent land proposed last year by the municipality.
The variances in question permit the 144-unit structure to exceed the maximum building height by 3.67 metres, decrease the size of each unit by 15 per cent and reduce the number of required parking stalls from 159 to 125.
Parks Canada has justified these variances by saying the smaller living spaces would allow for more units, the elevation of the roofline would be the same as a three-storey building when viewed at street level and the developer would work with the municipality to identify opportunities to provide more parking stalls.
Schwarz and Covey also argued that this housing would become unaffordable without rent control.
“While we recognize that the (project) has got to where it is largely because the private sector has taken the lead, let’s not forget that Parks Canada significantly reduced the price of the land before the current proponents bought in,” the petition stated.
“It seems to us that kind of subsidy should be balanced by some kind of rent control.”
The petition contains the signatures, phone numbers and addresses of more than 500 residents of Jasper.
“More than 10 per cent of the community’s population did take that step (to sign the petition),” Covey told councillors.
“If you look at the names carefully, you’ll see a broad representation of Jasper’s population. You’ll see the names of your fellow community members and business owners, your employers, employees and landlords on this list.”
In his written statement to the committee, Covey acknowledged that the municipality does not have any say in how the project moves forward.
Land-use planning and development is under the authority of the federal government through Parks Canada, as Jasper has a specialized municipality status that does not grant it any jurisdiction over such matters.
But Covey highlighted what he and Schwarz believe the municipality should do within its limited capacity.
“It is true that Parks Canada has the decision-making authority in Jasper and that the green light for the 144-unit proposal has been given by their offices, and not the (municipality’s),” he wrote.
“However, considering the ramifications of the variances, and more importantly, the effect the development will have on the increasingly-out-of-reach rental market, it is our hope that council would find a lever to either readdress the variances via a public engagement session…OR find a way to enact some kind of rent control on this, and future large scale housing projects, in Jasper.”
When Coun. Scott Wilson asked what steps the petitioners were hoping council would take, given the municipality’s lack of authority over the matter, Schwarz and Covey explained they would like to see a more thorough discussion with the community, one that includes further details about the proposed project from the developer.
“What we would like to do is have council have more publicity on what actually has been happening and what actually is coming,” Schwarz said.
“We would like the opportunity to have this come to a public forum,” Covey added.
Coun. Ralph Melnyk and Coun. Wilson noted that Parks Canada’s Planning and Development Advisory Committee (PDAC) hosted a discussion in June 2021.
Covey explained that they believe notification of the 2021 forum was inadequate, and as a result, the consultation did not hear from enough residents to qualify as a healthy community discussion that a project of this magnitude deserves.
“There are a lot of unknowns to this project,” Covey said.
“We think that the way that (the PDAC forum) was advertised wasn’t sufficient in terms of getting people to voice their concerns. We think that a more wholesome discussion is necessary. And we would hope that council would agree and bring this to a public forum.”
In his written statement, Covey concluded by asking the mayor and council to consider if residents and visitors in the future would be proud of the project or instead “hold hard feelings” for community leaders who allowed the project to proceed.
He continued by asking the mayor and council to envision “a future where the tenants, not just their landlords, benefit from such a project.”
After this presentation, a motion was passed without opposition “to direct administration to request preliminary information, such as renderings and site plans for the proposed GB development.”
Coun. Rico Damota said the discussion likely would not be occurring if the municipality had control over land-use planning and development.
“The trouble is it gets bounced back to us, as we’re the elected ones, and we really have no power or say in the matter,” Damota added.
“This again draws more attention to why it would be more appropriate for the municipality to have control over (land-use planning and development) decisions like this.”
