Re: ‘Opponents muddying Arlington waters,’ Feb. 10.
I find it funny that the editor’s opinions are treated as gospel while any concerns the people of the community address are considered dubious at best. Why do the voices of the citizens of St. Albert mean less than the words of a social agency? This is not about 58 families taking on a larger community. This is about a social agency furthering its agenda, not about providing quality affordable housing. They are not planning on building a couple of nice duplexes like the ones built last year in North Ridge. That’s what affordable housing should be like. It should blend into the surrounding community, not be segregated and conspicuous.
I live in Bergman in northeast Edmonton, a neighbourhood similar to Akinsdale with regular middle-class families. There was a private land sale to Habitat for Humanity in 2006 following the death of the landowner and the land got rezoned for a 47-unit project-style development in April 2008. For those who say it doesn’t affect property values, if you go back to the Edmonton Journal dated Jan. 8, 2009, on page A14, there is an article about the 2008/09 total assessment percentage change by neighbourhood. The number-one highlight was about Bergman. “Biggest drop in property assessments with average decrease of 22 per cent.”
The average assessment dropped to $306,900 from $374,000. With the stroke of a pen, the city robbed its citizens of close to $70,000, on average. If we had thought that the impact would have been that extreme, we would have pooled our resources to hire legal representation because there were many facts that we brought forward that were dismissed or ignored by the media and city council. There was no ‘for’ or ‘against.’ The only thought was fight or flight. Many original homeowners sold their homes and left. The rest of us stayed to fight.
No neighbourhood should be expected to carry more than its fair share of the load and that is what is being asked of Akinsdale residents, as it was of Bergman. If the 30 units proposed 10 years ago was considered too dense, why is a proposal for 58 units even being entertained? Habitat should have been told to go back to the drawing board. Remember that they are getting the land paid for by the City of St. Albert and they work with donated labour and supplies. How can it be unaffordable to build fewer units?
If any other sort of development would be expected to stay within the confines of the proposed school site, why is Habitat’s proposal allowed to cover every square inch of land, imposing on existing surrounding homes? That’s not good for current homeowners or future inhabitants of the development. Why would the rules get bent or ignored for Habitat for Humanity? They are a developer like any other. Who is behind Apollo Developments Inc. and what is their relationship to Habitat for Humanity? A Google search didn’t turn up any answers.
The bottom line is that there are a lot of unanswered questions and your city council should ensure they have the answers before they make such an important decision that will impact the neighbourhood forever. The concerns of the citizens of Akinsdale are as valid as any other citizen and should certainly matter more than an empire-building social agency. Look closely at the proposed site plan and ask yourself if that is truly habitat you would consider living in or near. Then spare a thought for the citizens of Akinsdale and what they are fighting for.
Toni Seerden, Edmonton
