Residents living near the site of a proposed group home were confused by a public hearing that took place at the Nov. 12 council meeting.
Residents living near the site of a proposed group home were confused by a public hearing that took place at the Nov. 12 council meeting.
The public hearing was held so the Town of Olds could receive submissions from residents regarding proposed changes to the Land Use Bylaw (LUB) that would add addictions treatment facilities, assisted living facilities, custodial care facilities, emergency shelters, hospitals and temporary shelters to the discretionary uses in low and medium density residential neighbourhoods.
But a proposed application by Accredited Supports to the Community (ASC) for a group home on 42 Street that has also been submitted to the town for review caused concern for neighbouring residents who showed up at the hearing because the residents thought the hearing was about ASC’s proposed application.
The application involves converting an existing single-family bungalow on 42 Street into a home suitable for six adults with special needs, potentially including residents of the closing Michener Centre in Red Deer.
If the proposed bylaw changes are adopted, they would allow for the group home to be established in the area in question, should the town’s municipal planning commission approve ASC’s application.
Following the meeting, Marg Geisler, a retired municipal planner who lives near the site of the application, said town staff should have done a better job in separating the proposed bylaw amendments from the ASC’s application in advertisements for the hearing.
"It was confusing. The way it was laid out in the newspaper, your eye goes to 42 Street and then if you read past that, you realized it was a bylaw amendment. So a lot of people wouldn’t make a distinction between the two," she said. "If there’s too much change, negative as seen by the people who are in those homes, that will affect land values."
Norm McInnis, the town’s chief administrative officer, said following the meeting that in hindsight the town should have focused on the proposed bylaw amendments without addressing the ASC application at the hearing.
"We thought we were doing the right thing by simultaneously moving this application forward and the amendments to the Land Use Bylaw at the same time, and with the advantage of hindsight we can see that it probably would cause more confusion than clarity as we hoped it would do," he said.
During the meeting, residents living near the proposed site for the group home said they felt the group home will lead to increased traffic, decreased parking options on an already busy street and decreased property values.
"This whole debate could be eliminated if (the proposed application) could be relocated to a (higher density) site," said resident Conrad Sherwin.
Geisler said the ability of residents to enjoy their own properties would be diminished – as well as property values – if the proposed uses (or definitions) were added to the bylaw. She also said the proposed uses would be better suited to a higher density area. In response to Geisler’s concerns, McInnis told the group that the assessment process determines the value of properties.
Mayor Judy Dahl ruled most of the objections to the group home concept out of order, as they concerned the ASC’s application rather than the proposed bylaw changes.
Werner Fischer, the town’s manager of planning, said the town chose to include several different definitions in the proposed bylaw amendments to reduce the risk that a change of use at a particular property at some point in the future could be made without public input.
"We believe this is transparent and staff believe this is the best way to deal with this request," he said.
Linda Maxwell, executive director of ASC, told the assembled group at the hearing that ASC currently owns two group homes in Olds for adults with disabilities and leases a third.
Coun. Wade Bearchell said he was concerned that an emergency shelter or an addictions treatment facility could be located in a neighbourhood of single-family homes in the future.
Coun. Mary Anne Overwater said she thought the public hearing was beneficial and that each individual application would be subject to scrutiny by the Municipal Planning Commission.
Coun. Harvey Walsh agreed.
"Basically this bylaw is covering what new (definitions will be). Discretionary use doesn’t mean it will happen. That’s the built-in safety of this (discussion). I think this bylaw makes it stronger for the community," he said.
Doug Wagstaff, the town’s director of community services, said in light of the community’s growth, applications such as the ASC’s will likely be coming forward in the future and said it was prudent to change the bylaw.
"Defining these (uses) will put some parameters around that," he said.
As a result of the discussion, third reading of the bylaw will come forward to council at a later date after administration has taken the feedback from the public hearing into account, while the ASC application for a group home will go to the Municipal Planning Commission for consideration.
"Our manager of planning will be talking with the applicants whether they want to push that forward now with the current Land Use Bylaw or whether they want to wait and have us bring the third reading back and possibly get some changes to the Land Use Bylaw (before proceeding with the application)," McInnis said in an interview.
Council’s role is to consider changes to the bylaw while the MPC’s role is to consider individual discretionary applications that come forward.
[email protected]
@ballfanatic16
CHECK US OUT ON FACEBOOK!
