City of Armstrong says opponents to affordable housing project mistaken about rezoning

Photo: Contributed

The City of Armstrong is firing back in the ongoing local dispute over a green space rezoning for affordable housing.

In a statement issued Tuesday, chief administrative officer Kevin Bertles says the city is "aware that concerns have been raised in the community regarding whether the city has met its legislative obligations in the rezoning and redesignation of property behind the Norval Arena for an affordable housing project.

"Some members of the public seem to suggest that the properties are dedicated or reserved as park land because of their designation in the city’s zoning bylaw or Official Community Plan," says Bertles.

He says the city has complied with statutory requirements "and will continue to comply with all legal requirements related to the proposed development of the properties going forward."

A legal challenge has been brought forward by Lindsay Thachuk and a group of residents opposing the project.

The challenge questions the legality of the rezoning, but Bertles says the city sought legal advice and is assured it acted in accordance to legislation set out in the Community Charter.

At issue is the rezoning of a 0.85-hectare property from park to multiple unit residential.

"Some members of the public mistakenly assume that the bylaws 'seek to take land that was, and is, park land' that was dedicated by bylaw," Bertles writes.

Section 30(3) of the Community Charter governs changing park land created by bylaw and requires electoral approval. But, he says, "neither Lot 3 nor Lot 10 are or were reserved or dedicated by bylaw as contemplated by section 30 of the Community Charter."

City records indicate the properties were acquired in 1964 as part of the lands assembled for a city sewage treatment plant.

"There is no indication that the city obtained the properties with the intention of using them as park or has developed or maintained the properties as (a) park."

Bertles adds "there is not any case law where a court has held that Section 30 applies as a result of the zoning or OCP designation for a property, or that the use or transfer of property is otherwise restricted in the manner some members of the public suggest.

"It is our opinion that for section 30 to apply, council must have adopted a bylaw that explicitly dedicated or reserved the properties for park purposes.... there is no indication that this was done."

Next steps include seeking a funding partner for the project.

Taxpayers will not be responsible for the capital costs, Bertles notes.