Neighbours oppose mobile home

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 21/07/2024 (451 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Hanover Council voted against a Grunthal man’s application for a mobile home on his property for his son to live in.

Bernhart Reimer, who lives on South Ridge Drive, bought the trailer and had it inspected by the municipality before the council meeting. But even with the work put in, neighbours submitted letters in opposition to the application.

“I am deeply concerned about the impact this would have on property values in our development,” wrote Deanna Kroeker in her objection letter. “The installation of a mobile home could result in a decline in property values, making it difficult for current residents to sell their homes and move elsewhere.”

Kroeker also lives on South Ridge Drive with her husband David, who submitted a letter of his own opposing the move.

“Allowing this type of residential application will jeopardize the future values of properties around it,” he said. “It will also open the door to a variety of potential development applications moving forward that could significantly change the essence of the neighbourhood.”

Council kept in mind the opposition to the mobile home and said that the 960 sq. ft. home wouldn’t match the rest of the neighbourhood.

“I think we have to keep in mind the neighbourhood here, (the neighbours) don’t approve of it,” said Ward 5 Coun. Darrin Warkentin.

The objection letters also said that their homes were bought knowing that they look good and didn’t want a cheaper-looking property next-door.

“When the developer created the development, he likely registered the development agreement on title,” said Amos Wiebe, permit administrator for the RM. “Which requires the homeowner to build a house that is broadly compliant with a set of architectural and aesthetic conditions that exist throughout the whole development.”

“Basically, he’s saying that for houses in my development, I want them to look broadly in this character and have this sort of value and these kinds of qualities. Those are agreements that exist throughout the municipality.”

Council voted 4-3 to deny Reimer’s application.