LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Concerned with Kleefeld development

I am not happy with the outcome of the RM of Hanover council meeting of Aug. 27, regarding Russ Barkman’s application to have his empty lot, 10 Third Street, Kleefeld, rezoned to allow a multiple-family dwelling. We were not heard.

What the neighbourhood said in a petition was, “I formally object to the rezoning.” What the council heard, “We are opposed to a ten-plex being built on that property.” There is a world of difference!

The vote went in favour of the rezoning, with a pending agreement between Russ Barkman and council that the development be limited. This agreement may say “limited to four doors”, or it may say something else. Unless we stay in touch with our councilor, we will not know until it is built what it will be.

“Four doors” means housing for four families, either a four-plex or two duplexes.

We do know that parking will now be on the street instead of in the front yard. If a four-plex or two duplexes are built, parking will be on the street.

Assuming that “four doors” are built on 10 Third Street, Kleefeld, and assuming that each of four families who eventually occupy those four doors has two vehicles each, that will mean eight more vehicles parked on the street.

Very often, a family will have a business vehicle or a recreational vehicle in addition to “his” vehicle and “her” vehicle. This extra traffic was one of the main concerns raised by neighbours at the council meeting. It will affect the quietness of the neighbourhood, and the safety of young children.

This is exactly what the community opposed when they signed the petition. There were 141 people who signed. Those who lived a little further away said, “We can’t sign, it’s not our neighbourhood.” Let me suggest that 141 signatures is most of the people living in the neighbourhood.

We were not heard.