The Subdivision and Development Appeal Board (SDAB) has announced its decision with regard to a permit application for supported housing, limited at 47 Reunion Grove N.W. According to City documents, the board has denied the appeal, after a hearing was held in late June and will proceed with granting the permit application. The written decision was issued on July 4.

The applicant who applied for the permit was Bright Adelegan, the Executive Director of Ever Bright Complex Needs Support Services Inc. 

While there were numerous appeals (30 plus appellants) against the development permit on June 20, there were also several letters submitted to the SDAB in support of the application being granted, several citing the fact that because Airdrie lacks supportive housing, such an initiative should be welcomed and fostered.

At the outset of the hearing, Airdrie city Councillor Candice Kolson, Chair of the SDAB,  addressed the role of the board as well as what it can and cannot do with regard to some of the information that was submitted by the appealing parties. Kolson underlined that the board was not a legislative or policymaking body. This was also restated in the city's written decision documents.

"The Board noted a series of issues raised in the Appellants’ written submissions that looked to be outside the Board’s jurisdiction. [The] Board stated that if speakers addressed those issues at the hearing, speakers should take care to explain the issues’ relevance to considerations within the Board’s remit."

It was also noted that Supportive Housing, limited is not meant to be a shelter or a temporary type of accommodation.

"It is meant to maintain the property’s residential nature. However, the residents need extra help with everyday activities. The permit proposed three residents supported by two onsite staff who will provide around-the-clock care on rotation."

The number of residents in the home was raised in the June 20 hearing by a Rocky View County resident. Catherine Ziegler, who spoke in favour of those appealing the permit underlined that because the Supportive Living Accommodation Licensing Act is only applied to supportive living accommodation provided to four or more adults who are not related to the operator, provincial oversight is limited. Supportive homes that have less than four individuals do not need to seek a license under this Act. 

Residents and those present during the appeal hearing were also adamant that the applicant had not posted the notice of the decision and had started operations prior to permit issuance. The city had confirmed they did receive such complaints but stated that on April 28, 2023, the City of Airdrie issued a warning notice. One day later, the City stated that the applicant confirmed compliance with the notice - though some residents dispute this.

In its decision, the City enumerated several reasons as to why the permit was granted. These included the fact that the permit aligns with high-level policy and the Land Use Bylaw regulations. It was also underlined several times that Airdrie has an extreme deflect of housing types serving vulnerable people.

However, the Development Authority did note and told the SDAB that it did not review the applicant’s other properties for land use complaints because each application is reviewed on its own merit.

"The community of Reunion has zero supportive housing units [and] the applicant’s use of the property prior to issuance of the permit was resolved through a warning notice and confirmation of compliance."

However, those who were against granting the permit and who spoke at the hearing brought up several issues, including concerns about the community's safety.

"Appellants requested that the City of Airdrie and Board investigate various issues, and stated that regulating the use not the user is wilfully ignoring the larger issues for vulnerable people."

John Maxner, an Airdrie resident who spoke at length during the appeal hearing, also spoke on behalf of others who were opposed. 

"Mr. Maxner submitted that his group’s biggest concern is that the user is not deserving of the permit because he is abusing the Permit, lying to different municipalities, and withholding the evidence and the truth for people that want to know and have the right to know if he wants to operate in our community," city documents stated. 

In his statements to the SDAB, Maxner also referred to the systemic abuse of Indigenous and Inuit people in group homes.

"He submitted that the Board needs to look at people and not treat them as paycheques or ratepayers. He submitted that the Inuit and people from Nunavut have a distinct culture that is different than southern Alberta and that Nunavut is 3,000 kilometres away and has 40,000 people. In contrast, 80,000 people live in Airdrie."

However, in his rebuttal, Adelegan said that his organization supports people from across Canada, and not exclusively from Nunavut.

"He submitted that the people set to reside at the Property have lived in Airdrie for the past 3 years without incident. He submitted that he would not speak to their diagnoses and that people with disabilities have the right to live anywhere."

Airdrie First Nations woman and advocate, Jaadaas Jagwaa was also present at the hearing on June 20, supporting the appellants, though she stated she lives in the Bay Springs area. Jagwaa, like Maxner, underscored that Airdrie has inadequate cultural support and infrastructure for Indigenous people from differing nations across Canada.

City documents stipulate that 'this permit is specific to a group home. It is not specific to Indigenous people or children or adults or any specific age group or other division.'

"The Board finds that the Appellants’ submission that the Permit is for Indigenous or Inuit people is factually incorrect. As the Development Authority submitted, the Land Use Bylaw does not make such a distinction. The Board finds that it received no convincing evidence that the Permit is for Indigenous or Inuit people."

In its decision, the City also stated that '...a significant part of the submissions were about operational violations, misrepresented applications, and bad faith actors representing Administration and the City’s planning department.'

Furthermore the City's Development Authority, 'acknowledged these comments in their gravity regarding abuse, neglect, systemic oppression, and relocation of children and people that are failed by our support systems.'

"These are terrible and can't be reduced to setbacks and land use classifications. The Land Use Bylaw is not sufficiently robust or multidisciplinary to resolve systemic social injustices. It does contain provisions where misrepresented permits or repeated violations can cause a development permit to be cancelled or revoked."

The most recent appeal hearing and subsequent decision are somewhat similar to what occurred last fall with regards to a supportive housing, limited unit in the Big Springs neighbourhood. Ever Bright Complex Needs Support Services Inc. had also requested a development permit for a housing unit there, with many residents opposing it. Similar concerns were brought up by Big Springs residents in the fall of 2022 when an appeal hearing was held.

It is estimated that there are 15 homes in the Airdrie area that are run by Ever Bright Complex Needs Support Services Inc.

Send your news tips, story ideas, pictures, and videos to news@discoverairdrie.com

Related Stories