SESC responses to Tannery Court’s “Frequently Asked Questions”*
On Avide’s web-site they have developed a list of Frequently Asked Questions related to Tannery Court in Saint John. The following is the South End Sustainable Community Group’s responses to those questions. Their link is http://www.avide.ca/tannerycourtcoop/faq.html
1. What will the building look like? What features will it include?
Not the architecture you see in Saint John South End today.
The building will be three stories and house 50 one bedroom apartments and one 2 bedroom apartment. Fifty of the units are to be small, 500 ft2 bachelor-type apartments. The only two-bedroom unit in the building is reserved for the building’s superintendent. Although there is a common laundry room, only 4 washers and 4 dryers are provided for 50 adults. The exterior of the building is to be L-shaped. The orientation of the building on the lot creates a narrow alleyway between the house at 27 Saint Andrews Street and the proposed development. This alley way will provide the majority of the green space for the residents of Tannery Court. Given the position of the buildings the green space will receive very little sunlight. In Moncton the green space is also in a shady area and consists of grey pebbles and low maintenance shrubs.
The proposed design of the Tannery Court development is out of scale with the general style and character of the surrounding properties. In terms of size and number of people in one building this development does not conform to the existing Saint John Municipal Plan. The Saint John plan stipulates that developments in this area not exceed 30 dwelling units per net residential acre. The Tannery Court development would result in a density of 48 dwelling units per acre.
2. What will the actual units be like?
The apartments are minimalist. These are small one bedroom apartments that are equipped with bathrooms that are limited to showers with no bathtubs provided in the units. These are for singles only.
3. Who will live in Tannery Court Saint John?
It has been difficult to get a precise answer to this question. The reports have varied. We do know specifically that all 50 of the tenants will come from a waiting list managed by the Department of Social Development for non-elderly singles in need of affordable housing. The apartments are for one person only and will not accommodate couples, children or roommates. In media reports a representative of Tannery Court has stated that residents may include people with mental health issues, physical disabilities and/or addictions. To date we have no official statements.
4. What type of supervision/security will be offered?
We have been told that the building will include security cameras. There will be one live-in supervisor. We are unclear of the supervisor’s responsibilities with regards to the facility other then to maintain the building.
5. Why can’t this complex be a “mixed” model?
Tannery Court in Moncton began with 5 apartments of the total 40 as market rate rental units. In Fredericton there was similar set up with 6 of 50 units set aside for market rate availability. We are told by Tannery Court representatives that this did not work out and that it was difficult to keep the market rate apartments occupied.
According to Bill O’Neil of Tannery Court: “A mixed-income project would not work in this case… partly because the mix hasn’t been successful in the past and because it’s not economically viable.”
In Saint John there has been a very different approach by other developers to creating mixed income affordable housing projects. Just a few blocks away in Leinster Court 24 of 52 units are also for non-elderly singles referred from the department of Social Development’s waiting list. Another project “The Abbey” behind Saint Andrews and Saint David Church is currently being developed and will create 91 mixed income units for single people, couples, families and roommates.
Despite being one of the poorest neighborhoods in the country, South Enders value diversity. Many of us have chosen to live in this neighborhood because it is mixed and as such gives it vibrancy.
6. Will bringing all these people together create a “ghetto”?
Ghetto by definition: Ghetto: A usually poor section of a city inhabited primarily by people of the same race, religion, or social background, often because of discrimination.
By definition this project will create an economic ghetto for single individuals.
According to Tannery Court: “For certain demographics and communities, mixed housing can work. Our experience, however, is that for this specific group, non-elderly singles, a targeted approach works better.”
Tannery Court representatives claim that people in “this demographic” prefer to live with only people from “this demographic”. South End Sustainable Communities disagrees.
7. How is Avide different than other Developers?
Unlike many recent developments in Saint John this development is completely reliant on government funding. Avide has provided this design to the government. Avide has stated it will not change the design in any way is it would be not economically viable.
A number of other developers who have built in Saint John have:
1. Built a community consultation process within the planning stage of their developments.
2. Have created mixed income projects that have a balanced mix between affordable and market focused units.
3. Have combined government funding for affordable housing with funds from other investors.
8. Will Avide be continuing their involvement after Tannery Court is built?
The contract with Department of Social Development will require Tannery Court to provide subsidized housing for 10 years. There is no requirement beyond ten years. For the building Tannery Court will receive $25,000 per “low income” unit. This is $25,000 times 50 for a total of $1.25 million. Tannery Court will receive funds from the government to make up for the difference between what tenants are able to pay (30% of their income) and the a “determined” market rate. At the end of the ten year period Tannery Court will continue to own the building completely funded through government dollars.
9. Why did Avide not consult with the Community before going to Planning?
Tannery Court claims they did consult with the community. According to their own documents “Following our proposal to the city to build a Tannery Court in this location, area residents and ourselves were invited to a meeting of the Planning Advisory Commission (PAC) on October 21. Twelve local residents and property owners attended, most of whom made written enquiries into the nature of the project. A full presentation on the Tannery Court proposal was given, and we answered questions and addressed the concerns raised by those in attendance. Following this, the PAC granted the variances that were requested, which allowed Tannery Court to move forward.”
The only people made aware of the PAC meeting describe above by Tannery Court documents as “community consultation meeting” were some of the property owners within 90 meters of 185 Carmarthen. People renting apartments or living 91 Meters or more away from the building were not made aware of the meeting. PAC meetings follow a precise format that does not allow for discussion between the developer and those in attendance concerned about the development. PAC meetings focus only on the variances requested and do not involve any consideration of the merits or concerns of the project itself.
A community meeting on Tannery Court was set up for Nov. 20, 2008. Tannery Court representatives chose to not attend the community meeting suggesting that the promotions would only attract those with concerns about the development. The meeting did proceed and a variety of opinions on the development were expressed.
To see the meeting by video visit You Tube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp7HDP9SVgM.
No other mechanism for community input has yet occurred.
It is called the path of least resistance.
Tannery Court explored two other locations before settling on 185 Carmarthen. The first undisclosed location had contaminants and therefore was no longer desirable. The second location was on Bentley Street (near Douglas Avenue). The Planning Advisory Committee rejected Tannery Court’s request for the needed re-zoning and variances to proceed. The site at 185 Carmarthen did not require as complicated an approval process. Re-zoning was not necessary. The only approval process for this project to go forward was the granting of variances by the same Planning Advisory Committee. On Oct. 21, 2008 the same Planning Advisory Committee approved variances for the same project they rejected just weeks earlier at another location. This expedited approach will help the developer to meet Government deadlines for financing.
There are particular concerns with this location however. The impact of a project such as this in an already vulnerable neighbourhood is of great concern. The South End is one of the poorest neighbourhoods in Saint John, in New Brunswick and in Canada. Within the larger South End the immediate neighbourhood (called Dissemination Area by Stats Can.) has the highest poverty rate of all of the South End.
According to 2006 Statistics Canada data, the south-end of Saint John has a poverty rate of 37.5%, compared with the city-wide poverty rate of 20.8%. Statistics Canada divides the south-end into eight smaller dissemination areas. The dissemination area where Tannery Court is to be located (“Tannery Court D.A.”) has a total population of 455. The poverty rate in the Tannery Court D.A. is 56.2% compared with the city-wide poverty rate of 20.8%, and is the highest poverty rate of the eight south end D.A.s.
Despite these dismal statistics the South End is a vibrant and interesting neighbourhood. To ensure that this neighbourhood becomes healthier and happier for all we need “balanced” housing.
The South End needs integration not segregation.
* These “Frequently Asked Questions” are those developed by Tannery Court: at http://www.avide.ca/tannerycourtcoop/faq.html the above are the South End Sustainable Community Group’s responses to those FAQ’s.
No user commented in " SESC responses to Tannery Court’s “Frequently Asked Questions”* "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a Trackback