Editor:
I am writing this letter to address council’s recent approval of a temporary use permit (TUP) for a work camp in Johnson Heights (JH) and add context to the decision.
These thoughts are my own and do not reflect the reasoning of any other councillors, the mayor or the City of Revelstoke.
Many JH residents opposed the work camp, citing sincere concerns for traffic and safety, aesthetics and property values, timing after recent OCP neighbourhood plan engagement and favouring RMR’s position over and above the residents’ concerns.
Residents’ concerns were addressed in the staff report informing council and discussed at the meeting.
I encourage anyone interested to watch the meeting from Oct. 27 to review how issues were evaluated for legitimacy and to watch the careful deliberation on the motion.
Rather than review my evaluation of those concerns, which is on public record, I hope to share some considerations that were largely overlooked on social media commentary.
READ MORE: City council approves permit for worker camp in Johnson Heights
Land-use & planning
The TUP contains requirements for landscaping, privacy, snow removal, bear-proof garbage bins, security and shuttle service to mitigate a work camp’s impacts. However, since the land in question is already zoned appropriately for this type of use, it is essential to note that none of those requirements would be necessary if this application had been for a utility project (i.e. highway expansion).
Protecting JH residents’ long-term vision
In effect, granting the TUP eliminates the long-term risk the new JH neighbourhood plan (completed as part of the OCP process) could be ignored if a non-TUP-restricted work camp were put in before the updated OCP is put in place.
Housing affordability
Reducing the risk of delay for 150-200 beds of staff accommodation built by the RMR construction workers living in the work camp
Accountability to the community
Reducing the TUP from three years to two years ensures that if RMR requests an extension of their TUP, the same people on council that voted to approve the motion will be accountable to the community in justifying their vote for an extension, rather than pushing that new motion to a new council.
I sincerely apologize to the people that are impacted by these more challenging decisions. You have every right to be frustrated, but my request is to consider all the relevant facts that have been explored before judging and carefully reflect the broader effect of adding divisive commentary to charged topics.
I worry that for some dedicated and passionate community members, the resulting conversation might push them to stop engaging and stop being part of the solution.
Your voice does matter, your letters do get read and I show up to represent you – all of you. Please remember that just because a decision might look bad from the headlines, it doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been given a great deal of care.
Jackie Rhind
Revelstoke city councillor