The first legal challenge of Edmonton’s updated city-wide zoning bylaw is underway with a homeowner headed to court to stop a new development next door. Over the course of 30 years, Nita Jalkanen has transformed her home and yard into an oasis. “It is a piece of heaven,” she told CTV News Edmonton. “I live out here, especially in the summer. I’m out here all the time and even in the winter. It’s why I put a heater on my veranda, because I like to be outside and so does my dog.” It’s a place where Jalkanen and her dog spend hours soaking up the sun. But she found out an eclipse is coming – in the form of a new infill development next door. ‘Very concerning to me’ Vida Nova Homes plans to build a three-plex: three units up and three raised basement units. Jalkanen paid for a shadow study, which she says found the proposed building would leave most of her property in the shadows for about half the year. “In a city that’s in a northern climate, where sun is at a premium, this is very concerning to me and obviously my garden … and my quality of life, my mental state,” she said. The owner of Vida Nova Homes told CTV News Edmonton any property built there would block the sunlight. “Wouldn’t really matter what we build there. Like even if I built a 1,400-square foot duplex or I built a very large house, you’re going to get the same process,” Troy Fernandes said. “You’re still going to be blocking sunlight because if you look at her house compared to maybe, I don’t know, 95 per cent of the houses in the neighbourhood, most houses are pushed forward. Her house is at the very back of the property and it’s very rare. It’s very uncommon. “I did everything I was told to do. That’s it. There was no being sneaky. There’s no hiding. We did everything based on the city bylaws. And as you can see, all you gotta do is step outside in any mature neighbourhood … All you see is multifamily.” Jalkanen disputed Fernandes’ claims in a text message to CTV News Edmonton: “In my appeal … I give the standard measurements of a standard two-storey home, and it would shade 32 per cent of my yard. This planned development will shade 100 per cent plus my veranda, plus a good part of my home. “The developer’s excuses do not hold water.” Appeal process The permit to start work is on hold because Jalkanen is fighting it through the subdivision and development appeal board. Jalkanen says the tribunal is the only option people have to fight infill projects at the municipal level, but it does not have the authority to make a ruling on anything other than variance errors. “We have property rights. We’re entitled to our sunlight. We’re entitled to the value of a property. We’re entitled to comfort in our property,” Jalkanen said. “We were forced to go to the courts so they have arbitrarily taken our rights away.” Armed with previous Supreme Court rulings regarding property and charter rights, Jalkanen has taken the city’s recently updated infill bylaw to court in what the city confirms is the first legal challenge of it. “What has to happen now is that the case from the Court of King’s Bench gets consolidated with my appeal, and they both go to the Court of Appeal,” she said. “And the Court of Appeal has the authority which the SDA does not (have): strike the bylaw and declare it invalid. And that’s what I’m trying to do.” She says she’s not against infill projects as long as they’re done respectfully. “For the city to do this to its citizens, to me, is atrocious.”
