Paused at third reading: Council halts rezoning over traffic, safety pushback
Two weeks after calling residents’ traffic and access concerns “very legitimate,” Fort St. John City Council has hit the brakes on a zoning amendment for a proposed 66-unit manufactured home park in the city’s east end.
Although the July 27 agenda slated the zoning bylaw amendment for third reading and adoption, Councillor Trevor Bolin stepped in and moved that it be deferred until staff could present the traffic and access report requested by Council, following the July 13 public hearing. Council unanimously voted to support the deferral.
Back in October 2025, Eric Bell, general manager of Northern Legendary Construction, submitted a zoning amendment request – from RM-2 Mixed Residential to R3 Manufactured Home Park – to develop a 66-unit manufactured home park on behalf of the property’s owners.
From the May 19 open house to the July 13 public hearing, nearby residents consistently raised concerns over traffic congestion and the fact that the proposed 66-unit park relies on a single access point. Those concerns were echoed across petitions, letters and public comments before Council.
During the standing-room only public hearing, eight residents took to the microphone to express their concerns over the proposed development and rezoning application.
“It is proven that there is overwhelming opposition to this rezoning from the surrounding community,” said resident Philip Riessner.
He cited poor communication from Northern Legendary Construction, lack of answers to concerns, and safety as some of the reasons for the opposition.
“There was no information provided in advance of the Open House. The responses arising from any community inquiries were non-specific, non-committal and unenforceable,” Riessner said. “It is only through the recent messaging by the city, and the sharing of information within the community, that we have gained any awareness and education towards these rezoning plans, and have been able to show up today.”
Riessner said that Stats Canada data shows that crime rates are up to five times higher in manufactured home developments, and property crime is up to three times more frequent.
“The rezoning of this land would unquestionably lessen the safety of the neighbourhood for its’ residents.
“This application is also based on a traffic impact assessment conducted in 2014, which required two neighbourhood upgrades; the introduction of signalised controls and a new street built eastwards. To date none of that has been constructed.”
Riessner noted that this raises concerns regarding existing traffic safety and emergency vehicle access.
To access the proposed development, traffic will have to go down 81A Street and 79A Street, to the two entrances on 81St Avenue.
Should there be an emergency in the neighbourhood, such as a fire or police incident, there would be no access to or from their properties, residents fear.
Fellow resident, Tim Loney agreed with Riessner, also pointing out that there was a lack of communication from the developer, the first he heard of the rezoning plans was when “I looked out of my house and saw a four by eight sheet of plywood with a sign on it. That’s the first time I realised something was going on.”
Loney’s biggest concern was traffic. Most of the area around his home isn’t built up yet, so right now it’s not very busy.
“It’s a young place, lots of kids running around – they don’t care where they’re going, they’re having fun. You can see them out on their little battery-powered four-by-fours going up the middle of the road,” Loney said.
There’s no debate that Fort St. John needs more housing, said resident Chantelle Yates, who added that she supports the goal of more attainable home ownership, and manufactured homes can be part of that solution.
“My concern is not about the park itself; it is about making sure we grow in a way that is safe and works well for both current and future residents.
“The Station is a fantastic neighbourhood,” she said. “On a summer evening, you’ll see kids riding bikes and scooters, playing basketball and drawing with chalk on the sidewalks. Families walk their dogs, neighbours stop to chat and parents sit outside while their children play. It feels connected, safe and very much like the community we all think it should be.”
Yates pointed out that the city’s own report notes that residents have raised significant concerns about traffic, limited access in and out of the area, and that traffic counts are still be conducted.
“Those are important questions because they affect the safety of the families who already live there, and any families that may move in.”
Like Yates, fellow Station resident Ryan Anthony said he supports more housing, and understands that the city is under pressure from the provincial government to increase the density of housing in the community.
He says that the bylaws regarding manufactured home parks aren’t being enforced in the existing parks.
“The city has been unable, so far, to enforce them at the existing trailer parks, so how could it be possible that if we add additional to the city’s bylaw enforcement that it’s possible that the city will have the means to enforce that,” Anthony said.
“It’s kind of irresponsible to use a traffic plan from 2014, to make judgements in 2026.” ~ affected resident, Ryan Anthony.
He suggested that instead of a manufactured home park, the city consider sticking with the Mixed Residential zoning, which is consistent with the Official Community Plan, and encourage the development of duplexes, town houses, row houses and four-plexes.
Anthony also pointed out that the city had just finished the update of the OCP in December 2025.
“Our planners put a ton of effort into that OCP, they made a good document, they made a good plan. Why would we change that?
“Things have not changed that much in six months”
He believes that his neighbours would support the development of smaller homes, but instead there are a lot of people who are against the proposed manufactured home park.
“They’re not only unsupportive, [they’re] vehemently against it.”
Anthony added that he supports the concerns of the other residents who spoke of their concerns surrounding traffic congestion and says the developer should conduct a new traffic study before Council considers the rezoning application.
“It’s kind of irresponsible to use a traffic plan from 2014, to make judgements in 2026.”
When all residents who wished to speak had done so, Bell was given an opportunity to address concerns about his rezoning application, and answer questions from Council.
Speaking to the concerns about traffic congestion, Bell said that he believes safety is the paramount concern of everyone in Fort St. John, and that residents of planned communities are also concerned about the safety of their children.
However, he downplayed concerns about local traffic congestion by comparing the city to major urban centres like Vancouver, noting that the local rush-hour adds “an additional two minutes to get across town.
“So, the traffic congestion standards are different here. We travel at the speed of light compared to most developed communities,” Bell said.
As to why the property owner is looking to pursue a manufactured home park, rather than mixed residential, it comes down to pure economics.
The owner, Bell said, considered building houses but the development costs present a big challenge when it comes to financing.
“Banks are a little more receptive to this project, compared to speculative development of lots, and putting them for sale in a marketplace that has some inventory. The owner believes that providing this type of development will get more traction in the marketplace with affordable housing.”
Councillor Jim Lequiere asked Bell if, during the development stage they’d looked at creating an access off the highway frontage road into the proposed manufactured home park.
“I don’t think there’s currently a way for the landowners to make that parcel of land available, but it could definitely be researched,” Bell said.
When the regular meeting resumed, following the public hearing, Councillor Trevor Bolin said that “some of these concerns tonight are very legitimate.”
His biggest concerns, based on the feedback from the residents, were the traffic, the recommended upgrades from the traffic study and access to the frontage road.
“It would be terrible . . . if something closed down one of those roadways, I think that is a major concern, especially if that was shown in the traffic study,” Bolin said.
Bolin asked that staff gather that information in a report, so that Council can discuss it further before deciding on the requested zoning amendment.
Council unanimously supported Bolin’s Resolution:
“THAT, Council direct staff to prepare a report identifying improvements required at the intersection lights of 85 Avenue and 86 Street, upgrades to the traffic study, and evaluating the potential for a neighbouring parcel to provide access to Alaska Road North.”
When Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 2630, 2026 and OCP Bylaw No. 2631, 2026 appeared on the July 27 agenda for third reading and adoption by title only, Bolin moved that the vote be deferred “until we have that information to answer the residents.”
As Riessner said at the July 13 Public Hearing: “This is a rezoning to which there is overwhelming opposition, where there has been negligible community consultation, which factually lessens the safety of the neighbourhood, and which is misaligned with the interests of the OCP and the community.”