Banff politicians aren’t prepared to scrap a controversial parking policy designed to encourage development of more rental housing, particularly given the tourist town continues to have a zero per cent vacancy rate and residents living in substandard conditions.
Policy C-122 allows for fewer on-site parking spots in apartment buildings under certain criteria, such as proximity to transit, than dictated in the land use bylaw. The idea is less parking lowers the cost to developers and, therefore, encourages more rental housing.
Residents in a couple of neighbourhoods have pushed to have the policy appealed, or at least altered, arguing C-122 has led to more vehicles on already clogged streets because there’s not enough on-site parking included in apartment developments.
The development appeal board meeting is at 9 a.m., Dec. 1 at Town Hall.
Council stands by the policy, but made several policy amendments on Monday (Nov. 28), including one that mandates developers provide free on-site parking to tenants on a first come, first served, basis to prevent them charging for parking.
Councillor Corrie DiManno voiced support for C-122 and the amendments, saying she sees it as more of a housing policy than a parking policy.
“In council’s four-year strategic plan, we have a goal of reaching 200 new units by 2018 and so far, after C-122, we have 115 net new units approved. I believe C-122 is what helped us move the needle,” said DiManno.
DiManno also reminded people of a recent incident in which a man offered free rent to a woman in exchange for sex through an online advertisement.
“I feel if we don’t offer a way for developers to continue building housing in Banff that we may see more situations like that,” she said. “To me, that was horrifying and that is a choice no one should have to make.”
Seven developments have taken advantage of the policy since its adoption in early 2014.
Based on several criteria, the policy allows a minimum of 0.6 parking stalls per dwelling unit, which was based on 2007 census data that indicated the average apartment unit in Banff has less than one vehicle per stall, and research about vehicle ownership in North America.
Resident after residents spoke to the downside of C-122, with some questioning the research and statistics used to come up with the policy, while others argued housing stock can still be increased with a one-to-one ratio of parking to housing unit.
Karen Smith, a Marten Street resident, said policy C-122 compounds the parking shortfall in Banff and will result in more cars on the streets when residents are already competing for parking spots with visitors and commercial vehicles.
She also said the current transit system, while good, still doesn’t meet the needs of all residents, and people need vehicles to drive to places like Johnston Canyon and Lake Minnewanka.
“Until we have major improvements to our transit system we should not be giving developers any allowances on parking requirements,” she said.
Coun. Stavros Karlos said he would not put vehicles before people. He said if paid parking ever gets implemented in the downtown core he will push for a residential permit system for residential neighbourhoods.
Karlos said he also believes some of the opposition to C-122 is more than just concerns over parking, noting he’s heard comments from some who simply don’t want younger, transient people living in their neighbourhoods.
“In the past month, I’ve had people around town, some of whom are my friends, come up to me and say things like, ‘I don’t want a dishwasher living next to me’,” he said. “That’s been said to me and I’m sorry – that’s wrong.”
Other amendments to C-122 include the creation of a specific cash-in-lieu fee for developments that make use of the policy of $75,000 per stall, with a two per cent annual inflationary increase.
