A direct control district proposed for a lot at Seventh and Seventh in downtown Canmore may have a challenging approval process after several issues were identified with the bylaw at a public hearing.
The location at Seventh Avenue and Seventh Street in Canmore’s downtown core is home to Sacred Heart Catholic Church, its parking lot and a single family home – totalling four lots at that corner location.
Canmore-based Distinctive Homes purchased the lots and hopes to redevelop the site as a multi-family residential project, with 10 per cent being Perpetually Affordable Housing.
But the lots are currently zoned for fourplexes as permitted residential use, meaning four sets of fourplexes could be developed without requiring approvals by council or changes to the Land Use Bylaw.
In order to consider building a 40-unit condominium building, including underground parking and a contribution to affordable housing, Distinctive has applied for a direct control district, requiring council to approve an amendment to the land use bylaw.
Planner Marcus Henry presented the proposal at a public hearing held at the end of April.
“The land use amendment proposed for the corner of Seventh and Seventh would allow for a direct control district and a medium density residential building subject to the maximum of 40 units, with 10 per cent of those units provided as perpetually affordable housing,” Henry told council. “The overall height of the building is a maximum of 3.5 storeys of 14.5 metres.”
It soon became clear at the hearing that how parking was being addressed, in particular visitor parking, was cause for public concern.
Jeff Laidlaw told council to reconsider the parking strategy being used for the project, saying he does not support the kind of development being proposed for the site.
“I do not believe the Municipal Development Plan calls for this particular kind of development at this location,” he said. “If the town is planning to grow as Three Sisters and Silvertip suggest, keeping land available in the commercial downtown core would probably be a good plan.”
Catie Tuff told council parking needs more consideration on the site, and the visual impact of the direct control district is significant.
“I am not necessarily opposed to the development, but I am opposed to the drastic change in height,” she said. “I think parking is an issue that needs to be reconsidered.”
Henry said the proposed building would include underground parking for 54 vehicles and some parking would be tandem for units with more than one stall – three and four bedrooms, for example. There was, however, no provision of visitor parking on site, but Henry identified six on-street parking spots as visitor parking.
“On street parking cannot be assigned to a building,” stated Mayor John Borrowman. “So why would we consider on street stalls as visitor parking in this location?”
Part of the rationale behind the suggestion on-street parking could be counted towards visitor spaces was the fact several additional on street parking spaces would be created with redevelopment of the current parking lot. In other words, the space where vehicles currently drive into the parking lot for the church would be available for parking after the site is redeveloped.
“What we are saying is as a result of the development, parking is opened up,” Henry said, adding a downtown parking strategy is expected to be presented to council sometime in the near future.
Lawrence Hill spoke about the parking, but said because the building is located in the centre of town, it is likely several units won’t require as much parking.
“I think it is practical,” Hill said. “You can expect several (units) won’t own a car and make the reduction (in parking) more acceptable I believe.”
Other aspects of the proposed development include setbacks for development on each side of the property, a requirement for landscaping that would allow a green roof, as well as a conceptual design that would have the building that fronts onto Seventh Avenue and Seventh Street at two storeys in height, and at the back of the lot facing the back parking lot and loading zone of the post office at 14.5 metres as the maximum height.
Henry said as a direct control district, there would not be variances considered to that roof height at the development permit stage.
Borrowman reminded everyone attending the public hearing that the bylaw deals only with land use and district requirements, not an actual building that is being proposed for development.
“We are not approving a building, we are just considering provision of land use,” said the mayor.
Bob Kocian, developer with Distinctive, as well as architect Bill Marshall with Marshall Tittemore, and Jenny Kasprowicz with McElhanney Consulting, each took an opportunity to speak to the application.
Kasprowicz said the form of the building being considered for development is in a draft stage, but was needed to “get an idea of what would fit on the site to create a vision for the direct control district.
“It is a unique site,” she said. “It is kind of on the transition zone. This is an excellent infill opportunity, to be close to transit services, Main Street and trails that encourage walking and cycling.”
Kasprowicz said the overall vision for the infill redevelopment of the site was to create housing that utilizes existing infrastructure as much as possible, encourages densification that is sensitive to the community and promote active transportation in the area.
She said the reason for proposing a direct control district is it represents the uniqueness of the site and the infill opportunity, including creating a requirement of 10 per cent perpetually affordable housing.
“We tried to create a district flexible enough to allow creativity in site design, but also gives the town comfort development will be controlled on site and in a responsible manner,” Kasprowicz said.
“The purpose is to provide medium density multi-unit housing and affordable housing that is complementary to the surrounding neighbourhood and downtown core.”
Former councillor John Kende said he is concerned about the preference this council seems to have for direct control districts.
“Council is falling in love with direct control,” Kende said. “Council has the authority that allows it to have all kinds of zonings and to put definitions of zonings that does not need to be a direct control.”
There also seemed to be some interest in commercial development on the site, even though its current land use zoning only permits fourplexes and does not contemplate commercial on the ground floor.
Blanca Cervi asked council why they are looking at densifying downtown for residential.
“You are denying the opportunity of much needed future jobs created in this location for commercial establishments,” she said.
Canmore resident Philip Lens also spoke at the public hearing and expressed support for higher density in the downtown core.
In particular, Lens spoke about the underground parkade and the fact that Canmore has high groundwater levels that affect parking structures in the valley bottom.
“World wide they build parkades into the ground, next to oceans and rivers, in places like London and Manhattan,” he said. “What I would like council to do is demand builders to build (parkades) properly. You can properly build a parkade in the ocean and not get a drop of water in it.”
