In a split vote, Canmore council approved a re-zoning application on lands in the Peaks of Grassi neighbourhood to allow residential development to go forward, including several affordable housing units.
Council members took the time to express how each arrived at their decision in a 5-2 vote to approve the rezoning for the Peaks Landing proposal. It was the second rezoning application on the land in the last year, in what many in the community felt was a neighbourhood that had no more room for development.
Councillors Vi Sandford and Ed Russell voted against the application, noting several concerns about the development itself and their obligation to honour the 1998 settlement agreement.
“I understand fully we are not bound by the settlement agreement,” Russell said. “But the zoning change does not respect the settlement agreement. While we have no legal compulsion, I feel a moral obligation to stick with that agreement.”
Mayor John Borrowman said while he appreciates the intent of the settlement agreement and the spirit in which it was made, it is almost 20 years later and “this council is dealing with quite a different reality.
“This council is trying to do what is best for this community today and I fail to see how the settlement agreement has a bearing on this any longer. In any governance model, no council or legislature or parliament can make a decision that a future government cannot change – that is just not how it works.”
Borrowman said he is hearing from the next generation of Canmore residents that they are leaving town due to affordability, and availability, of housing options.
“We have stated affordability is our first priority and affordable housing is the primary component and we have to be intentional and determined when dealing with these issues.”
Sandford said she was overwhelmed with the 698 pages of information from the public hearing and stated it has been a difficult decision.
“One thing I noted is most of the people who supported this project were in support of affordable housing in general, but the people against it had very specific reasons and rationale and thoroughly approached the issues,” she said. “The big question for me is, is this big enough to make a difference or is this just big enough to cause more problems?
“The location of the development is the part I am struggling with because we are adding density to a place where the accessibility is compromised.”
Sandford said the neighbourhood is already quite dense and with a single access road, any more residential development at the end of that street will cause adverse effects on other residents.
“There is a lack of density in this town and we should look to create density where it makes sense and I do not believe this neighbourhood and this land makes sense at this time,” she said.
Coun. Sean Krausert said for himself there needed to be a significant community benefit to consider allowing residential development on the site.
“Affordable housing is our greatest community need and the zoning proposed allows many entrance points on the housing spectrum, many of which are in the more affordable zone,” he said.
The rezoning opens the door for subdivision to occur and what is proposed are five single family home lots, eight duplex units which must include a secondary suite, and 14 townhouse units. Of those, seven would be perpetually affordable housing units and the remaining seven market affordable housing. MAH is a new definition that is included in the draft Municipal Development Plan and indicates a unit that is purpose built to keep costs low.
Krausert said all of council has approached the question of the rezoning diligently and taken the decision seriously, whether they are for or against it.
“The reality is that we have to make the best decision for the community now,” he said. “That is what we are required to do under the Municipal Government Act and that is where we demonstrate our integrity.”
Councillors Rob Seeley, Esmé Comfort and Joanna McCallum all spoke to the need for affordable housing in the community as part of their decision making process to support the rezoning.
“To address the crisis and show the community we are serious about doing things to address liveability in Canmore, we all have to be prepared to give a little, be more accepting and be more inclusionary and that is why I support this motion,” Comfort said.
Development planner Patrick Sorfleet presented the application for rezoning to the Land Use Bylaw for second and third reading. He reminded council at this point in the development approval process, the application deals only with land use and general principles.
“What it does not do is deal with specific building design, site layout, servicing and grading,” Sorfleet said. “I highlight this because there were drawings submitted with the application.’
There were concerns expressed at the public hearing regarding elements of the development like parking, site layout, traffic and design, but Sorfleet said those are issues that will be addressed at the development permit phase.
The issue of steep creeks was also brought up at the public hearing and Sorfleet said the hazard and risk assessment for the area indicates it is a low hazard.
“Development is possible … on-site mitigation will sufficiently protect buildings and their contents,” he said.
