Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Vince Fedoroff

COMPRESSED CONSULTATION TIME? – John Stamp, speaking to city council Monday evening, said many of his neighbours are surprised by the short time span the city has given them to express their views on the townhouses planned for Keewenaw Drive.

Townhouses should proceed, city staff say

City staff are recommending that council move ahead with rezoning to allow for a 10-unit townhouse development on Keewenaw Drive.

By Stephanie Waddell on June 20, 2018

City staff are recommending that council move ahead with rezoning to allow for a 10-unit townhouse development on Keewenaw Drive. The proposal in the Copper Ridge subdivision has raised the ire of some nearby residents.

Patrick McLarnon owns the vacant lot at 51 Keewenaw Dr. He has applied to have the zoning changed from its current commercial status to a multi-housing zone that would allow the 10 units to be built.

Council heard from two delegates opposed to the development during a public hearing last week, along with receiving nine written comments.

Seven of those were opposed or brought up concerns; another was neutral and one showed support.

At Monday’s meeting, area resident John Stamp also addressed council on the matter. He highlighted his own written submission and noted that while he had planned to be at the public hearing, he had been called in to work.

Stamp noted that in speaking to his neighbours, many are surprised by the quick deadline to state their views on the project. Many don’t want to see a 10-unit project in the 3,600 square metre space.

Some have taken issue with renderings submitted on the proposal showing two rectangular, five-unit townhouses with each unit a different colour – green, yellow, blue and tan.

Mélodie Simard, the city’s planning and sustainability manager, noted that while the renderings were submitted and are available on the city’s website, the developer may opt not to build them in that style.

It’s only after a site is zoned, confirming plans can go ahead, that many developers then pursue a more detailed design.

Stamp also argued the project would impact more than than just those who live in a 100-metre radius of the property, with those property owners receiving official notice of the plans from the city.

As Stamp noted, the playground next to the lot is a meeting place for many in the neighbourhood that’s made up largely of single-detached and duplex homes.

He went on to argue that council should be paying attention to what residents want to see in the neighbourhood. Any development should fit in better with the neighbourhood, Stamp added.

Coun. Dan Boyd said there are some issues with the renderings.

“I think those renderings are not helpful,” he said. “I think they actually make it problematic, because seeing that (residents) believe that that’s actually what would be built there,” Boyd said.

Coun. Betty Irwin also commented on the drawings provided, wondering aloud: “Aren’t there any architects in the world with some kind of imagination when they are designing buildings like this?”

Mayor Dan Curtis came to the defence of local architects, stating good architects are designing quality buildings in the city.

He also pointed out McLarnon has been unable to attract commercial development to the site since it was purchased in 2011.

The mayor wondered what the reaction of the neighbourhood would be if, for example, a 7/11 convenience store was built and opened on the site, as zoning would currently allow for.

The city has a role to decide on zoning and ensure developments adhere to the rules that are in place, Curtis noted.

He also commented that “it’s not really our role or our job to say what colour your house is, or the design it is, as long as it fits the criteria and the rules we have in place for our community.”

In the report on the rezoning provided to council, it’s noted the lot could potentially be subdivided and accommodate up to 10 units through triplex, duplex and garden suite development, though rezoning would also be required.

If the townhouse development is approved, it would have to meet requirements around parking.

It’s unlikely it would result in any more vehicles than a commercial development would. It’s also not expected to result in speeding through the area, as most vehicles would be slowing down while turning in or out of the property.

Some have argued the project would reduce property values for neighbouring home owners,.

Simard stated in her report: “A substantial amount of research and literature exists that indicates higher-density housing developments, when suitably design and quality-built, do not reduce the property values of adjacent, lower-density properties.”

Council will vote on whether to go ahead with the final two readings of the bylaw next week.

Comments (2)

Up 10 Down 4

longtimenortherner on Jun 21, 2018 at 3:02 pm

Stamp seems to be an elitist who wants to dictate who can live in his privileged neighbourhood. Would it be more acceptable to him that the residents moving into the townhouses were screened to ensure they meet socio-economic status of the existing residents? What about a single lawyer, or a doctor who has his kids part time... is that okay? Is it the property re-zoning that is the problem, or the potential lower-class residents who may purchase, or heaven forbid... rent them? Get off your horse Mr. Stamp, you look a fool with the feather in your cap.

Up 18 Down 4

BnR on Jun 20, 2018 at 3:01 pm

"Mayor Dan Curtis came to the defence of local architects, stating good architects are designing quality buildings in the city"
And you would know this how Dan? While there is an engineering act, there is no legislation governing architects, so anyone can call themselves such.

"He also pointed out McLarnon has been unable to attract commercial development to the site since it was purchased in 2011."
So, Pat's business plan isn't working out, that's CofWs issue. Why not give him his purchase price back, and then re-zone and allow others the opportunity to develop townhouses. Maybe accept proposals on the multi residential opportunity and select the best one.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.