The Subdivision Authority approved the subdivision application to create 10 new residential lots and three municipal reserve lots. This subdivision is consistent with municipal standards, is appropriate for the uses allowed for in the land use bylaw, and is consistent with our municipal development plan, the MGA and subdivision regulation. The entire portion of the east lot is designated as Municipal Reserve (MR) and will be owned by the Town of Canmore as Municipal Reserve under the Public Use (PD) District.
After several years of controversy, Council approved Bylaw 2018-14 to rezone a vacant parcel of land known as Peaks Landing, located in the Peaks of Grassi neighbourhood.
A compromise was reached, and housing will not be developed on the largest site; instead, it has been designated as Municipal Reserve (MR), while prioritizing the development of affordable housing. The rezoning allows 14 townhouse units (10 Vital Homes -formerly known as Perpetually Affordable Housing - and four market units) on one site, and the second site will allow for up to eight duplex dwellings.
LUB Amendment Peaks Landing DC 2018 14
A Wildfire Risk Assessment was prepared, building height calculations modified due to steep creek hazard mitigation, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was submitted, and the Town conducted an independent third party review of the applicant’s EIS.
The bylaw allocates the entire eastern portion of the lot to Public Use (PD) District, and no further applications could come forward by the applicants to develop the lands in the future.
Site 1 allows up to 14 townhouse units, with Canmore Community Housing (CCH) building 10 Vital Homes (formerly known as Perpetually Affordable Housing or PAH).
The proposed townhouses, while of slightly higher density than the R2A district across the street, would be subject to the similar height maximums, site coverage, and roof pitch requirements as the R2A district. This should result in a built form of similar scale to that across the street. Building heights on this site are proposed to be calculated from finished grade due to steep creek hazard mitigation requirements, rather than from existing grades. This is similar to how building heights are calculated in the flood risk area and the high groundwater overlay districts.
Site 2 allows up to 8 duplex dwellings, each of which must have its own suite. Duplex units with suites make both the duplex purchase more affordable for the purchaser and provides a market affordable suite for a renter. These units differ fundamentally from a 4-plex as they cannot be subdivided and sold off as a separate title. This means that if the suites are used they would be rental units. The proposed built form is largely consistent with the R2A district to the east and across the street from this site; with the same height maximums, site coverage, and roof pitch requirements as the R2A district. This should result in built form of similar scale to that across the street.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can apply to amend the Town’s land use bylaw?
Anyone can make application to the Town’s Planning Department to amend the land use bylaw. The requirements of the application must be met for Administration to prepare it for first reading by council, including an application fee. Certain application requirements are specific depending on the site and the nature of the application. The Town is obligated to process any application that it receives. Administration does not have the authority or discretion to deny a complete application without taking it to Council for consideration.
What are the procedures to amend a land use bylaw?
The Municipal Government Act requires a municipal council to give three readings to a bylaw and hold a public hearing prior to giving the bylaw second reading. Once a bylaw is given first reading and a public hearing date is set, a notice of the hearing must be given (s.692). The bylaw is approved only if it receives all three readings by council.
When did the application receive approval?
First reading was given by Council on January 8, 2019. Details can be found at Bylaws Pending Approval
. The public had an opportunity to submit verbal and/or written comments to council at the public hearing held on January 29, 2019. See Connect with Council
for other ways to express your views. Second reading (with amendments) was given by Council on March 19, 2019. Third reading (with amendments) was given by Council on May 7, 2019.
How does Council make a decision to amend a land use bylaw?
There are two basic requirements of a council in the procedure of amending a land use bylaw. First, a council must give reasonable opportunity for interested or affected parties to present their views and opinions of the proposal. Secondly, a council must remain sufficiently open to any representations made at the public hearing. Council will also consider policies contained within the Municipal Development Plan or any other statutory planning document in making a decision.
The second application for Peaks Landing was approved by Council, but invalidated by the courts. What was the reason?
In July 2016, an application for judicial review for questions of procedural fairness was made to the Court of Queen’s Bench regarding Council’s approval of the second land use bylaw amendment application. In 2018, the Court of Queen’s Bench ruled that the bylaw amendment must be invalidated because the MDP required an EIS to be prepared and reviewed by an independent third party reviewer due to the development proposal being located adjacent to an Environmental Reserve parcel (Sections 8.4 and 8.5 of the 1998 MDP).
Although an EIS and third party review is not a mandatory requirement of the current application based on the updated policies of the
2016 Municipal Development Plan
, the applicant prepared an Environmental Impact Statement. The Town of Canmore used an independent environmental consultant to prepare a third party review report. See section below (Background and Documents) for copies of the EIS and third party review.
What is the current status of the Settlement Agreement?
The agreed upon ‘Master Zoning Bylaw’ for the remainder of the Three Sisters Inc. land was implemented through the adoption of Bylaw 1-98DC and subsequent amendments to the Town’s Land Use Bylaw. With regards to pods 7 and 8 (the Peaks of Grassi) The Town of Canmore obtained a legal opinion that determined that the Settlement Agreement does not prevent Council from considering a land use change application. Council must therefore follow the procedures to consider adopting or amending a land use bylaw in accordance with the provisions of Part 17 of the Municipal Government Act.
Can Council include conditions of approval of a land use bylaw amendment?
No. A land use bylaw amendment only changes the zoning of a parcel, or can create a new district, such as the Peaks Landing application. The Municipal Government Act outlines what can be regulated through the land use bylaw. Conditions of approval are placed on approvals of applications such as subdivision or development permits.
How much did the Town spend on legal fees related to the second application, and what was the amount paid out for costs?
The Town’s costs for the Peaks Landing judicial review totaled $117,912.85, including the $55,000 reimbursed to the appellant for their legal fees.
How does the Town determine road designs that are safe for anticipated traffic volumes near Peaks Landing?
Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) guidelines reference that variances to standard guidelines may be necessary in mountainous terrain; the existing roadways comply with the Town’s
mountainous terrain guidelines
. The typical threshold for the requirement of a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) is 100 units. Peaks Landing proposes a minor increase in vehicle trips on a road with adequate capacity. No parking zones will be retained to maintain sightlines. Community feedback will be monitored post-development for speed concerns and a lower posted speed could be an option at that time.
Was a traffic impact assessment completed for Peaks Landing?
Peaks of Grassi was initially approved as one development (completed in 4 Phases) by the NRCB and the Town of Canmore. These approvals were completed in 1998. A
Traffic Impact Evaluation
was completed as part of the initial application in 1996 and submitted to the Town of Canmore. The current Peaks Landing application before Council is the first development application to be considered following the initial approval of Peaks of Grassi (Pods 7 & 8). The Peaks Landing proposal does not trigger the requirement for a new traffic impact assessment. The development proposes a minor incremental increase in vehicle trips that is accommodated within the existing road capacity.
The Town has completed a basin-level Steep Creek Hazard and Risk Report for X, Y and Z Creeks. Where can I get a copy of this report? Has the report been reviewed by a third party?
This report was completed by the Town’s consultant BGC, and was presented to Council on January 22, 2019. This is the
XYZ Creeks Hazard and Risk Assessment
Steep creek hazard reports are reviewed by Dr. Michael Church, Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia. Steep creek risk reports are reviewed by Dr. Norbert Morgenstern, Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta. Our reviewers are leading experts in their respective fields and have helped guide Canmore’s Steep Creek Hazard Mitigation Program since 2013. An in-depth review process by leading independent experts provides assurance of the consistency and quality of the work of our consultants.
A berm is proposed to be built to protect against steep creek hazards. What are the details of the berm, and are any approvals required?
The steep creek hazard report for Stones Canyon Creek recommended mitigation be built to protect both new and existing development in Peaks of Grassi. The proposal is that a 1m high berm/wall be constructed within the Government Road Allowance which is under the control of the Town of Canmore. The final location and design of the berm/wall would be determined during the subdivision process.
If, during the process of the final berm/wall design, it is determined that any approvals are required to locate the berm/wall on any portion of Public Lands, the appropriate approvals would be required to be obtained (such as a Temporary Field Assignment). Approval from the Province of Alberta is also required when there are activities proposed within a waterbody or when the works will divert and use surface or groundwater. Such activities require approval when they affect the land or vegetation around a water body, or may affect the location, flow or quality of the water or aquatic environment. For example, the debris flow retention structure proposed for Cougar Creek requires Water Act
A copy of the Stones Canyon Creek Diversion Wall Report (DRAFT) can be read
Is the wall/berm required for development to occur?
No. Development in a yellow zone is allowed to occur with local design mitigations only, such as grading, foundation, and openings to prevent water damage. The wall/berm would also protect existing development which was not designed with these local mitigation measures.
How is the risk of wildfire being addressed?
A Wildfire Risk Assessment was prepared by Montane Forest Management Ltd. The applicant has undertaken a significant amount of fuel management on the site. A small area of vegetation management remains to be undertaken on the proposed MR16 and the adjacent government road allowance. This will be undertaken by the Town through its town-wide Firesmart vegetation management program. The report also provides recommendations for structural mitigations, which will be considered at the development permit stage (i.e. building materials and landscaping).
Will blasting be allowed to develop on Site 3?
Site 3 will not be developed
The development may be visible from Quarry Lake and impact users. How does this factor into the decision-making process?
Scenic values are not universally held, and the impacts of changing viewsheds vary widely. Council considers the impacts of the development on views in their decision-making process.
How can the Town ensure that the affordable housing will be built?
The Town will acquire approximately 2/3 of the eastern portion (0.18ha) of Site 1 with the ability for CCHC to construct 10 townhouse PAH units. The Town would agree to pay to the applicants the proportionate cost of the studies prepared for the land use amendment and subdivision applications (including but not limited to the Environmental Impact Statement, Wildfire Risk Assessment, Steep Creek Hazard and Risk Report). The proportionate cost is $115,600.
What are the details of the Sustainability Screening Report (SSR) submission?
The SSR received in this application for Bylaw 2018-14 is the same as the version received in 2015 with the second application. The applicant’s version can be viewed
. It shows a positive impact with a score of 69.97.
Administration reviews all SSR submissions, and where it is unsure that a commitment will be met, a separate SSR is prepared. Due to points that were included for environmental leadership and innovation, and green building, Administration’s results of the SSR indicate a slightly lower positive impact with a score of 64.47. More information on SSRs can be found at Sustainability Screening Report
Background and Documents
In June of 2019, a notice of subdivision application was provided to
local impacted stakeholders
2018 Peaks Landing EIS Terms of Reference
2018 Environmental Impact Statement for Peaks Landing
2019 Third Party Review of EIS
A similar application was previously approved by Council through Bylaw 2015-19, but was deemed invalid at the Alberta Court of the Queens Bench in July 2018 due to the lack of a complete Environmental Impact Statement.