COCHRANE— After a fierce month's long discussion of the potential benefits of zero lot lines in Cochrane, council unanimously rejected a bylaw that would have allowed for the new lots to be developed at the Nov. 23 regular council meeting.
Mayor Jeff Genung said it was an interesting discussion about zero lot lines, but he was not surprised to see the bylaw receive no support from council.
“This is something that has been brewing for a while— Smaller lots,” Genung said. “It’s about identity— Some may argue we’re losing that small-town feel but its decisions like this that really challenge council on that.”
Council gave first reading to Bylaw 18/2020, a land-use amendment that would redesignate zero lot line single-detached districts in Cochrane on Oct.13 .Zero lot lines are single detached homes that are currently permitted to be developed on a property with a 2.4-metre easement requirement. The bylaw would have changed the easement requirement to 1.5 metres.
Communities affected by the proposed rezoning would have included Fireside, Riversong (Precedence), Sunset Ridge and Heartland. Current properties would maintain existing development opportunities of R2 and R1 districts.
The data showed overall zero lot lines would have 362 units in the affected communities or 28 per cent less than the densest development. This number was compared to 319 single-detached dwellings, 480 semi-detached dwellings or 500 townhouses. A second clarification was provided to compare proposed developments to the proposed zero lot lines. Overall it was found if approved zero lot lines would result in 12 fewer homes, or three per cent less than what was originally planned.
Genung said his major concerns were if the Town was ready and how zero lot lines would affect parking, which is already a hot topic in the community and the perception of density in communities.
“This to me this feels like a dilution of our identity,” Genung said. “I get the economics behind it. But for me, I can’t wrap my head around the feel and the change of our identity of Cochrane. The smaller lots is going the wrong direction for me.”
Councillor Marni Fedeyko said she understood the desire some families may feel to owning a home with its own four walls but was concerned about the fire regulations of the structures, effects on parking in neighbourhoods, and wanted to see day-homes and home-based business minor moved to discretionary uses.
These issues would need to be addressed if the proposed pilot project was to move forward, she said.
“I do understand the need I just don’t want to do development in the same way that we continue to do it,” Fedeyko said. “Knowing the mistakes, knowing the frustrations, knowing the issues that already exist this is an opportunity to stand up to residents and say we’re listening to you but we’re also going to have a different product which I think is a good compromise for both sides.”
Coun. Morgan Nagel said he could not support the bylaw because the measurement of success was based on if the houses sell and failed to take into account the quality of life for residents.
“These houses are going to be cheap,” Nagel said. “I don’t think when we’re community building in Cochrane that our poll should be a race to the bottom to just build the cheapest products possible.”
The pilot project was a step toward building houses closer together and is out of touch with what the community wants, Nagel said.
Coun. Susan Flowers said typically she is all about more housing options, especially those that make homes more affordable.
However, in the case of zero lot lines, Flowers said, she was uncomfortable with the pilot project because of the adverse effect it could have in neighbourhoods.
“We can’t just change the neighbourhood back if it’s not popular,” Flowers said. “When we know that there could be issues around parking, safety, noise and traffic I just don’t like the idea of counting complaints.”
Flowers said a project of this nature would be better off in a new area that has been specifically designed and anticipated for the lots. She added the proposed zero lot lines are a big change in comparison to what people originally anticipated when they moved into the affected neighbourhoods.
“I just think the developers should do what they were first going to do in this case,” Flowers said. “I just see more problems than I do resolutions.”
