CANMORE – A key decision in Canmore’s downtown area redevelopment plan (ARP) will be the future of density in the community’s downtown.
At the May 6 public hearing, a main theme was what should or shouldn’t be permitted when it comes to building heights, with the positives and negatives that may come from either option.
The plan itself proposes allowing more gradual increases in select areas of the plan – often considered to be gentle densification – with up to three- or four-storey buildings. The draft plan proposes density bonusing outside the immediate downtown core, which is when an extra floor is allowed, but in exchange for a community benefit such as affordable housing units.
The plan also indicates Town-owned land – some of which is dedicated to parking – could be future affordable housing.
If approved by council, implementation of the plan would start and involve items such as zoning amendments and updating the density bonus regulations in the land use bylaw.
Though much of the downtown area is proposed at three- or four-storeys, the outlying areas mostly residential and along Railway Avenue would be eligible for bonus density of up to four- or five-storeys.
“Decisions around land use and urban design are key factors for achieving this future vision,” states the draft ARP. “Gentle densification and the development of underused spaces will help provide adequate housing choices, commercial space and amenities that respond to the growing needs of current – and future – residents.”
More density, more possibilities
In a presentation from representatives of the Bow Valley Builders and Developers Association (BOWDA), the development advocacy group stated added density could address housing issues in the community and bring more people to the downtown core.
“[A] key missed opportunity is a lack of meaningful increased density or intensity of use in the Town Centre area,” Chris Sparrow said at the May 6 public hearing. “For a community facing a prolonged housing crisis, increased residential capacity directly in the downtown core where it can support local businesses, reduce reliance on cars and promote walkability should be an essential goal.”
He noted the plan allows for greater density on the peripheral areas with density bonusing, but one such area in the Gateway area along Railway Avenue is “highly complicated” when it comes to development and floor area ratio.
Sparrow said BOWDA understands mountain views are important, but there are ways to work on mitigating loss of views while also adding density.
He noted affordability, parking, feasibility and height are all issues “deeply inter-connected with respect to development and the role private developers help the plan come to fruition.”
Brian Talbot, the former chair of BOWDA, said the organization supports the vision but is concerned about what’s achievable when it comes to development.
He said he didn’t think the plan addresses financial aspects in unlocking development goals such as costs that come with building on high water tables and downtown having multiple small landowners, which would limit the ability to build more density since it typically needs larger lots.
“It’s visionary, but it has to be actionable,” he said.
“We’re looking at scale, so if we want to reduce the cost of buildings, we need to scale them up, which means density. It also means height.”
Sparrow noted, “density is a contributing part of ensuring feasibility and viability for development” since it can bring costs down.
“Those costs have to be recovered. The more units that can be introduced in a building that can economize common areas associated with it and meet the objectives of the plan to create a vibrant, engaging and social hub in the heart of the community can at least move the needle in terms of market housing and some inclusion of affordable housing,” he said.
Talbot gave the example of building a 30-unit condo and washrooms costing a fixed amount, but if it were to be a 100-unit condo such costs are likely to go down due to it being a larger project.
“If you go to a higher density, your cost of the individual components – because of scale – will come down,” he said.
Cathy-Anne David, a long-time BOWDA member and developer in the community, said “density is really the key to building more homes,” with it supporting both climate and housing goals.
“Density would allow Canmore’s population to grow in existing urban areas as opposed to expanding outward into the natural green areas and recreational spaces. … It’s often seen as a more sustainable approach than urban sprawl, which Canadian cities are quite used to,” she said.
Concerns about greater heights
Swathes of land surrounding downtown are primarily longstanding single-family homes and allowing a potential increase to 68 units per hectare had many speakers and letter writers concerned about too much change too fast.
Several speakers opposed the ARP based on it allowing greater density in areas traditionally zoned for single-family homes.
In their letter, Martin Buckley, a long-time municipal senior staffer at the MD of Bighorn and Town of Canmore, and Kelley Buckley stated the suggestion of height increases “remains one of two frightening and unacceptable concepts for us.”
They raised concern for the potential “very high degree of flexibility suggested for development authorities” for bonusing – when increased height is a trade-off for other aspects such as cash-in-lieu or affordable housing – in the draft ARP.
“We cannot envision any agreement within the Town Centre residential sector to go to four- or five-storey structures on any street north of 8 Street. The maximum should be three stories at most, and three-storey structures should be selectively placed, to limit the undesirable impacts – again, to those lots immediately abutting 8 Avenue/Fairholm Drive,” they wrote. “The area south of 8 Street has seemingly already developed to a three-storey neighbourhood.”
In a letter to council, Tourism Canmore Kananaskis CEO Rachel Ludwig said the organization generally supported the height limitations and “understands that to make development affordable, higher density, including height relaxations may need to be accommodated where necessary and desirable for the community.”
However, her letter stated the importance of having mandatory view studies completed to “ensure mountain views are protected” for buildings four or more stories in height and in the civic corridor.
Gradey McMahon, executive director of Downtown Canmore BIA, told council at the public hearing its membership expressed concern about building heights in the BIA zone.
He noted the potential Civic Corridor was of specific concern and requested if it were to go ahead, to ensure studies were done for possible development to “ensure skylines remain unobstructed and sunlight reaches the pedestrian areas” to protect “Canmore’s charm and natural beauty.”
“Without the scenic views, we’re just another small town,” he said.
Balancing act of existing, future needs
In 2024, Banff council approved significant land use changes in the mountain town that increased floor area ratio and maximum height as well as a relaxation of parking to allow for four- to five-storey buildings in certain land use districts.
The move was a key aspect of it receiving federal funding through the Housing Accelerator Fund and addressing housing availability in the community.
Lea Lohnes, principal architect with Canmore-based Montane Architecture, noted the downtown ARP is proposing one less floor than the highest density permitted in Banff's downtown.
She compared the density proposed to Antwerp, Banff and Canmore, saying “it is, in fact, very gentle and I think it’s very easy to support the densification that’s brought forward in the ARP.”
She noted it would also send a “very strong signal” to have affordable housing in the downtown area.
Edmund Ong, chair of Bow Valley Climate Action, emphasized to council that “land use policy is climate policy” and greater density can aid in climate goals of the community.
He said larger, more dense buildings allow additional living space per unit of outside surface area, which is “inherently more energy efficient” and containing urban sprawl would lead to more active modes of transit rather than personal vehicle reliance.
“Land use policy has deep and long-lasting effects on greenhouse gas pollution from these sectors because land use policy directly informs what transportation options are available and what transportation options are desirable,” he said.
Long-time Canmore realtor and former chair of Canmore Community Housing, Dan Sparks, highlighted the need for the Town to put “affordable housing absolutely anywhere you can in town.”
He cautioned that “density does not equal affordability” and switching zoning to allow up to four-storeys in some places “is not going to equal greater affordability.”
He said the starting rate for a new fourplex downtown is $1.8 million and “that’s not going to be affordable.” In comparison, Sparks said the average sale price for a home in Cougar Creek last year was $1.4 million.
A new single-family downtown starts at about $4 million, he said, and is likely only going to escalate. Sparks noted at the time of the hearing, he had two properties listed that are zoned for single-family homes downtown, with one being $4.499 million and the other $4.75 million.
Sparks added if a home is between five to 10 years old, it’s likely going to go for about $3.5 million and a teardown of an existing downtown single-family home lot is about $1.7 million.
“In building fourplexes, what we’re going to be doing is replacing the presidents of oil and gas companies with vice presidents of oil and gas companies,” he said. “We’re going to be serving the weekenders. The only way this contributes to affordable housing is through the collection of the vacancy tax. … That money can then be put to actual affordable housing projects.”
