The Town of Banff, which has many of the same unique characteristics of Jasper - held within a national park and with a restricted town boundary - is currently working on a review of their land use bylaw in an effort to align itself with their community plan that was approved in February of this year. 

According to Randall McKay manager of planning and development for the Town of Banff, one deficit that was identified during incorporation of the town and again in the community plan was a chronic shortage of “value housing” and affordable housing. 

The community plan identified the need for apartment-style housing, such as condominiums, he said, adding that duplex-dwelling’s are not enough to accommodate the community.

Through community consultations, whereby McKay and town staff have been discussing issues such as residential density, architectural motifs, and re-zoning of green-space, the Town of Banff is striving towards the best possible solution.

The review of residential density regulations is driven by three factors, said McKay, to align the bylaw with goals of the plan, accommodate the ever increasing population, that despite being capped at 8,000 reached 8,721 in 2007, and with a town boundary that has shrunk by 19 per cent since incorporation.

From his interactions thus far, McKay said people have said “don’t go out, go up”, which means increase density and leave the green space alone.

During consultations for the Jasper Community Sustainability Plan (JCSP) a similar goal to “ensure green space is not forfeited for housing” was suggested.

Higher density housing was also identified by consultants of the Jasper plan a matter of conflict whereby goals such as “to provide higher density housing that provides for good quality of life” conflicted with other goals to have the density to remain static. 

Unlike Jasper, McKay said Banff is “used to a reasonable level of density and already has an appetite for it.”

Consequently, in some areas of Banff, McKay suggested that a further increase would have little impact. 

“Downtown is very dense already... so we believe the impact we’ll be negligible... it’s easier for people to understand and accept (higher density housing) in those areas,” he said. 

Continuing to maintain a high-level of control over architectural design and protection of neighbourhood character is another strong issue that McKay said was raised during consultations.

During consultations for the JCSP, the consultants identified another conflict between maintaining architectural design motifs and successfully adopting green standards throughout the town concurrently. 

“We’ve received wide ranging opinions on density,” he said, “a dominant feeling is to stick with redevelopment... maintain high architectural control so that neighbourhood character is sustained and enhanced.”

“People have said... allow more capacity on the site as long as you can control the architecture,” he added noting that many opinions were site specific. 

Another similarity to Jasper is the issue of unlawful dwellings, the latest in Jasper being the Bonhomme evictions that will see seven Jasperites displaced in order to enforce duplex dwelling district zoning regulations.

An ongoing issue in Banff, McKay said that the town was continuing to enforce on written complaints and was working to bring these dwellings into compliance with both bylaw and safety codes. 

McKay suggested that while it wouldn’t be a matter of amending the bylaw to accommodate unlawful suites, it was possible that more flexibility would be allowed.

“We have to look at each land use,” McKay said, “we know from our census data we know where the bulk of these are located.”

“It seems to be almost accepted generally, they’ve lived with it,” he said, adding that the people have been living with the increased density so it could mean “they don’t mind the density”.

The town is also asking residents to examine the use of secondary suites, which McKay said can provide an important revenue for mortgage payers while providing extra housing.

“We’ve engaged the public about secondary suites again, there is a series of things we want to look at,” he said, “increasing size, where they’re allowed, how many on site, parking regulations, how they’re approved... and planning commission involvement.”

Parking requirements, he said, were also being reviewed as it had been identified that many “entry-level staff who are here for six months to two years” don’t own a vehicle.

Thus “we are demanding parking to be built when in fact it’s not needed,” he added.

Although it seems clear in Banff, the JCSP consultations highlighted more conflict between too much parking and simply not enough parking.

The Banff land use bylaw review has two more evenings of consultations, and then hopes to have recommendations to council in September. The JCSP is expected to be available in draft form for public review in early September.

For more information on the Banff land use bylaw review, the full survey and process is available online at http://www.banff.ca/business/planning-development/land-use-review.html.