At a council meeting on Wednesday, February 19, Ritchot’s council approved an application by the developers of Tourond Creek to rezone a section of lots from single-family homes to two-family dwellings.
This decision followed an earlier council decision in November to deny a similar plan by the developer, the St. Adolphe Land Corp.
Representing the developer was Brandon Powell, who told council that his group listened to the concerns expressed by residents in November and went back to the drawing board to come up with a revised plan that takes their feedback into account.
Earlier, the developer had sought to convert 37 single-family lots into 74 two-family units. The revised plan calls for reduced density, lowering the number of units to 66. He explained that the new lots are larger, the front yards will be more expansive, and that the side yard setback will be upped from a minimum of four feet to five feet. The average lot will be about 400 square feet larger.
Powell listed the main concerns that have been addressed this time around.
“Some of the concerns that came up were, ‘We don’t want to see more multifamily. We moved to St. Adophe to get away from multifamily in the city,’” Powell said. “To that, we’d like to say that we understand that people have their preferences. However, the most successful communities are those that offer places for people to live, work, and play no matter their age, stage, or wage.”
Another common refrain from those who opposed the addition of multifamily lots in the subdivision is that the developer has tried too many times to change the plan. In addition to the failed multifamily proposal in November, the St. Adolphe Land Corp succeeded last year in rezoning a plot of land in front of the development from commercial to residential.
“It’s not uncommon for developers in large communities to alter their development plans to better align with market needs,” Powell said. “The Planning Act allows developers and landowners to amend municipal planning policy and regulatory documents, subject to council approval, to better meet the property needs. Without this flexibility, developers are vulnerable to risk, which could not only lead to adverse outcomes for the development but also to the community.”
Some residents have questioned whether the quality of the homes would be high enough to fit in with the rest of the development. Powell unveiled a couple of examples of two-family home builds which he says are representative of what the Tourond Creek units will look like once completed. One of those homes, containing two three-bedroom 1,500-square-foot units, won its category at the Parade of Homes for two years running.
He says the proposed location will create an effective transition area between the higher-density homes to the west and the lower-density homes to the east and south.
“The developer is not creating a precedent here when it comes to two-family dwellings in the RM,” Powell added. “There are already two-family development design concepts in Ste. Agathe, and the absorption of these housing types in Ste. Agathe demonstrates that the concept of two-family homes works. It’s a proof of concept. The RM has also approved two-family dwellings as a compatible use adjacent to single-family homes, which is what we’re proposing here.”
Powell concluded his presentation by reminding council that, according to The Planning Act, council must approve or reject an application on the basis of two main requirements: compatibility and conformance.
“This two-family home concept would be surrounding by existing residential lands contained within Tourond Creek,” he said, addressing the issue of the compatibility between single-family and two-family homes in the development. “Increasing the density from single-family to two-family residential homes is an appropriate change of use amongst other adjacent residential land uses. It will have no detrimental effects to health or welfare on adjacent properties. [And regarding] conformance, the proposal is consistent with the McDonald-Ritchot development plan, the St. Adolphe East Dike Secondary Plan, and is in general conformance with the zoning bylaw… In closing, I feel that the developers have made a reasonable attempt here to balance the developers’ needs with council and community needs.”
The Opposition Speaks
More than a dozen St. Adolphe residents made their presence known, and six of them proceeded to address council with their objections to the proposal.
“I just purchased a lot in Tourond Creek two years ago and this will impact me,” said one resident.
Another questioned issues of density. Despite the concessions mentioned during Powell’s presentation, this resident warned about too-small lots and potential parking problems.
“You know, the plan looked so great, the one we looked at initially,” they said. “I understand [the developer] wants more houses, but I just think it looks so congested, the whole idea of it… I don’t see anyone wanting to buy a home of that square footage and have such a small yard. It just doesn’t seem right to me.”
A third resident, who moved to town last fall, said, “We were very exciting about coming out to St. Adolphe. We were looking for something that gave us more space, a larger, more substantial lot being the main purpose we moved out here… I don’t understand how the appeal of multifamily dwellings will draw people in. I don’t know what age groups we’re drawing in. I just don’t know. Because for ourselves, in our 20s buying our first home, we’re not looking for duplexes.”
This resident also expressed concerns about the possibility that the new units will be rented out, creating a higher rate of turnover with residents who may not take care of their lots the same as if they owned them.
“One of my concerns with this developer is that the community was designed initially looking grandiose, with beautiful conceptual drawings,” said a fourth resident. “A more upscale development is what we were sold on.”
Still another resident said these two-family homes would serve as an eyesore when people first drive into Tourond Creek.
In addition to the residents who showed up to voice concern, another nine letters of objection were received by council. On the other hand, several letters of support were also received, written by local builders.
In Summation
After the various people had their chance to speak, Councillor Janine Boulanger asked Powell a pointed question: “What drove you to this, the duplexes? What was the main driver?”
“We want to find some way to create some momentum for Tourond Creek,” Powell replied. “We’re not seeing the demand that we want to see for single-family housing… [And we want to] allow for lower price points, so that either first-time buyers or people downsizing will have an affordable option to look at other than a single-family home. Generally speaking, we believe that communities that offer [a larger] range of housing will be more successful communities.”
Powell added that this proposal has generated quite a bit of excitement from local builders, with a number of them having reached out to say they would like to participate in this next phase of development.
“We were at 74 lots last time, and now we’re at 66,” said Councillor Curtis Claydon in summation. “[This] may not seem like a huge difference, but… it’s roughly about $300,000 a home. That’s a concession of about $2.5 million dollars in home sales that’s off the table [for the developer]. So I think we need to respect that. I like hearing from the residents in the area. They’re living right there. And I know there’s talk about some potential maybe of devaluing their homes or property. But I think what would be the biggest shame is if there’s a lack of growth in that area and it becomes stagnant. I think that’s where you’d see the biggest amount of devaluation to someone’s residence.”
Claydon then proposed that council could work with the developer to add further mitigations to the development agreement, such as requiring a six-foot privacy fence between the single-family and two-family lots. He also contemplated asking the developer to complete some of the landscaping in the area.
When it came time for the vote, council voted unanimously in favour of the developer’s proposal.
