Council approved changes to the Grandin Mall redevelopment Monday night in a 6-1 vote, with Coun. Sheena Hughes voting against the development.
Council approved changes to the Grandin Mall redevelopment Monday night in a 6-1 vote, with Coun. Sheena Hughes voting against the development.
Last month Amacon came forward with a new concept for the site, which required what the developer considered “minor variances” in the Land Use Bylaw, in order to achieve the urban setting it hoped to create.
All requested variances were approved, save some minor changes to permitted and discretionary commercial uses.
These included changes to minimum required setbacks and the distribution of green and open spaces, as well as a 10 per cent variance for commercial parking.
The biggest change was to the maximum building height. The current design would see two 25-storey towers and one 20-storey tower, at 80 and 65 metres respectively, mixed into a number of smaller buildings around the site, rather than the previously-approved five 19 storey-buildings at 70 metres, lining Sir Winston Churchill.
Coun. Sheena Hughes brought forward a motion to reduce the maximum building height on the site from 25 storeys to 20, or 65 metres.
She compared building heights in other mid-sized Albertan cities like Sherwood Park (23 metres), Airdrie (24 metres) and Red Deer (33 metres), and argued that 25-storey towers were incompatible with the small town feel that St. Albert is known and loved for.
“This is coming forward as progress but what it actually is, is more than doubling what anyone else in comparable suburbia considers as acceptable height for a development,” said Hughes.
Mark Reid from Urban Strategies, the design team on the project, explained that although the developer was adding more storeys the height difference would be almost unperceivable to the naked eye.
“The numbers were very strange in 2008,” he explained. “In 70 metres you can actually fit approximately 22 storeys, but in the LUB it was capped at 19 (storeys) for 70 (metres), so there was a disconnect.”
This motion was defeated 4-3, with councillors Hughes, Cam MacKay and Bob Russell voting for the reduced heights.
Hughes also proposed to cap the variance at five per cent, up to a maximum of 50 stalls.
A maximum 25 per cent variance is provided for in the LUB at the discretion of the development officer. Amacon will be requesting a reduction of approximately 10 per cent, which equates to about 133 parking stalls. Requests are assessed on a case-by-case basis at the development permit stage, and Amacon's is subject to change said planner Karen Oxley.
Staff told council that this change would make parking requirements more restrictive for Amacon over any other developer, and is not the way planning and development operates.
Hughes insisted that given the shortage of parking downtown, Amacon should be required to build the maximum required stalls, but that she was willing to meet them in the middle.
The motion was defeated 4-3, with some councillors saying that it is not up to Amacon to resolve the city's downtown parking woes.
Still, Hughes, addressing the gallery, urged the developer to “do right” by the residents of St. Albert and “just build the amount of required parking.”
In approving the final readings of the LUB amendments, council expressed concerns over the developer coming back for more changes and over the length of the build-out, expected to take at least a decade, possibly two.
“I would like this to stop coming to council,” said Mackay. “I think you got what you want, now it's time to see if you can deliver.”
Following the meeting it did not sound like Amacon had the intention of coming back to council any time soon.
“It's taken a lot of time an effort on our part,” said Simon Taylor, director of development for Amacon, “so we don't want to be rushing back in (to council chambers) at any point. We're happy with this and want to move forward with the development.”
Taylor couldn't provide timelines for the second phase of the project, which includes a 25-storey tower and a nine-storey building in the northwest corner of the site, but indicated that the company was currently looking at the refurbishment of the existing office tower.
Grandin resident David Klippenstein, who lives 350 metres from the site, expressed excitement over the “rejuvenation” the project would bring to the area. He also pointed out that the proposed design was an improvement over the “wall” of towers that was originally approved in 2008.
“I do hear sounds of hammers pounding. I do hear sound of machinery,” he added. “I hear sounds of jobs being created through this development. Those sounds in this economy are very welcome.”
Others still held reservations about the way the development might change St. Albert's “small-town feel,” a term recently coined to describe the city by the Community Vision policy.
Councillors acknowledged the development was a big, but necessary, change for the community.
“I know I've walked past that site numerous times and tried to imagine buildings with, whether it's 19 storeys or 20 or 25, and it's hard; it's different. But I don't know that that makes it bad or wrong,” said Coun. Tim Osbourne.
Hughes, who remained against the changes and voted against the second and third readings of the LUB, said she was disappointed with the process.
“We have 14 requests from the developer for changes to our bylaws. We were told that they would be reviewed by administration and not all would be recommended to council. How many were not recommended?” asked Hughes. “I remember it as zero.”
The development will bring half a billion dollars worth of investment to St. Albert's downtown core and will result, upon full build-out, in $4 million in tax revenue for the city. It adds 1,200-units and 14,500 square metres of commercial space to the downtown market.
The development will bring a diversity of housing to downtown St. Albert. Prices will be market driven, said Taylor, but affordability will be considered.
