Proposed seniors’ residence hits roadblocks in Steinbach

The issue of granting a conditional use and several variances for the construction of a new seniors’ apartment complex became a thorny one for Steinbach city council on March 17, prompting them to recess the public hearing until more information can be gathered.

The property, located at 185 Friesen Avenue and owned by Steinbach Housing Inc., presented several problems for council.

It required a conditional use as multi-family residential is not permitted in a commercial neighbourhood zone.

A variance is also required to allow for the proposed seven-storey height because the current zoning only allows for three. Variances are also required for a reduced front yard setback to 20 feet from the required 25 feet.

The property in question was also established as permanent green space in a caveat signed by Steinbach Housing Inc and the Town of Steinbach in 1989.

Those issues did not result in the recessed hearing, however. Instead, it was the variation that Steinbach Housing Inc. sought to limit parking spaces to 10 where 150 are required, a 94 percent reduction.

A report by city manager Troy Warkentin pointed out a six-storey multi-unit residential structure is on the adjacent property fronting on First Street but that most of the surrounding properties are single unit residential structures.

He also noted the caveat in his report.

“Council should carefully consider whether the condition and reasoning under which the restriction was imposed remains relevant,” he wrote. “If it does, this application should be denied.”

However, Warkentin did recommend that council approve the conditional use subject to a development agreement.

The city planner’s report described the reduction of parking stalls as an “extreme request”.

The report noted that the proponents of the plan indicated they would enter into a parking agreement with Linden Place. It also contained a note of caution.

“There is a lack of affordable seniors’ housing in the city, however the excitement for this project should not result in an abundance of street parking and negatively impact the neighbourhood,” it said.

The report also advised council that if they don’t have all the information needed, they should adjourn the public hearing until a later date.

City engineer Aaron Rach also indicated the parking plan was problematic.

“I would recommend council deny the reduction in parking stalls,” he wrote. “If council wants to approve this request, I recommend it to be conditional to an acceptable parking plan which shows how they will share parking between 185 Friesen and 260 First Street, how much street parking is needed and, an explanation be provided for why reduced parking would be acceptable.“

The applicants defended their plan, saying they’ve noticed at their other facilities, including Fernwood, that they only need one parking spot for every three units.

Those opposed questioned both the height of the building at 70 feet and the parking, which many said would create issues on Friesen Avenue.

Coun. Michael Zwaagstra made the motion to reconvene the hearing at a later date, noting that’s not the typical practice of this council.

“This is a massive impact on the neighbourhood,” he said. “We need to see what the actual (parking) plan is.”

Coun. Jake Hiebert and Coun. Susan Penner agreed.

But Coun. Jac Siemens was ready to make a decision, saying the applicants should have had all the information at the hearing.

“We shouldn’t delay because of the parking issue,” he said.

He said the caveat on the property is reason enough to deny the project.

“Council of the day did make a decision,” he said of the 1989 municipal board ordered caveat to establish green space for perpetuity. “That was part of the requirement to build Linden Place.”

Zwaagstra disagreed, saying any agreement can be changed if both parties agree.

“When both sides agree on change, that’s when agreements can change,” he said.

The hearing will reconvene on April 21.