Forks proposes less public space at Railside project

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 15/05/2020 (2128 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Forks is seeking changes to its Railside residential project, including a reduction in public space, an increase in building height, and flexibility on community gardens, green roofs and geothermal heating.

The city’s property and development committee is scheduled to review a report on the project Thursday.

Committee chairman Brian Mayes said he worries the changes could leave room for The Forks to renege on commitments central to the project’s approval. The Railside land at the popular downtown site is made up of two large parking lots totalling nearly 12 acres.

Among the proposed changes is a reduction in the percentage of public space, such as parks, pathways and patios, that would be incorporated into the final development.

Originally, the mixed residential and retail space was slated to have 75 per cent public space. Mayes said that was crucial to approving the project’s tax-increment financing (TIF) agreement. The Forks wants that minimum requirement lowered to 60 per cent.

“I want a better explanation, and I want it in public, as to why we would reduce the percentage mentioned,” Mayes said Friday. “Because if we’re giving that big a tax revenue concession, we should be getting some public benefit. Why are we now tinkering with that?”

The report prepared for the committee says the reduced public space has been requested due to inconsistencies in boundary lines. It notes the city’s policy, The Forks’ concept plan and conditionally approved subdivision plans all indicate different boundaries.

“The purpose of this amendment is to broaden the development parameters, while protecting the original intent of the policy to maximize the amount of space dedicated to public use,” reads a letter from developers regarding the amendments.

Other proposed amendments include increased allowances for building height, striking the proposed 65-foot limit in favour of a more flexible six-storey limit.

The Forks wants more flexibility related to community gardens, green roofs and geothermal heating systems, which were part of the original design.

“I am concerned about any document that says we’re going to take out the word ‘shall’ and put in the word ‘should,’” Mayes said in reference to the flexibility amendments. “Why would you need to weaken a commitment to community gardens or to geothermal?”

The report says the incorporation of green roofs and community gardens — intended to encourage food production — depends on funding, as is the inclusion of a geothermal heating and cooling system.

“The proposed amendment does not diminish (our) commitment, but provides a degree of adaptability should that public investment, which is outside of (our) control, be affected or limited in some way,” wrote The Forks Renewal Corp. in the report to the committee.

Mayes said the explanations don’t justify The Forks’ proposed amendments, noting the flexibility it offers is “the flexibility not to do something.” He said the committee will press city staff and The Forks for more robust justifications before amendments are approved.

“I think there’s tremendous goodwill towards The Forks… but we shouldn’t give total deference to the staff and The Forks on this. There’s a big public aspect to it,” he said.

Representatives from The Forks did not reply to the Free Press by publication time.

julia-simone.rutgers@free.press.mb.ca