Town council has agreed unanimously to include discussions on a lower density residential category as part of the major rewrite in the works for the Cochrane land-use bylaw.

Despite the show of support, the reception remained lukewarm to Councillor Morgan Nagel's push to have larger lots added to the mix.

What Nagel seeks is a new low-density residential land use zone, “residential estate” or “RE” as part of the land-use bylaw review that has started and will take 18 to 24 months to complete.

Nagel changed his motion after being encouraged to do so by Mayor Jeff Genung. The mayor suggested it shouldn't be a one-off motion, rather it should be part of the discussion on the major rewrite.

Still, many councillors questioned the need for the new zoning because, in theory, it's covered under existing R-1 zoning. Others believed the market should dictate what type of housing is developed while others pondered what would happen if larger estate lots are found to be unpopular and remain vacant (although they can always be rezoned).

Nagel countered by saying estate lots are discouraged by town policy. He said he would like to see these larger more expensive lots available for those wanting to have such a home in Cochrane but are currently forced to look in Bearspaw and Springbank.

He says he doesn't see it as a dilution of his intentions.

"It's all part of the same comprehensive strategy of less density, higher quality homes and slowing development in Cochrane."

During his state of the town address to the chamber of commerce, last week, Mayor Genung said he doesn't believe Cochrane has a density problem, it has a traffic problem. He said discouraging growth would be a mistake and pointed to how it impacted Okotoks a few years back when it briefly froze development.

"If we didn't have a traffic problem, if no one was backed up the Cochrane hill in the afternoon or early in the morning, would anybody be complaining about density? I don't think so. It's all about how they're developed and we're working on that."

Not everyone is convinced this is the case and do believe higher density means more traffic spilling into Cochrane neighbourhoods.

Proponents, like Gerry Ertel, president of the Riverview Community Association, believe in the need for such housing options in the community and he sees the support of Nagel's motion as a very small step, but a positive one.

"I know a lot of times we talk about a principle that we want communities to serve people in whatever stage of life they're in," says Ertel. "When it comes to low-cost housing or multiple-family housing or condos, we almost absolutely insist that it be part of every community. But when it comes to a larger home, maybe a more expensive home, more upscale, we don't necessarily think they need to be part of our communities.

"I don't know why we would tell those people they need to go to Springbank or Bearspaws. I don't know why we can't have some of those homes in Cochrane. Having said that, I think with densities of 8 to 10 there aren't going to be very many of them. You can't have that density and have those large homes."

While Ertel continues the association's lobby, he's also keeping a close eye on what will happen with the newly-established Calgary Growth Management Board. He fears a density of 8 to 10 homes per acre will pale in comparison to what may come down the line. He says the capital region growth board in the Edmonton area has much higher density numbers and he has been told it will be the template used for the entire province.

Riverview is adjacent to the Greystone development proposal expected to come before council soon. The last time they viewed the area structure plan it had a density of over 14 units per acre. Still, it's been some time since they have communicated with the developer.

"The planning department, Drew Hyndman and his people, have been very open-armed and we never get turned away and so we're very happy with that kind of engagement," says Ertel. "But it's just that we've been kind of shut out by developers. I know they're promising we're going to have some sort of public engagement before it goes to first reading and I expect that's going to happen in the next two to four weeks.

"But we really don't know what has changed since June. We made a fairly substantive submission in June expressing our concern and we have no idea what or if anything has been done with it."

With the discussion over his proposed new residential zoning possibility occurring well over a year from, Nagel muses over the possibility of holding off on approving any new residential developments in Cochrane, especially when there's already approvals in place for 9,600 new homes.

"We are not allowed to say you can never develop here, but we do have the option to say, now's not the time, you'll have to wait a little bit."

The Riverview community, for one, plans to get involved with the land-use bylaw revision and been contacted by senior planner Riley Welden, who is heading up the project.

"He has contacted me and I'm hoping very much that either myself for someone from Riverview can be on that committee because it is pivotal in terms of what we can approve in the town. The challenge is it's going to be an 18 to 24-month process."