City council got a sneak peek at three options for developing a piece of downtown property it recently acquired from Canadian Pacific Railway after decades of failed negotiations.

The narrow strip of land is located along Quilchena Avenue between Main Street and Cleasby Street.

The site was previously a right-of-way for the CPR and runs behind houses facing Quilchena Avenue and those facing Coldwater Avenue.

It’s about 550 metres long and averages 20 metres in width.

The city plans to use a piece of the land to connect the two stretches of Cleasby Street north and south of Coldwater Avenue by Fairley Park, which will divide the remainder of the property into two pieces.

About 60 per cent of the property has frontage on Quilchena Avenue, while the remaining part runs between rear yards for lots facing Quilchena and Coldwater.

The land cuts through three zones, including low density residential (R2), agricultural (AR1), and park/cemetery/school (P1).

This stretch of land in Merritt's downtown is finally property of the City of Merritt after decades of negotiation with CPR.

This stretch of land in Merritt’s downtown is finally property of the City of Merritt after decades of negotiation with CPR.

A study by engineering firm Urban Systems found the site to be free of contaminants and proposed three options, which council got a first look at in a committee of the whole meeting on March 17.

The first option is a linear park, which would separate the land into two pieces. The first section, between Main and Cleasby Streets, would be converted into a park with lights, benches, and either a paved or gravel trail running its length. The other section east of Cleasby would be a community garden and compost site.

The second option contains a subdivision comprised of eight single-family units and three affordable duplex lots, along with a linear park with a community garden.

In this option, part of the property with frontage on Quilchena Avenue would be sold off in order to pay for the linear park and community garden.

The third option is a blended one, which is comprised of more park space and six single-family lots with three low-income duplex lots.

In option three, part of the property would still be sold off and the profits used to fund the development of the park. However, there would be less housing and more parkland.

All three concepts include a paved multi-use pathway along Quilchena Avenue, which is in line with the city’s Official Community Plan to increase bike and pedestrian trails.

Coun. Ginny Prowal said she preferred the second option.

“I think it’s a good combination of housing, parks and trails, and it has some income potential. It also connects to Fairley Park, and would be a nice way of getting around there,” she said.

However, she said she didn’t know if a downtown community garden would be feasible because it would require someone to look over it and to fence it in. She and Coun. Dave Baker suggested holding off on the community garden part until someone was in place to manage it.

Coun. Linda Brown said she supported option two.

“I know we’re all in agreement that there’s a real need for low-income housing, and I personally would like to see the higher-density housing option go through,” Brown said.

Coun. Mike Goetz said he supported a linear park over the options with low-income housing.

A combination of duplex and single-family lots, along with a multi-use trail, are also proposed for the land.

A combination of duplex and single-family lots, along with a multi-use trail, are also proposed for the land.

Coun. Diana Norgaard said she liked the second option but was skeptical about the actual process of getting low-cost housing built in the area.

“I’m in favour of affordable housing. My concern is it won’t happen quickly enough and we’ll have unsightly building lots sitting there, which will, perhaps, encroach on our parkland,” she said.

The logistics of selling off land for the purpose of affordable housing were also debated, but chief administrative officer Allan Chabot said the purpose of presenting the information was to get council’s initial impressions for best use of the land.

Council tabled the discussion for its next workshop.

The city successfully negotiated its purchase with CPR in late 2013 at an in-camera meeting. In-camera is Latin for “in private,” and those meetings are closed to the public so councils can discuss certain items such as land sales or purchases, litigation, and human resources matters.