City council has turned down proposed changes to its comprehensive development zones.

In a 3-2 vote at its meeting Monday evening, council opted not to go ahead with the amendments brought forward by staff, with councillors Doug Graham, Florence Roberts and Betty Irwin raising their hands against the proposal.

Acting Mayor Ranj Pillai and Coun. Dave Stockdale were the only members to vote in favour, with Mayor Bev Buckway and Coun. Dave Austin away from the meeting.

"I think the bylaw is too restrictive,” Coun. Doug Graham said.

The comprehensive zones were developed in newer neighbourhoods like the new section of Takhini North, Ingram, Stan McCowan and eventually will be in Whistle Bend.

The zoning is more restrictive than other zones, with design requirements around colour, garage placement and so on.

Staff proposed the changes to the zones as a way of dealing with concerns that have sprung up from the initial bylaw.

Although it doesn't allow for adjacent houses to be the same colour, for example, many colours are very similar, such as ash and sandalwood.

There have been cases of homes with similar colour siding being built side-by-side. The proposed bylaw would have added hues and values to the colour requirements to ensure homes were significantly different in colour.

While the bylaw aims to make the newer, more dense neighbourhoods aesthetically pleasing, Graham pointed out that can mean different things to different people.

"My house is aesthetically-pleasing to me,” he said, adding his home wouldn't meet the requirements of the newer zones.

The regulations, he said, create a situation where residents can no longer build their dream home.

If, for example, someone views their dream home being a particular colour, they may not be able to have their home that colour if their next-door neighbour has the same.

Meeting the regulations could also mean higher costs to home owners, he said.

"It's trying to solve a perceived problem,” Graham contended, arguing the restrictions don't work in the Yukon.

"This isn't Calgary; this isn't Toronto; this is Whitehorse,” he said to applause from about 10 people sitting in the gallery.

Coun. Dave Stockdale was quick to come to the defence of city planning staff, who put forward the amendments.

He argued planners have looked extensively at what is working in other cities and have come up with zoning that is more environmentally-friendly and creates good aesthetics.

"I don't think they're major things people are going to have a problem with,” he said, raising the ire of his fellow councillor.

Graham questioned whether Stockdale realized residents would be prevented from cutting trees down in certain parts of the property and that in some cases homeowners couldn't have a garage due to the restrictions.

Stockdale countered that he didn't believe "half of what” Graham had said, adding he didn't believe the planning department would allow for such a situation.

Graham, however, was quick to point to Section 9.6.6 of the bylaw as proof.

The section is titled "Other Regulations” and begins by stating: "a) Where a development abuts a lane, there shall be no vehicle access permitted from the front of the building.

"Where there is no rear lane access, front yard garages are permitted provided that the garage face is recessed or in-line with the front facade of the house. Garages shall have a roof pitch consistent with the principal building.”

The section goes on to address a number of other restrictions around porches, building materials, colour and many more.

Roberts too argued the zoning is too specific and simply moves the city more toward houses that are built like "little boxes”.

Stating she couldn't believe the "petty stuff” the city would be asking for, she joined Irwin and Graham in voting against it.

It means those lots falling under the comprehensive zones will continue to have to meet the current requirements.