TO; MAYOR AND ALDERYEN Marcy Ist, 1972,
FROM: THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE

REPORT FROM THE PLANNING AND Zonine Cormitree MEETING HELD ~ HeDNesDAY, MARCH Ist, 1972 AT 3:30. P.M,

Present: ALDERMAN LAKING

ALDERMAN PaNGER :
L.D. PoLtock, - 7 .
VG. Borcy f

K.J, STINSON MAR ~6 1972
-- N. CHERNOFF
ae de BUCHAN
K. WHITING . oO RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

Jrem_L

Re: 2994 Coast MERIDIAN RoaD,
Lega: Lor 2, Buk F, SW 1/4, Section 6 TovnsHip 40, Plan 16097,
AREA: 2.283 acres, - 125’ X 796’, - SEE ATTACHED map,

Zonep: ' Rl .

. COMMENTS: THE APPLICANT IS CONCERNED OVER ACCESS TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. AT PRESENT LOTS 1 2 2 HAVE
THE SAME PROBLEM, SEE ATTACHED MAP. IN CRDER TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT REZONING THE.
PROPERTY TO RS-1 WOULD GIVE THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECUEST AN ACCESS TO THE REAR OF BOTH
Lots 1 & 2 AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT, THERE IS A 33’ GAZETTED ROAD 70 THE SOUTH oF LoT 1 WHICH CARRIES
A VERY LARGE DRAINAGE DITCH DOWN THE FULL LENGTH OF THE GAZETTED ROAD. THE GAZETTED RGAD ACW BACKS THE PRESENT
BIRCHLAND MANOR SUBDIVISION WHICH WOULD CREATE A DOUBLE FRONTAGE ROAD, AND AN UNDESIRABLE ROAD PATTERN,

To ENSURE THE CwNERS oF Lots 1 2 2 DEVELOP TOGETHER OR SELL 79 A MUTUAL DEVELOPER A ZONING OF
-RS-1 with a Devetoprient AREA ZONE INCORPORATED WOULD GIVE COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY YO GOVERN PROPOSED
PLANS AND ACCESS TO THE TWO PARCELS OF ‘LAND, THUS CREATING A DESIRABLE SITUATION FOR BOTH CONCERNED,

RecovmenpaTion: THE CommiTTEE RECOMMENDS To CounciL THAT Lots 1 & 2 BE REZONED. TO PS-1 wiTH A DEVELOPMENT
AREA ZONE INCORPORATED,

ditem_U
Re: Rezoninc AppLication # 35-71
leat: Lots 7 & 8. Bie 14 &@ 15, DL. 4SE4, PLAN 2244,
‘““Anpress: 2990 Fuint Street
Area: SEE ATTACHED MAP.
. Request: To rezone From C~3 to DeveLcesment AREA,
REASON: To EXTEND THE PREMISES,
Cowsents: THE PLANninG AND Zonine CoriTTEE HAVE DISCUSSED THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT, THE BUILDING
1S NON-CONFORMING IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: 1) Lack oF 20' REAR YARD, 2) OVER HANGING CANOPY ON CITY
PROPERTY, 3) NO LEGAL ACCESS TO PARKING AREA, AND 4) NO DEFINED LOADING ZONE. DUE TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED

NON-CONFORMITIES THE REGUEST TO REZCNE FRCM C-3 To DeveLortenT AREA IS NOT SUITAELE. AS THE ZONE IS THEN BEING USED

JO ALLOW CONSTRUCTICN WHICH IS°NOT IN CONFCRMITY WITH OUR ZONING BY-LAW. .

. Recovmenpation: THE Commi TTEE RECOMMENDS To COUNCIL REFUSAL OF THE REZONING APPLICATION,