SUPPORTS ITEM NO. 3
P&E COMMITTEE AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 14, 1995
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: August 25, 1995
Dept. File No. JF
TO: Standing Committee on Planning and Environment
FROM: Associate Director of Planning -
Land Use and Development
SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Subdivision By-law No. 5208 -
Site Reclassification at 2868 and 2880 West 39th Avenue
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council refuse the application to reclassify the properties at
2868 and 2880 West 39th Avenue from Category 'B' to Category 'A' of
Schedule A, Table 1, of Subdivision By-law No. 5208.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
the foregoing.
COUNCIL POLICY
Council policy regarding amendments to the subdivision categories in RS-
1, RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A and RS-5 zoned districts is reflected in the
Manager's Report as approved by Council on October 28, 1987. As well as
establishing seven parcel size categories for subdivision in the RS-1
District, the report provided for possible future changes in the
categories in cases where property owners seek to classify their parcel
category either up or down, to facilitate or prevent subdivision.
PURPOSE
This report addresses a proposal to reclassify the properties at 2868
and 2880 West 39th Avenue (Lots 31 Remainder and 32 Amended, Both of
Block 9, D.L. 2027, Plan 1682) from Category 'B' to Category 'A' for the
purpose of subdivision in accordance with the minimum parcel size
requirements of Schedule A, Table 1 of Subdivision By-law No. 5208.
BACKGROUND
On January 19, 1988, Council enacted an amended Schedule A to the
Subdivision By-law by introducing seven categories of minimum parcel
width and area to govern the subdivision of lands zoned RS-1.
Subsequently, lands zoned RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A and RS-5 have been
- 2 -
included as well. All lands in these five zoning districts are
classified on a block-by-block basis, as shown on 279 sectional maps,
which are on file with the City Clerk and which form part of Schedule A.
As shown in Appendix A, the south side of West 39th Avenue between
MacKenzie Street and Trafalgar Street, which contains the subject
parcels, is now classified as Category 'B', which prescribes a minimum
width of 12.192 m (40.00 ft.) and a minimum area of 334.451 m› (3,600.00
sq. ft.) for each parcel created by subdivision. The blockfaces
surrounding the subject block are also classified as Category 'B'.
Lot 31 Remainder (2868 West 39th Avenue) has a width and area of
approximately 20.630 m (67.70 ft.) and 1,273.000 m› (13,702.00 sq. ft.),
respectively. Lot 32 Amended (2880 West 39th Avenue) has a width and
area of approximately 20.630 m (67.70 ft.) and 903.500 m› (9,725.00 sq.
ft.), respectively. Under Category 'B', the subject parcels cannot be
subdivided individually, because they do not meet the minimum 12.192 m
(40.00 ft.) width required for each parcel created.
The owners of the subject parcels could combine their parcels, however,
and resubdivide in accordance with Category 'B', into three parcels,
each having a width of approximately 13.760 m (45.10 ft.), as shown in
the context of the surrounding parcels, in Appendix B. Although both
owners have expressed an interest in subdivision, they do not wish to
pursue a three-parcel configuration because the existing parcels have
different depths, and the resulting centre parcel would have an
irregular rear property line. Instead, they have submitted this
proposal to amend the By-law, as it applies to their parcels only, to
enable them to apply individually to subdivide to create two parcels
each (for a total of four parcels), having a width of approximately
10.320 m (33.90 ft.), also as shown in the context of the surrounding
parcels, in Appendix B.
ASSESSMENT
This reclassification application proposes to allow for consideration of
parcels no less than 9.144 m (30.00 ft.) in width and 278.709 m›
(3,000.00 sq. ft.) in area, thereby allowing consideration of a two-
parcel subdivision proposal on either of the subject parcels.
- 3 -
Twenty property owners, excluding the applicants, were notified in
writing of this reclassification request. Sixteen owners responded,
with the following results:
Oppose Reclassification: 7
Support Reclassification to Category 'A' 9
16
The location of the respondents is shown in Appendix A.
Many of the respondents opposing the reclassification cited increased
density, added congestion, increased driveway crossings as the block has
no lane for rear access, and shortage of parking in the neighbourhood as
reasons for objecting to this reclassification. Several indicated they
felt that a change of category and the resulting potential subdivision
would detrimentally affect both the area's character and property
values.
Most of the respondents who supported the reclassification did not cite
their reasons. Two people, however, said they would like to see the
existing boulevard trees protected or replaced, and one supporter
mentioned that the City should consider rezoning these properties to
allow for regulating the design of the new homes and driveways.
Category 'B' was assigned to the subject block in 1988 to ensure that
the remaining larger parcels such as Lot 31 Remainder and Lot 32 Amended
would be subdivided in a consistent and compatible manner with the
surrounding blocks. As illustrated in Table 1 below, analysis of the
blockface containing the subject parcels, indicates that the majority
of the parcels are within the 12.200 m - 15.210 m (40.00 ft. - 49.90
ft.) range, which is indicative of why Categary 'B' was recommended for
this block.
Table 1
South side of West 39th Avenue, between MacKenzie Street and the lane
west of Trafalgar Street, excluding Lots 31 Remainder and 32 Amended.
Parcel 9.14-12.16m 12.20-15.21m 15.24-18.26m
Width (30.0-39.9ft) (40.4-49.9ft) (50.0-59.9ft)
# of parcels 3 8 1
Parcel 18.29-21.30m 21.34m plus
Width (60.0-69.9ft) (70.0ft plus)
# of parcels 1 2
- 4 -
Based on the established pattern of subdivision, there is no convincing
rationale for changing the category of Lot 31 Remainder and Lot 32
Amended to a smaller standard. Under the present Category 'B', the
owners can combine the two parcels and subdivide, in a manner that would
be consistent with the existing pattern of subdivision [i.e., 3 parcels
each being 13.760 m (45.10 ft.) in width].
CONCLUSION
The Associate Director of Planning - Land Use and Development does not
support the reclassification of Lot 31 Remainder and Lot 32 Amended from
Category 'B' to Category 'A' in view of:
(a) objections from surrounding property owners who responded to the
notification; and
(b) the opportunity for the subject property owners to subdivide the
two combined parcels under the present Category 'B' standard, to
create three parcels more consistent in size with the predominant
pattern in this block.
* * * * *