Skip to main content
File #: BL 12-011    Version: Name: Bylaw No. 38-2011
Type: Bylaw Status: Carried
File created: 2/16/2012 In control: Development Services Division
On agenda: 3/27/2012 Final action: 3/27/2012
Title: Amendment to Land Use Bylaw 20-2009 to redistrict Pt. SE 33-52-26-W4M from Agricultural Restricted District to Business Industrial District and Pt. SE 33-52-26-W4M from Industrial Reserve District to Business Industrial District (Bylaw No. 38-2011). Recommendation That Council give third and final reading to Bylaw No. 38-2011.
Attachments: 1. CRB Approval Letter.pdf, 2. LUB application and title.pdf, 3. Bylaw 36,37 & 38-2011 Key Plan.pdf, 4. Bylaw 38-2011 LUB Current Districting.pdf, 5. Bylaw 38-2011 (AGR & IRD to BI).pdf, 6. Bylaw 38-2011 LUB Schedule A.pdf, 7. LUB-Map+9a-rev.pdf, 8. Administration Report.pdf, 9. Tentative Plan Dec22-11.pdf

Title

Amendment to Land Use Bylaw 20-2009 to redistrict Pt. SE 33-52-26-W4M from Agricultural Restricted District to Business Industrial District and Pt. SE 33-52-26-W4M from Industrial Reserve District to Business Industrial District (Bylaw No. 38-2011).

 

Recommendation

That Council give third and final reading to Bylaw No. 38-2011.

 

Body

Purpose

The County has received an application from Remington Development Corporation to amend the County's Land Use Bylaw for the purpose of redistricting all of SE 33-52-26-W4M to the BI - Business Industrial District.  Again, the southwest 8.1 ha (20.0 ac) is districted separately from the lands to the north and east and falls under the AGR - Agricultural Restricted District, which is a similar to the situation in the MDP and ASP as discussed previously.  The remaining approximately 24.3 ha (60.0 ac) in the southeast corner of the quarter section is currently located within the IRD - Industrial Reserve District, but these lands will also be redistricted to the BI - Business Industrial District intended for future commercial/industrial development.  Should the amendment be accepted by Council, the Developer may then apply to the County's Municipal Planning Commission for the proposed 23 lot fully serviced development, associated improvements, and subdivision (See attached Tentative Plan - for information only).

 

Summary

Council gave first reading to proposed Bylaw No. 38-2011 on January 31, 2012 and second reading on February 28, 2012.  The County has also received applications from Remington Development Corporation to amend the County's Municipal Development Plan and Acheson Industrial Area Structure Plan for the purpose of districting all of SE 33-52-26-W4M for industrial/commercial use.  

 

Administration received confirmation via email from the Capital Region Board Manager of Regional Projects that Parkland County's application to amend the Municipal Development Plan was unanimously approved the morning of March 20, 2012.  Therefore, this amendment application may be considered by Council for third and final reading. 

 

Administrative Position

Administration supports Bylaw No. 38-2011 and recommends that Council give third reading to the requested amendment subject to Council's approval to the change of zoning as requested under Bylaw 36-2011 (Amendment to MDP) and Bylaw 37-2011 (Amendment to Acheson Industrial ASP).  The proposed development of SE 33-53-26-W4M in its entirety for Business Industrial development is consistent with the Capital Region Growth Plan, Municipal Development Plan, and other approved plans by the County.  The development at this location in Zone 5 of Acheson is practical as existing infrastructure can be logically and efficiently extended and will open the remainder of Zone 5 for development given the new intersection with Highway 60. 

 

Strategic Plan/Policy/Legal/Staff Implications

Administration will now be able to have the Municipal Planning Commission and consider a subdivision application for the 23 proposed fully serviced lots at a future meeting date.

Other

1.    Council could table third reading for Bylaw No. 38-2011.

2.   Council could defeat Bylaw No. 38-2011 at third reading; as a result, the development of the 23 fully serviced lots and associated infrastructure improvements could not proceed.