Calgary Subdivision and Development Appeal Board
P.O. Box 2100, Station M, # 8110,
Calgary, AB T2P 2M5
Email: [email protected]
CALGARY SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD
Citation: 2015 CGYSDAB 145
Case Name: SDAB2015-0145 (Re)
File No: DP2014-4118
Appeal by:
Tony Trutina representing Truman North Inc.
Appeal against:
Development Authority of The City of Calgary
Hearing date:
December 10, 2015 and February 18, 2016
Decision date:
February 22, 2016
Board members:
Jo Anne Atkins, Presiding Officer
John Attrell
Katherine Camarta
Michelle Pink
Joshua Selby
DECISION
FILE NO. DP2014-4118
APPEAL NO. SDAB2015-0145
Basis of appeal:
This is an appeal from conditions imposed by Development Authority in approving a
development permit made on the application of S2 Architecture for a new: multiresidential development; commercial (3 phases, 3 buildings, 446 units),
community entrance feature at 50 Skyview Ranch Road NE.
Description of Application:
The appeal before the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board (Board) deals with
conditions imposed by the Development Authority in approving a development permit
application for a new multi-residential development; commercial (3 phases, 3 buildings,
446 units), community entrance feature at 50 Skyview Ranch Road NE. The property is
located in the community of Skyview Ranch and has a land use designation of MultiResidential – High Density Low Rise (M-H1) District.
Adjournment:
This appeal was originally scheduled for December 10, 2015 but was adjourned to
February 18, 2016 with consent from all parties.
Hearing:
The Board heard verbal submissions from:
Ken Melanson, representing the Development Authority; and
Ken Shaman with S2 Architecture, the applicant, representing the appellant, in favour of
the appeal.
Summary of Evidence:
The Board report forms part of the evidence presented to the Board. It contains the
Development Authority’s decision respecting the development permit application and
the materials submitted by the Development Authority that pertain to the application.
The Board report further contains the notice of appeal and the documents, materials or
written submissions of the appellant/applicant and any other party to the appeal.
Development Authority’s Submission
Mr. Melanson advised that a resolution has been reached between the Development
Authority and the appellant/applicant regarding the appeal. He referred to amended
plans, submitted by the appellant/applicant, which indicates a new entryway design. He
Page 2 of 7
ISC: Unrestricted
FILE NO. DP2014-4118
APPEAL NO. SDAB2015-0145
advised that the Development Authority agrees that prior to release condition number
13 be replaced and that prior to release conditions 14 and 16 be deleted.
Mr. Melanson submitted the following email from Marc Bastiaan of Transportation
Development Services:
Regarding Condition of Approval #13:
13. Amend the site plan to indicate curb returns at the main access, designed to
current City standards. Provide detailed design drawings of the proposed
intersection.
Following the approval and appeal of DP2014-4118, our Roads’ colleagues have
worked with the applicants to derive an acceptable alternative entryway design.
At this time, I would ask that SDAB “delete” #13 as written, and replace it with the
following condition:
NEW CONDITION: Amend the Site plan to indicate the modified, curbed entry
roadway per the agreed upon design finalised January 19, 2016. For reference,
the plan view of the design is copied below: […]
Regarding Conditions of Approval #14, 16:
14. Traffic signal at Skyview Ranch Road/Skyview Way/Site entrance: The
property owner shall provide a certified cheque or bank draft, payable to the City
of Calgary, to cover this cost. A letter from the property owner is required, under
Corporate Seal / on corporate letterhead, that states that the owner is
responsible for 100% of the actual construction cost of installing this signal.
16. Traffic signal at Skyview Ranch Road/128 Ave NE: The property owner shall
provide a certified cheque or bank draft, payable to the City of Calgary, to cover
this cost. A letter from the property owner is required, under Corporate Seal / on
corporate letterhead, that states that the owner is responsible for 40% of the
actual construction cost of installing this signal.
I would further ask that SDAB strike out Conditions 14 and 16 (without
replacement). Following approval of DP2014-4118, it was determined that these
requirements were applied in error.
Upon questioning by the Board, Mr. Melanson agreed that permanent condition number
52 should also be deleted. The Development Authority overlooked that this condition is
no longer required as a result of the resolution reached.
Appellant/Applicant’s Submission
Mr. Shaman, representing the applicant/appellant, confirmed the resolution that has
been reached with the Development Authority regarding the proposed development as
per the amended plans. The agreed changes to the conditions of approval are:
(1) Delete prior to release condition number 13 and replace with a new prior to
release condition number 13 which reads: “Amend the site plan to indicate
the modified, curbed entry roadway per the agreed upon design finalised
January 19, 2016.”;
(2) Delete prior to release condition number 14;
Page 3 of 7
ISC: Unrestricted
FILE NO. DP2014-4118
APPEAL NO. SDAB2015-0145
(3) Delete prior to release condition number16; and
(4) Delete permanent condition number 52.
Affected Persons’ Submissions
There were no verbal or written submissions from affected parties.
Decision:
In determining this appeal, the Board:
Complied with the provincial legislation and land use policies, applicable statutory plans
and, subject to variation by the Board, The City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw 1P2007, as
amended, and all other relevant City of Calgary Bylaws;
Had regard to the subdivision and development regulations;
Considered all the relevant planning evidence presented at the hearing and the
arguments made; and
Considered the circumstances and merits of the application.
1. The appeal is allowed in part and the decision of the Development Authority is
varied.
2. A development permit shall be issued as approved by the Development
Authority subject to the following amendments/additions to the conditions of
approval.
Prior to release conditions

Prior to release condition number 1 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following condition:
1.
The applicant shall, to the satisfaction of the Development Authority,
submit a total of six (6) complete sets of amended plans (file folded and
collated) to the Planning Generalist that comprehensively address the
prior to release requirements of all Departments as specified below.
The plans shall be in accordance with the amended plans (with the
subsequent changes to the development) submitted to the Subdivision
and Development Appeal Board at the hearing on February 18, 2016 and
accepted by the Board as per decision SDAB2015-0145.
Page 4 of 7
ISC: Unrestricted
FILE NO. DP2014-4118
APPEAL NO. SDAB2015-0145
The amended plans, among other things, shall indicate the following:
(a) New curb returns at the main access, designed to current City
standards.
In order to expedite the review of the amended plans, please include the
following in your submission:
(1)
Four (4) of the plan set(s) shall highlight all of the amendments with
annotations accordingly; and
(2)
Four (4) detailed written response(s) to the conditions of approval
document that provides a point by point explanation as to how each
of the prior to release conditions were addressed and/or resolved.
Please ensure that all plans affected by the revisions are amended
accordingly.

Prior to release condition number 13 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with
the following condition:
13.
Amend the site plan to indicate the modified, curbed entry roadway per
the agreed upon design finalized January 19, 2016 and as shown per the
amended plans submitted to the Subdivision and Development Appeal
Board at the hearing on February 18, 2016.

Prior to release condition number 14 is deleted in its entirety.

Prior to release condition number 16 is deleted in its entirety.
Permanent conditions

Permanent condition number 52 is deleted in its entirety.
Reasons:
1 The Board considered the written, verbal, and photographic evidence submitted, and
notes that the appeal pertains to the conditions of approval imposed by the
Development Authority on a development permit for a new multi-residential
development; commercial (3 phases, 3 buildings, 446 units), community entrance
feature at 50 Skyview Ranch Road NE. The property is located in the community of
Page 5 of 7
ISC: Unrestricted
FILE NO. DP2014-4118
APPEAL NO. SDAB2015-0145
Skyview Ranch and has a land use designation of Multi-Residential – High Density Low
Rise (M-H1) District pursuant to Land Use Bylaw 1P2007.
Legislative Framework
2 The Board has particular regard to the following sections of Land Use Bylaw 1P2007,
including but not limited to:
Section 35 states:
Discretionary Use Development Permit Application
35
When making a decision on a development permit for a discretionary
use the Development Authority must take into account:
(a)
any plans and policies affecting the parcel;
(b)
the purpose statements in the applicable land use district;
(c)
the appropriateness of the location and parcel for the
proposed development;
(d)
the compatibility and impact of the proposed development with
respect to adjacent development and the neighbourhood;
(e)
the merits of the proposed development;
(f)
the servicing requirements;
(g)
access and transportation requirements;
(h)
vehicle and pedestrian circulation within the parcel;
(i)
the impact on the public transit system; and
(j)
sound planning principles.
Section 637(1)(d) lists “Community Entrance Feature” as a discretionary use in the MH1 District.
Section 637(1)(k) lists “Multi-Residential Development” as a discretionary use in the MH1 District.
3 The Board has regard to the Northeast Community ‘A’ Area Structure Plan (ASP) –
Part 1.
Page 6 of 7
ISC: Unrestricted
FILE NO. DP2014-4118
APPEAL NO. SDAB2015-0145
Analysis
4 At the hearing the Development Authority advised a resolution was reached with the
appellant/applicant. The applicant submitted amended plans to that effect at the hearing
on February 18, 2016. The Development Authority recommended to the Board to
amend the conditions of approval by replacing condition number 13 and deleting
condition numbers 14, 16, and 52.
5 The Board notes that the proposed modifications as per the amended plans provided
at the hearing are to modify the entry roadway to the development.
6 The Board accepts the amended plans for the purpose of the appeal and application.
7 The appellant/applicant submitted that the proposed changes to the conditions of
approval satisfactorily address their concerns. The Board accepts this evidence for the
purpose of the appeal.
8 In reviewing and weighing the evidence, the Board finds that the application warrants
approval subject to amendments/additions to the conditions of approval regarding the
amended plans.
9 The Board amends the conditions of approval by adding, among other things, a new
prior to release condition requiring amended plans as submitted at the hearing. The
Board deletes prior to release conditions numbers 14 and 16. The Board also deletes
permanent condition number 52.
Conclusion
10 For the above reasons the Board allows the appeal in part and varies the decision of
the Development Authority.
11 The development permit shall be issued as approved by the Development Authority
subject to the above listed amendments/additions to the conditions of approval.
___________________________________
Jo Anne Atkins, Presiding Officer
Subdivision and Development Appeal Board
Issued on this 22nd day of February, 2016
Page 7 of 7
ISC: Unrestricted