36

The park shown in Option No. 1 (Drawing No. 3) is not supported by our
Parks and Recreation Department due to the steep slope and its location
between two busy roads.

Option 2 (Drawing No. 2) is favoured by the Parks and Recreation and
Planning Department because it facilitates neighbourhood identification. Some
revisions to the concept on the lands north of the applicants' lands will be
required in due time.

a. Engineering Department:

The Engineering Department has a number of concerns with the Concept
Plan for the area, although most of these concerns do not affect the
applicant's land (see attached memorandum from Acting City Engineer
dated April 26, 1990). '

With regard to the development of the applicant's land the Municipal
Engineer is requesting that the cross connection from Mary Hill Road to
Shaughnessy be constructed.

The Municipal Engineer igs reserving judgement on the extension of
Shaughnessy Street, pending detailed engineering design and due
technical advise regarding stability of the steep slope.

Parks and Recreation Department:

The Parks and Recreation Director has expressed support to the Park
location shown in Option No. 2 (Drawing No. 2 - Concept Plan) although
the acreage shown needs to be increased to satisfy the needs of the
area.

Building Department:
Due to the steep slopes the Building Department would expect a

Geotechnical Engineering report and a plan indicating soil retention,
as well as surface grades.

‘Fire Department :

The Fire Department has no objections to this application.
R.C.M.P.¢

The R.C.M.P. identified this as a low crime risk area. The wooded area
should be addressed at the time of construction as it could prove to be
a hiding place for potential criminals. The R.C.M.P. welcomes the
Opportunity to review the planned drawings for the proposed development
with the builder or architect, should they wish more information
regarding crime prevention.