The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About2023-10-26_Council_Website Agenda Package.pdfThursday, October 26, 2023 Livestreamed via YouTube at www.youtubecom/modcvideo Office Location: 151 King Street, Chester, NS 1n EETI CALLED T ORDER 2. APP VA L F AGE A/ORER OF BUST ESS e PUBLIC PUT SESSI (15 mutes — 8:45 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) 4. UTES 1F PREVIUS EETI I 4.1 Council — October 12, 2023. 5. PR CLA ATI °IS 6. C F'IITTEE REPS TS 7. PUBLIC PRESENTATI 8. BY -LA SA DP CIES 9. L,'' ATTERS ARISI G 9.1 Information Report prepared October 20, 2023 — Corporate & Strategic Management — Nova Scotia's Proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard. a. Proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard Package. b. Lunenburg County Accessibility Plan. 9.2 Request for Decision prepared October 3rd, 2023 — Corporate & Strategic Management - Chester Fire Hall Conceptual Design RFP Recommendation to Award. Page 1 of 2 of Agenda Cover Page(s) 9.3 Village Plan Review prepared October 12, 2023 — Community Development & Recreation — What We Heard Report. a. Appendix A — Public Comment Cards, Emails, Letters — Village Plan Review Redacted. 9.4 Request for Direction prepared October 3, 2023 — Infrastructure & Operations — Sustainable Services Growth Fund. 9.5 Request for Direction prepared October 16, 2023 — Infrastructure & Operations — J -Class Roads 2024 NSDPW Submission. 9.6 Request for Decision prepared October 18, 2023 — Infrastructure & Operations, Solid Waste — Kaizer Meadow Landfill Phase 2 LTP Upgrades. 9.7 Request for Decision prepared October 17, 2023 — Corporate & Strategic Management — East River Point Property PID 60628468 Consideration of Land Sale. a. Correspondence. 10. C©RRESP DE CE 10.1 Email dated October 10, 2023, from Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner, with information from NS Environment and Climate Change regarding the launch of consultation with coastal property owners on how to plan and adapt development along the coastline. 10.2 Email dated October 19, 2023, from Katie Hirtle, Director 4H Nova Scotia, with information on November being National 4H Month in Canada. 11. E BUSINESS 11.1 Information Report prepared October 17, 2023 — Corporate & Strategic Management — Economic Development Sponsorships Update. 11.2 Request for Decision prepared October 17, 2023 — Community Development & Recreation Dept. — New Road Name Assignment. 11.3 Council District Grant Request: District 5 — Together We Can Community Society — Halloween Event & Christmas Wreaths - $1800. 12. I CA E 13. AID I E T APPOU T E TS WORKSHOP — DEVELOPMENT CHARGES AND WASTEWATER BOUNDARIES WORKSHOP Page 2 of 2 (Agenada Pages) 376 MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER Minutes of COUNCIL MEETING Livestreamed via YouTube www.youtube.com/modcvideo from 151 King Street, Chester, Nova Scotia On Thursday, October 12, 2023 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Warden Webber called the meeting to order at 8:49 a.m. Present: District 1 — Councillor Andre Veinotte District 2 — Deputy Warden Floyd Shatford District 3 — Councillor Derek Wells District 4 — Warden Allen Webber District 5 — Councillor Abdella Assaff District 6 — Councillor Tina Connors District 7 - Councillor Sharon Church Staff: Tara Maguire, CAO Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO Pamela Myra, Municipal Clerk Emily Lennox, Executive Secretary Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner Tim Topping, Director of Financial & Information Services Matthew Blair, Director of Infrastructure & Operations Tammie Bezanson, Certified Engineering Technologist Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner Paul Riley, Planner Public: There were seven members of the public in the gallery. Regrets Samuel Lamey, Municipal Solicitor APPROVAL OF AGENDA/ORDER OF BUSINESS Addition/Change: • Add — Correspondence dated October 11, 2023 from the Lunenburg County Accessibility Advisory Committee. Council (continued) October 12, 2023 377 • Add - Council Meeting on November 16, 2023. • Add - Workshop regarding Personnel Policy. • Items 11.4 and 8.1 moving to Correspondence as they relate to item 10.1. • Consideration of sending a letter to Bell — Councillor Assaff. 2023-000 C MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff the agenda and order of business for the October 12, 2023, Council meeting be approved as amended. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. Ray Cambria, 216 Central Street, Chester — commented on the information included in item 9.1 regarding J Class and cost sharing resurfacing. It does not include repairs and is strictly for resurfacing. He noted that #3 on the list Valley Road. The criteria developed regarding priority has basic things that are understandable, however, criteria related to Condition Report and Surface Condition Report are both classed as a 1 which means excellent. He asked why a road, that has 1 s across the board for the existing condition of the road, number 3 on the list. The only item that moves Valley Road to the top is the fact that it has a school bus route. He thanked Council for their time. TES F P EV 4.1 Council September 28, 2023 2023-420 MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford the minutes of the September 28, 2023, Council Meeting be approved as circulated. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. CL TI There were no proclamations for consideration. C I EE '` ',EP TS 6.1 Lunenburg County Seniors' Safety Program Monthly Report September 2023 — Councillor Connors. Council (continued) October 12, 2023 378 Councillor Connors briefly reviewed the September report offering to answer any questions if there were any. LIC :' ESE T TI 5 7.1 9:00 a.m. - Charlie Hutton - South Shore Historic Preservation Society: Countway Mosher House (Verbal Update). Charlie Hutton was present to review the Countway Mosher House and its current condition. Over the past year, the mold issue has worsened, and, at this time, there is no reason to believe the property can be rehabilitated. He acknowledged the restoration done by the previous owners Dan Haughn and John Chataway, who put their heart and soul in the building. The Society is suggesting demolishing the structure; however, they are also suggesting that there be option to allow any artifacts, flooring, chimney, mantels, windows, etc. to be remediated from the building to be salvaged before demolition. There are people/companies who will do the work during/prior to the demolition. They are also suggesting that some granite be left in place to honour the most recent curators. Warden Webber noted that staff will be asked to provide direction on how to move forward and Mr. Hutton offered his assistance in the process if required. Allen right this minute we don't have a tender — would have to go out again. Thinks we should salvage the historical material. Would need staff to advise how to do that. Mr. Hutton indicated that he would forward the written report once it has been completed. 9.1 Request for Decision prepared September 29, 2023 — Infrastructure & Operations - J -Class Road Revised Evaluation Matrix. Present were Matthew B of Infrastructure & Operations, and Tammie Bezanson, CET. Mr. Blair referred to Mr. Cambria's earlier comments noting that he makes a good point -it is the traffic and volume that puts Valley Road to the top of list. However, this list was generated following the direction of Council from the last meeting. Councillor Wells indicated that Valley Road should not be within the top three roads; he is not interested in repaving those that are in good condition when Stevens Road is atrocious. Council (continued) October 12, 2023 379 There was a lengthy discussion regarding the scoring of the J Class Roads with comments regarding Pig Loop Road, safety issues, surface condition of roads, budget of the province, active transit issues, using other programs to deal with roads in poor condition, need for sidewalks (part of the ICIP over the next five years), traffic study workshop, determining criteria from other municipalities, funding from the province lacking, consideration of a different matrix, how to determine which roads are on the top ten list for the province, including or not including gravel roads. It was agreed to bring back a list that puts 1s and roads that have been paved in the last five years at the bottom and roads scoring 4 or 5 for surface condition at the top which would then include Forest Village Road, Stevens Road , Chester Downs, Vaughn, and Swinimer Road as the top five. It was suggested to also include Walker Road — if the province agrees with Walker Road, they will repair it before paving it. There was discussion on whether or not to include gravel roads as well. It was suggested that at the Quarterly Meeting with NS Department of Public Works it should be discussed whether or not to include Walker Road on the list of J -Class Roads for repaving. Discussion was held on the Traffic Study related to safety and sidewalks; however, it was noted that the Traffic Study was only for the Village, and it would be difficult to have a conversation regarding the entire municipality without the broader information available. There will be a workshop in the, near future regarding the Traffic Study. It was noted that the pole mounted speed radar units are in place at two locations with a third location approved. These will provide data that may be used when determining safety and sidewalk locations. 9.2 Request for Decision — Infrastructure & Operations - Village of Chester ICIP Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades. This was removed from the agenda. 10.1 Correspondence dated October 4, 2023 from Keith Campbell regarding landing of scrap metal at Beach in Gates Cove, Blandford. Council (continued) October 12, 2023 380 Councillor Veinotte outlined the issue that took place recently when an industrial operation located scrap steel from a beached vessel next to our slipway and adjacent to a beach that is on provincial land that is well used by the community recreationally. This caused an issue for the residents and now that the material has been removed, there still remains bits of sharp steel debris left behind. Residents are not satisfied with the way it has been cleaned up — gravel covering the location which will wash away with the tides and will likely leave the small bits of steel behind. How did it happen and how can we prevent it from happening again? Whose job is it to remove the left over debris? Another part of the issue is the abuse of use of our slipways and docks. In this case the contractor had equipment at our slipway for days. We have a policy but need to add teeth to it suggesting issue one warning and then impound the vessel if it done again. The final part of the issue is the beach (an unofficial park owned by the province). Can we look for a way to have that made into a municipal park? Discussion was held regarding removal of the shards of metal, permission by Warden Webber to put the material at that location, which was expected to be removed within the week, discussion with Department of Environment who were not concerned about the material as it wasn't deleterious, mitigating potential risk, responsibility of the contractor toclean up the location, lack of authority related to the matter, improvement of the by-law/policy, resources for monitoring, and enforcement issues. The CAO indicated that staff would come back with some options, and it was agreed to determine if the province would be willing to make the rest of the beach a municipal park. 8.1 Public Prope Veinotte. SI SS This was dealt with during item 10.1 discussion. nd Wharves, Slipways and Berthage Policy - Councillor 11.1 Request for Direction prepared September 14, 2023 - Community Development & Recreation - Development Agreement Application - Twin Rivers Park Limited (Highway 3, East River). Council (continued) October 12, 2023 381 Present was Paul Riley, Planner, and Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner who reviewed the Request for Direction prepared September 14, 2023 regarding a Development Agreement Application for Twin Rivers Park Limited (Highway 3, East River). 2023-000 MOVED by Councillor Veinotte, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff that Council direct Staff to prepare a draft Development Agreement and hold a public information session with regard to the Twin Rivers Park Limited (Highway 3, East River). ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. 11.2 Request for Decision prepared September 29, 2023 - Community Development & Recreation — New Road Name Assignment — Dordean Lane (off of Middle River Road). Sylvia Dixon, Development and Planning Technician was present to review the Road Name request for Dordean Lane (off of Middle River Road 2023-000 MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford that Council approve the road name "Dordean Lane" off of Middle River Road and direct staff to advise the appropriate residents, departments, and agencies. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. 11.3 Planning Matters Report - MPS Amendment Protected Watershed Zone. E Statton (Applicant Jimmy Rafuse will be present to answer questions). material to follow. Councillor Veinotte declared a "Conflict ofinterest"and left the table. Present were Emily Statton, Planner, GarthStu of Stillwater Construction Ltd. Senior Planner, and Jimmy Rafuse, owner The Planner and Senior Planner outlined the request and how the policy conflicts with the request, i.e., the construction of roads within the zone. Following discussion, it was agreed that Council had not reached a point where they would be continuing the possibility of retaining the Spectacle Lake area as a watershed area. If it is determined that Spectacle Lake is not the solution for a water source, then the entire zone could be considered. It was noted that well drilling for other sources is happening in the very near future and it is the intention to bring back that information as soon as possible. It was felt that by the end of November staff would know if groundwater is an option. Depending on what happens with the watershed investigation, the area in question around Stanford Lake could become a growth area. Council (continued) October 12, 2023 382 The Senior Planner noted that if the request was rejected, staff could refund the fees and if Council does make the decision that Stanford Lake is not a watershed area, it would take the onus off of the applicant and Council could more ahead with changing the zone. 2023-000 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Church that Council reject the request from Stillwater Construction Ltd. to pursue policy amendments to the zone around Spectacle Lake, Chester. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. Councillor Veinotte returned to the table. 11.4 Upper Blandford Road - Councillor Veinotte. This was dealt with during item 10.1 discussion. 11.5 Letter dated October 11, 2023 from Lunenburg County Accessibility Advisory Committee regarding appointment of new member. 2023-000 MOVED by Deputy Warden Shatford, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff that Council appoint Scott Lutes to the Lunenburg County Accessibility Advisory Committee for a two-year term. DISCUSSION: Councillor Assaff indicated that he is on the Committee and noted that the Town of Mahone Bay has adopted their plan with the help of Ellen Johnson, Regional Accessibility Coordinator. It is challenging and complicated. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. 11.6 Consideration of Council meeting to be held on November 16, 2023. This was previously a date when there would not be a Council meeting, however, a meeting is needed to move matters through the process. 2023-000 MOVED by Councillor"Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Church that a Council meeting be held on November 16, 2023. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. 11.7 Unfinished Paving Project — Highway 3, Western Shore - Councillor Assaff. Councillor Assaff reported that during the paving from Chester Basin to Vaughn Road a section of paving was not completed due to underground wires. In speaking with Area Supervisor from the NS Department of Public Works he was advised that they have contacted Bell several times Council (continued) October 12, 2023 383 to move the wires and it is holding up paving and work at Wild Rose Park to improve accessibility. He would like a letter sent to Bell and copied to the MLA. 2023-000 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford that a letter be sent to Bell requesting them to move the underground cables so paving can continue in Western Shore and accessibility work/modifications can be made to Wild Rose Park. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. A motion was made to adjourn; however, it was immediately noted that there was an "In Camera" item to be dealt with. The meeting was called back to order by Warden Webber. C 12.1 In Camera as per Section 22(2)(c) of the Municipal Government Act — Personnel. 2023-000 MOVED by Deputy Warden Shatford, SECONDED by Councillor Church that the meeting convene "In Camera" as per Section 22(2)(c) of the Municipal Government Act — Personnel. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. Following a brief meeting he era" ng reconvenedwith all members present. 2023-000 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Church that the meeting adjourn. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED. (11:52 a.m.) Allen Webber Warden Pamela Myra Municipal Clerk N TE: The minutes are a record of decisions made at meetings. For more details on discussions, a recording of the minutes can be viewed at: www.youtu e.co / odcvi eo. Date: October 20, 2023 Date: October 20, 2023 Date: October 20, 2023 T T T REPORT TO: EETI G DATE: DEPART E T: SU JECT: G Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: unicipal Council October 26, 2023 Corporate and Strategic anagement Proposed uilt Environment Accessibility Standard NS Accessibility Act Ellen Johnson, Regional Accessibility coordinator Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO The Accessibility Directorate, which is responsible for implementing the province of Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act (2017), has released the proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard for public review. Following the deadline of October 30, all feedback will be considered by the provincial government with the goal of the standard being enacted in early 2024. The Regional Accessibility Coordinator has reviewed the proposed standard in detail and is providing a summary of the key points and anticipated impacts on the municipality if it comes into effect in its current form. Under the Nova Scotia accessibility Act (2017), the Municipality of Chester is required to create an accessibility plan. The five municipalities in Lunenburg County worked together to create the Lunenburg County Accessibility Plan in 2021 and the regional Accessibility Coordinator has worked with staff to develop an implementation plan, which is currently being reviewed by senior management. The Proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard is the first of six accessibility standards to be created as part of the Accessibility Act. Because the municipality already has the Lunenburg County Accessibility Plan and the MOC Accessibility Implementation Plan (in review), municipal staff have become more aware of how accessibility fits into their roles and are already making changes to incorporate accessibility into their daily work. This includes projects related to the built environment. SS T The Proposed Built Environment Standard, if enacted in its current form, would impact municipalities in a number of ways. The proposed standard has five components (ways of making change): 1. Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations (p. 9): These are laws that outline what the municipality (and other organizations) will be required to do. These regulations are intended to address accessibility barriers that do not fall within the scope of the Nova scotia Building Code or Fire Code. Unless specifically stated, they apply to all organizations in the province, including municipalities. They are expected to be enacted in 2024 and to require compliance by April 1, 2026. Compliance means that anything constructed or redeveloped/renovated after April 1, 2026, will need to follow the regulations (with a few exceptions that will require compliance for Request for Decision Page 12 existing infrastructure). Unless otherwise stated in the specific regulation, there is no option for exemptions or partial compliance. Many of the 24 proposed regulations will have implications for municipalities in terms of policy and bylaw review and development, budgets, and communications with the public. The regulations are summarized below in three sections. High=Significant changes are anticipated to policies, bylaws, procedures, budgets, or infrastructure as a result of the regulation coming into force. Moderate=Some changes are anticipated to policies, bylaws, procedures, budgets, or infrastructure as a result of the regulation coming into force. Low=Very little to no change is anticipated due to the regulation. This may be because it represents small actions to comply, or it may be because the municipality has already made all or some of the required changes. High Impact Section 7) Parking areas not associated with a building: Requirements around parking areas not associated with a building. This regulation requires that parking areas that are currently not covered by the building code meet specific requirements for surface quality, pedestrian paths of travel, accessible parking and signage. This would include parking areas associated with parks and outdoor spaces, meaning that parking areas developed in the future will cost more to design, build and maintain. Section 9) On -Street Parking: Requirement to consult persons with disabilities about the need, location, and design of accessible on -street parking spaces within the municipality. Also, requirement that these accessible on -street parking spaces have curb ramps with colour contrast and tactile walking surface indicators (TWSI's) and a barrier free path of travel to the sidewalk. To comply with this, the municipality will need to establish a process to follow that includes public engagement and also plan for increased budgets to ensure that changes to the nearby sidewalks/pedestrian infrastructure can occur. Section 11) Temporary Sidewalks: Requirement that temporary sidewalks associated with eating establishments and construction zones follow specific regulations with respect to design and materials. In cases where barrier free routes are impacted, it outlines the requirements for alternate routes and provision of ramps to entrances. The municipality's Outdoor Dining By -Law (#153) was created with consideration of accessibility, meaning much of the work has already been done and minimal changes are anticipated to update the by-law to ensure alignment with this regulation for eating establishments. However, the requirements related to temporary sidewalks for construction may require more investigation, planning, and cost in the future. This is one of the few regulations that will require retrofits to existing infrastructure. For example, if a restaurant already has a temporary sidewalk that does not comply with this regulation, it will need to be changed by April 1, 2026, to come into compliance. This does not directly impact the municipality except in that there will be a role related to supporting businesses to understand and comply following any updates to the Outdoor Dining By -Law. Request for Decision Page 13 Section 23) Outdoor Play Spaces: Specific requirements for these spaces that consider both children and caregivers' accessibility. This will apply to any outdoor play spaces that are upgraded/renovated or newly constructed. The cost of design and construction of a new accessible play space is expected to represent a small increased cost compared to past projects, mainly because of consideration of accessible ground surface materials. The cost to upgrade or retrofit an existing play space, to comply with the new regulation would be significant, as accessibility was generally not considered when these spaces were originally designed and constructed. However, even without this regulation, any new outdoor play space would be designed considering accessibility because it is already part of the CSA Z614-20 Children's Playground Equipment and Surfacing Standard, which is what is currently used to inspect municipal play spaces. Moderate Impact Section 8) Maintenance of Parking Areas: Requirements to create a plan and carry out maintenance to all parking areas under the control of the municipality. The plan must be available to the public and include maintenance to accessibility features such as accessible parking surfaces, markings and signage. This would require the development of a maintenance plan for all parking areas and any associated budget, policy, and procedure to support the maintenance activities. Section 22) Campgrounds: Requirements for the number and design of accessible campsites in front - country campgrounds. This will impact the municipality because of the Kaizer Meadow Wind Turbine Campsite, which will need to comply with this regulation. With the existing number of campsites, this regulation would require one to be made accessible. This means improving the ground surface, providing an accessible picnic table and a barrier free path to an accessible washroom and a source of potable water. Although not clearly stated in the regulation, it is expected that this regulation will need to be met by April 1, 2026, when the standard comes into effect. This means work would need to take place with appropriate budget allocation prior to that time. Low Impact Section 3) Site Selection: Requirement to consider specific accessibility criteria when planning a public building or outdoor space such as parks. This will need to be incorporated into any related policy or process related to site selection. Public Works is already informally considering these and other accessibility factors when discussing site selection criteria, meaning this will not represent a significant change to current practices but can be incorporated into any appropriate policy or procedure to ensure full compliance with this regulation. Section 4) Accessible Entrance Illumination: Requirement that a minimum light level is provided along pathways to accessible building entrances. This would apply to any renovated or new building entrances and would constitute minimal cost. However, any new lighting plans would need to incorporate public engagement. Section 5) Plans for Accessible Entrance: Requirement that accessible building entrances have an associated plan to ensure they are not obstructed and that this plan is available to the public on request. This could refer to snow, construction, objects like bicycles, plants, or any other object that could prevent people from easily accessing the entrance. This would involve development of the appropriate plans and ensuring a process for sharing with the public on request. Request for Decision Page 14 Section 6) Exterior Stairs not associated with a Building: Requirements that exterior stairs such as those in parks or at beaches, trail heads, and wharfs, follow specific design requirements. The municipality currently has very few exterior stairs and any new exterior stairs would already be built to a high level of accessibility, meaning this regulation would have little impact. Section 10) Sidewalks: Requirement to comply with the Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads (TAC) and the CSA B651 standard section 8.3.5. respecting "Alignment of pedestrian crossing components". The municipality is already following the TAC guidelines and is also already designing pedestrian crossing components to be well aligned, meaning compliance with the CSA standard is likely already in place although this will need to be confirmed. There will be minimal additional cost to construction. Section 12) Objects in Path of Travel: Requirement that objects do not impede the accessible path of travel along pedestrian routes like sidewalks, pathways and trails (where applicable). This would apply to objects like waste receptacles, mailboxes, benches, flowerpots, and any other object that might narrow the space required for an accessible path of travel. The regulation also requires that objects that are placed along an accessible route are cane detectable, meaning they meet specific requirements so a person with sight loss using a white cane can detect their presence safely. To comply with this regulation, the municipality can update/create appropriate policy or procedure to ensure proper placement of any new objects. Although not required, it may also be appropriate to assess placement of current objects along pedestrian routes and adjust placement where possible. Section 13) Pedestrian Signals: Requires that Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) are installed wherever pedestrian signals are installed. This will have minimal impact as our traffic volumes do not warrant signalized pedestrian crossings at this time. Section 14) Snow and Ice Control: Requirement to make snow and ice control standards for pedestrian facilities publicly available. This means that the municipality will need to clarify and prepare a plan that describes snow and ice control standards used for managing pedestrian infrastructure in a format appropriate for access by the public (i.e., plain language, accessible formats). Section 15) Emergency Evacuation Plan: Requires organizations not already required to have an emergency evacuation plan to create one and specifies what needs to be in these plans. The municipality is already required to have such a plan under the Fire Code, which is reviewed regularly. To comply with this regulation, municipal staff can review the existing plans and update them as required. It is anticipated that minimal changes would be needed but that associated training for staff related to the changes would be beneficial. Section 16) Placement of Defibrillators: Specifies placement of existing defibrillators. This will result in the need to relocate existing defibrillators in the municipal Administration and Annex buildings and will require minimal cost. Section 17) Lockers: This applies to multi -use recreation centres. The municipality does not own any such facilities, meaning this regulation does not currently apply. In future, any multi -use recreation centre to be built would need to comply with this. Request for Decision Page 15 Section 18) Pools: Requirements to include either a pool lift or sloped entry to shallow end of pool and colour contrast and tactile indications of the pool edge. As the municipality does not own a pool, this regulation does not currently apply. There may be a role to support the Village of Chester to implement the required accessibility upgrades to the LIDO pool. Section 18) Outdoor Public Eating Areas: Provides specific requirements for seating in areas where the public is expected to be consuming food. This might include parts of a park with picnic tables, for example. The requirements for a minimum of one accessible picnic table or 20% of the total number along with the requirement for associated accessible pathways and surfaces will lead to an increased cost for new areas compared to how such projects have been done in the past. However, recent planning for parks is already in line with this regulation and considering the small number of spaces where this regulation will apply, the overall impact on the municipality is expected to be low. Section 20) Benches: Provides specific requirements for design and placement of benches for outdoor public spaces. This is specific to benches installed adjacent to a barrier free path of travel. It is anticipated that bench cost will not change but that the installation and associated surface requirements will increase the cost of new bench installations. Section 21) Development of Plan for Accessible Outdoor Spaces: This requirement is the responsibility of the province but will involve consultation with municipalities in the development of a plan to ensure accessible trails, parks, beaches, and outdoor play spaces are available in appropriate numbers and locations across the province. This may have implications long-term depending on how geographic regions are defined in the plan. However, municipalities will be consulted during plan development, which will allow for a more accurate understanding of the impact. The results of the provincial plan can also support planning of municipal accessible infrastructure. Section 24) Outdoor Classrooms: Requirements related to outdoor classroom design. This does not appear to apply to any spaces currently owned by the municipality. However, some investigation may be required because of the relationship with the community schools. There is also one DRAFT General Regulation under the Accessibility Act that applies to PPSB's. It requires that updated Accessibility Plans must include a plan for accessing accessible washrooms in buildings. The Lunenburg County Accessibility Plan is due to be updated and submitted to the province by April 2024 and again in 2027, meaning the ideal time to address this is within the next few months for inclusion in the 2024 plan update. The regulation may involve plans to renovate a space to add an accessible washroom, or taking other steps to ensure that someone visiting the building can access nearby accessible washroom facilities. This is a regulation that aligns with existing work happening to address the lack of accessible washroom facilities in municipal buildings. 2. Guidelines (p. 23) are recommendations for organizations to encourage use of best practice accessibility in the built environment. The municipality is not required to follow these guidelines, but it will likely be reasonable to do so in many cases. 3. Building Code Amendments (p. 27) are changes to the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations. This is the main vehicle used to make change. The next update to the NS Building Code Regulations is Request for Decision Page 16 scheduled for January 2024, but that timing may be delayed as there must be alignment with the Built Environment Accessibility Standard. As soon as it is in place, everyone will need to comply with the new version of the building code for any new construction or renovations. As renovations are made over time to existing buildings, the requirement to meet the higher accessibility standard in the updated building code will represent significantly increased design and renovation costs. This is because older buildings lack adequate space and flexibility to accommodate the necessary changes to increase accessibility. In contrast, newly designed and constructed buildings are expected to require minimal increased cost for design and construction because procurement processes can ensure that the appropriate professionals are hired to intentionally incorporate accessibility into the design from the beginning. This leads to minimal increases in cost while creating highly accessible spaces. 4. Fire Code Amendments (p. 67) are amendments to the Nova Scotia Fire Safety Regulations. These changes, as with Regulation 15, relate primarily to emergency evacuation plans, but also to information about emergency systems. Although an initial review suggests minimal changes are needed, a more in-depth review by staff would be required to confirm this and make any necessary updates to ensure compliance. 5. Government Actions (p. 68) are actions taken by the province to increase accessibility in the built environment. These apply to the province. Of the six actions, two will impact municipalities directly, although there is no timeline. 1. "Temporary Traffic Control Manual: The Temporary Workplace Traffic Control Manual is to be amended to require that where a section of an accessible route is affected by construction, a safe and secure alternative pedestrian route of at least 1600 mm in width is provided through or around the temporary work area." This will impact municipalities when construction takes place and intersects with Regulation 11, which defines the requirements for temporary sidewalks. 2. "Government of Nova Scotia is to explore best practices for adapting buildings with a designated heritage status." There is currently a lack of clarity around the intersection between accessibility and heritage in buildings and the proposed work is expected to reduce the confusion for building owners, building officials, and municipalities. In conclusion, although there are few components of this proposed standard that are anticipated to have high or moderate impacts, the combined impact of all of these together will require staff resources and increased budgets for upcoming projects for renovations and construction of new built environment infrastructure as well as for ongoing maintenance and setting up the necessary plans and communications for the public. Request for Decision Page 17 When this proposed standard is viewed from the perspective of residents with disabilities and the people around them, the resulting changes will also be significant. These changes are expected to increase accessibility to the built environment and therefore increase opportunities for persons with disabilities to participate more fully in the life of our communities. In response to the request for feedback on this proposed standard, the Lunenburg County Accessibility Advisory Committee plans to submit a letter with their feedback. In addition, the Regional Accessibility Coordinator will submit feedback through the online public engagement website that includes the comments gathered from staff. Anyone can make a submission through the public engagement website at the link provided below. TT TS 1. Proposed built Environment Accessibility Standard 2. Proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard Public Engagement website: novascotia.ca/built-environment-public-review 3. Lunenburg County Accessibility Plan Draft Proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard Package Disclaimer This is a draft document for the purpose of review and comment only. This is not law and is subject to change; it should not be used for reference purposes. NOVA SCOTIA MITIMIHRTIMITIRTIMITIMITIRTIMITIRTIMITIRTIMITIMrt1111111 Introduction 2 Background 3 Guiding Principles 4 Nothing About Us Without Us 4 Intersectionality 4 Universal Design 4 Human Rights 4 A Note on Language 5 Proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations 6 Scope 6 Components 6 Application 7 Compliance & Enforcement 7 Review 8 Providing Feedback 8 Next Steps 8 /1 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm This draft proposed standard aims to remove and prevent barriers in the built environment for persons with disabilities. Accessibility standards are a key part of the Government of Nova Scotia's goal of an accessible province by 2030. This is a draft proposed accessibility standard for the built environment. It has been developed by Government of Nova Scotia using the recommendations of people with disabilities and subject matter experts. This is a draft document for the purpose of review and comment only. This draft is not law and is subject to change; it should not be used for reference purposes. /2 Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act, enacted in 2017, recognizes accessibility as a human right and sets a goal of an accessible Nova Scotia by 2030. It enables Government to develop accessibility standards in six areas, including the built environment. Under the Accessibility Act the Accessibility Advisory Board (Board) makes recommendations to Government on accessibility standards. In March 2019, the Board established its Built Environment Standard Development Committee (Committee) to assist with this work. Committee members represented people with disabilities, representatives from organizations representing people with disabilities, representatives from sectors impacted by the standard, and representatives from government departments from across the province. A minimum of 50% of committee members identified as or represented people with disabilities to ensure significant and meaningful First Voice representation. The committee researched, deliberated, and consulted with the community regarding its recommendations to the Board on the content and implementation of accessibility standard in the Built Environment. The committee submitted recommendations in two phases. Phase 1 recommendations were submitted to Minister of Justice in 2020, and Phase 2 recommendations were submitted in 2021. For more information, visit Recommendations for an accessibility standard in the built environment. /3 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm These principles represent the values and behaviours that have guided the development of the drafting of this standard and will continue to guide the work of finalizing and implementing the standard and associated work. t s First Voice input and insights inform the development of this standard. Input of persons with disabilities occurs throughout the process, beginning with people with disabilities forming the majority of the Standard Development Committee. People with a wide range of types of disabilities were included throughout the process. Intersectionality Work to develop this standard is approached with an intersectional lens. This means that consideration is given to how disability interacts with other parts of a person's identity or circumstance. This includes considerations of how disability interacts with race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, etc. niversal esi+n Development of this proposed standard used the principles of universal design. Universal design aims to design the built environment so that it can be accessed and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of disability, age, or other factors. Everyone benefits from a built environment that is accessible. u an is Accessibility is a human right. This proposed standard strives to make sure all Nova Scotians can fully and meaningfully take part in society. /4 MITIMIHRTIMITHARTIRTIMITIMITIMITIMrtlfERITIMITI111111 Language to describe people is complex and changes over time. The ways an individual identifies may be deeply personal. In this proposed standard, you will find reference to persons with disabilities. The Accessibility Act defines disability as "a physical, mental, intellectual, learning or sensory impairment, including an episodic disability, that, in interaction with a barrier, hinders an individual's full and effective participation in society". While this language is not perfect, our intent in this work is to be inclusive, accessible, and respectful. /5 MITIMIHRTIMITIRTIMITIMITIRTIMITIRTIMITIRTIMITIMrt1111111 1. co e The built environment includes human -made spaces in which people live, work, learn, and play. This includes inside and outside of buildings as well as outdoor spaces such as trails, parks, and beaches. The proposed standard and associated work is in response to the Accessibility Advisory Board's standard recommendations, which covered nine categories: 1. Site selection 2. Exteriors 3. Accessible Parking 4. Interiors 5. Emergency Systems 6. Housing 7. Wayfinding and Signage 8. Parks and Recreation 9. Schools and Public Libraries 2. o • onents The Accessibility Advisory Board made standard recommendations for a variety of policy instruments. This included recommendations for accessibility standard regulations to be enacted under the Accessibility Act, recommendations for amendments to the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations, and recommendations for guidelines. The proposed standard work is now being shared with Nova Scotians for public comment and includes the following components: Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations are laws that outline rights and create duties, obligations, and responsibilities for the organizations that are affected by them. Regulations relating to matters outside of the scope of the Building Code will be found in the Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations under the Accessibility Act. Building Code Amendments are changes to the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations. Fire Code Amendments are amendments to the Nova Scotia Fire Safety Regulations. Government Actions are actions Government will take to advance accessibility in the built environment. /6 Guidelines are non -mandatory guidance for organizations to make the built environment accessible. The proposed accessibility standard regulations as well as associated work including guidelines and proposed changes to the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations are being shared with Nova Scotians for public comment. 3. Application The proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard mostly applies to new construction and redevelopments. It aims to prevent new barriers from being created in the built environment. Many organizations may choose to go beyond the minimum requirements of the accessibility standard. Government of Nova Scotia has committed to leading by example in accessibility and has made commitments in its accessibility plan to address accessibility barriers in existing infrastructure. For more information, visit Government of Nova Scotia 2022-2025 Accessibility Plan. Component Application • Apply to Government of Nova Scotia, Prescribed Public Sector Bodies, and other organizations prescribed by the Regulations Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations • • • Apply to design and construction of new buildings Apply to alteration, reconstruction, demolition, and relocation of existing buildings Apply to work necessary to correct unsafe conditions in existing buildings Fire Safety Regulations • Apply to the construction, intended use, demolition, condition, and protection of buildings and facilities. Government Actions • Apply to Government of Nova Scotia Accessibility Guidelines • May be adopted by any organization 4. Compliance & Enforcement Once the Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations are enacted, they become law. The target for enactment of the Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations is early 2024. It is proposed that these regulations would become effective in 2026. This would allow time for organizations to become aware of the new requirements and to incorporate the requirements into their plans and budgets for infrastructure. Note: The Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations follow a separate enforcement process. Once a new set of Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations is released, all new building permits would be required to meet the updated Building Code requirements. /7 Exemptions The Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations do not allow for exemptions unless stated in the regulation. Partial Compliance The Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations do not allow for partial compliance unless stated in the regulation. evie The Accessibility Act requires a review of the effectiveness of the Act and accessibility standards every five years. Amendments to accessibility standards may be considered after each review or in between review periods if approved by the Governor -in -Council. Accessibility guidelines may be modified from time to time and published by the Accessibility Directorate. The Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations are modified by Ministerial Order from time to time. Any modifications first require giving sufficient notice to municipalities and the public about the changes. rove + in Fee ac To provide feedback, visit novascotia.ca/built-environment-public-review. 7. ext te•s After this public review period, the feedback will be compiled and analyzed. Other jurisdictions are also developing accessibility standards for the built environment. We will continue to review and consider the work of other jurisdictions, including that of Accessibility Standards Canada, as we finalize this standard. The Accessibility Act requires that the feedback be shared with the Accessibility Advisory Board. The Minister of Justice will then consider whether any changes should be made to the proposed Built Environment Accessibility Standard Regulations. Once the standard is finalized, the Minister of Justice will recommend to the Governor -in -Council that it be approved as regulation. Accessibility standards in other areas are being developed to support the goal of making Nova Scotia accessible. If you would like to learn more, visit the Nova Scotia Accessibility Directorate's website at novascotia.ca/accessibility. /8 Regulations DRAFT Built Environment Standard Regulations under the Accessibility Act 1 co• a an i I'cation 1.1 General a) These regulations apply to the maintenance, design, construction, alteration, reconstruction, and use of the built environment. b) Except as otherwise specified, these regulations apply to aspects of the built environment that are newly constructed or redeveloped on or after April 1, 2026. c) Where any aspect of the built environment that is the subject of these regulations is redeveloped, these regulations apply to the parts of the built environment that are redeveloped. 1.2. Inclusions These regulations apply to: a) aspects of the built environment including indoor and outdoor spaces b) aspects of the built environment that are not within the scope of the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations 1.3. Exclusions These regulations do not apply to: a) federally regulated infrastructure (e.g., national parks, federal courts and tribunals, airports, federally regulated businesses such as banks, etc.) b) aspects of the built environment that are governed by the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations c) aspects of the built environment that are governed by the Nova Scotia Fire Code Regulations /9 efinitions "Accessible Pedestrian Signals" are devices used to allow pedestrians with visual disabilities to use the 'walk' and 'don't walk' signals when they are attempting to cross a street. "barrier -free path of travel" means a pedestrian path of travel that is free of barriers and usable by persons with disabilities. "beach access routes" means routes that are constructed and are intended for pedestrian use by the public and that provide access from off-street parking facilities, recreational trails, exterior paths of travel and amenities to an area of a beach that is intended for recreational use by the public. "cane detectable" means any object or a change in surface texture that falls within the detection range of a long white cane. "clear floor space" means the amount of unobstructed floor or ground space required to accommodate a single stationary user with a mobility device / aid, such as wheelchairs, scooters, canes, crutches and walkers. "colour contrast" means a significant contrast in colour between the foreground and the background of an element. "CSA B651" means the 2023 Canadian Standards Association's "Accessible design for the built environment". "Dynamic Symbol of Access" means an accessibility symbol, which depicts a person in motion who is seated in a wheelchair and leaning forward with a sense of movement. "Emergency Evacuation Plan" means a plan to address the needs of persons with disabilities who are not able to independently evacuate the building in the case of an emergency. "frontcountry campground" means a campground, or portion of a campground, that offers campsites that are primarily accessed by vehicle. "highway" means a) a public street, highway, sidewalk, lane, road or alley; b) a part of a public park, a beach or other public property that is accessible to the public for driving motor vehicles and not solely for driving off -highway vehicles; or c) privately owned property that is designed to be and is accessible to the public for driving motor vehicles and not solely for driving off -highway vehicles. "illumination" means the combined amount and intensity of lighting provided, as measured in lux. /10 "lux" means the metric measurement for light intensity or illumination. "Nova Scotia Building Code" means the regulations made under the Nova Scotia Building Code Act, as amended from time to time. "on -street parking" means parking spaces located on highways that provide direct access to shops, offices and other facilities whether or not the payment of a fee is charged. "outdoor play spaces" means a public area that includes play equipment, such as swings, or features such as logs, rocks, sand or water, where the equipment or features are designed and placed to provide play opportunities and experiences for children and caregivers. "outdoor public eating area" means an area that is specifically intended for use by the public as a place to consume food, including public parks, hospital grounds, university campuses. "parking areas" means open area parking lots not associated with a building that are intended for the temporary parking of vehicles by the public, whether or not the payment of a fee is charged. "pedestrian ramp" means a sloped surface that allows people to move safely and efficiently between vehicular and pedestrian routes, but does not include driveways. "prescribed public sector bodies" means an entity designated under the Accessibility General Regulations, as amended from time to time. "multi -purpose recreation centre" means any building that is open to the public for an active recreational purpose and includes at least two of the following: (a) a gymnasium; (b) a pool; (c) an ice pad; (d) a track; (e) a racket sport court; (f) a fitness room; (g) a community gathering room. "recreational trail" means public shared use trails that are intended for recreational and leisure purposes that are managed or operated by Government or a prescribed public sector body, a registered not -for-profit organization that develops trails, or an incorporated trail group. "redeveloped" means significant alterations to the built environment but does not include maintenance activities. /11 "slip resistant" means a surface that provides sufficient frictional counterforce to the forces exerted in walking to permit safe ambulation. "specified geographic region" means a defined area that is determined after giving consideration to: (a) population base; (b) geographic nature of the land; (c) existing infrastructure, including access to public transportation; and (d) distance Nova Scotians will have to travel from their primary residence to an accessible trail, park, beach access route and public outdoor play space. "tactile walking surface indicator" means a standardized surface using truncated domes that are detectable by cane or foot to assist persons with low vision or blindness by signalling the need for caution at a change in elevation, a vehicular route, or other obstruction. "Temporary Workplace Traffic Control Manual" means the manual published by the Department of Public Works and amended from time to time. "traffic barrier" means an obstruction used to minimize the frequency and severity of accidents involving pedestrians leaving the sidewalk into vehicular traffic. ® rte election ccessi ' ility riteria When Government or a prescribed public sector body is evaluating new sites for outdoor spaces and buildings primarily designed for public use, they must ensure the following accessibility criteria are considered: (a) availability of public transportation; (b) sidewalk access; (c) availability of accessible on -site parking; (d) safe drop off locations; and (e) proximity to community and clientele that the space or building is intended to serve. ccessi le ntrance Illu ination Where an accessible entrance is provided, the path leading to the entrance must provide illumination with an average light level of 50 lux, with no area less than 10 lux. /12 Tans for , ccessi • le ntrance (1) Where an accessible entrance is provided, owners and operators must have a plan in place to ensure accessible entrances remain free from physical obstruction. (2) The plan referred to in subsection (1) must be made available to the public upon request. xterior tairs, not associate. 't a uil in Exterior stairs, not associated with a building, that are connected to a barrier free path of travel and are intended to serve a functional purpose must have: (a) uniform risers and runs in any one flight; (b) tread surface finish that is slip resistant; (c) a rise between successive treads must be between 125 mm and 180 mm; (d) a run between successive steps must be between 280 mm and 355 mm; (e) closed risers; (f) tread nosing projection of a maximum of 38 mm, with no abrupt undersides; (g) high tonal contrast markings that extend the full tread width of the leading edge of each step; (h) tactile walking surface indicators that are built in or applied to the walking surface, and the tactile walking surface indicators must: (i) have raised tactile profiles, (ii) have a high tonal contrast with the adjacent surface, (iii) be located at the top of all flights of stairs, and (iv) extend the full tread width to a minimum depth of 610 mm commencing one tread depth from the edge of the stair; handrails included on both sides of stairs and comply with the requirements related to handrails set out in Nova Scotia Building Code 9.39.2.3; and (j) a guard that is not less than 920 mm, measured vertically to the top of the guard from a line drawn through the outside edges of the stair nosings and 1070 mm around the landings and is required on each side of a stairway where the difference in elevation between ground level and the top of the stair is more than 600 mm but, where there is a wall, a guard is not required on that side. (i) /13 7. ar in areas not associate s °t a . u®I• in (1) Parking areas, not associated with a building, must include parking stalls for use by persons with disabilities as designated by the following table: Number of Parking Stalls Number of Designated Accessible Stalls Required 1 2-15 16-45 2 46-100 3 101-200 4 201-300 5 301-400 6 401-500 7 501-900 8 901-1300 9 1301-1700 10 each increment of up to 400 stalls in excess of 1700 one additional space (2) Specifications of accessible parking stalls for use by persons with disabilities must: (a) not be less than 2600 mm wide; (b) include an access aisle not less than 2000 mm wide and if more than one parking space is provided for persons with disabilities, a single access aisle can serve two adjacent parking stalls; (c) not be less than 7500 mm long for parallel parking stalls; (d) have a firm, slip resistant and level surface of asphalt, concrete, or compacted gravel; (e) be clearly marked as accessible parking by using the International Symbol of Access or the Dynamic Symbol of Access; and be identified by a sign located not less than 1500 mm above ground level. (f) /14 (3) All accessible parking stalls must be designed to include a barrier -free path of travel extending to the entrance of the parking area and include: (a) vertical signage that is colour contrast at all areas where a pedestrian crosses traffic; (b) illumination with an average light level of 50 lux, with no area less than 10 lux. (c) a pedestrian ramp, where applicable, including tactile surfaces and colour contrast; (d) pavement markings, where applicable; and (e) pedestrian ramps, where applicable. (4) The requirements of this section do not apply to the types of parking areas that are used exclusively for one of the following: (a) buses; (b) delivery vehicles; (c) law enforcement vehicles; (d) medical transportation vehicles, such as ambulances; (e) impounded vehicles; or (f) used as a carpool lot. aintenance of ar in reas (1) All organizations having control of parking areas, whether attached to a building or not, must establish a regular maintenance plan that addresses the maintenance of the accessibility features of the parking area. (2) A maintenance plan must address the following: (a) painting of accessibility symbols; (b) painting of parking space lines; (c) maintenance of surface area; and (d) maintenance of accessibility signage throughout the parking area. The plan referred to in subsection (1) must be made available to the public upon request. (3) /15 n -street ar n (1) Government or a prescribed public sector body responsible for on -street parking must consult with persons with disabilities on the need, location, and design of accessible on -street parking spaces. (2) All accessible on -street parking spaces located next to a curb must include a pedestrian ramp and a barrier -free path of travel to the sidewalk. Pedestrian ramps required in subsection (2) must include tactile walking surface indicators and colour contrast. (3) 1 1 e al s Government and prescribed public sector bodies must comply with the following design specifications for sidewalks: (a) Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads published by the Transportation Association of Canada, as amended from time to time; and (b) CSA B651 standard section 8.3.5. respecting "Alignment of pedestrian crossing components". 11. Te orary 1 al s (1) This section applies to all temporary sidewalks, including those that are installed to accommodate sidewalk cafes, restaurant patios, and construction zones. (2) Temporary sidewalks must: (a) have a firm and level surface; (b) be slip resistant; (c) not impede pedestrian traffic movement or safety; (d) be a minimum of 1600 mm in width; (e) be guarded by a traffic barrier between 0.81 m and 1.05m in height at ends exposed to vehicular travel; (f) incorporate reflective elements on the traffic barrier required in subclause (c); (g) have a clear height of no less than 2100 mm where covered. (3) Where a temporary sidewalk is required as a result of construction, pedestrian signage must be installed in accordance with the Temporary Workplace Traffic Control Manual. /16 (4) Where lighting is placed on a temporary sidewalk, it must not: (a) interfere with any traffic signal light, control sign or device; (b) obstruct or interfere with the movement of motorists or pedestrians; (c) produce or cause glare to motorists, pedestrians, or neighbouring premises; or (d) move or appear to move. (5) Where the requirements of this section cannot be achieved given the particular nature and location of a construction zone, a crosswalk to a barrier -free sidewalk must be provided before the obstruction occurs. (6) Where barrier -free access to the principal entrance of a property is not available as a result of a temporary sidewalk, a ramp must be provided to facilitate barrier -free access. 12. • jects in • ath of travel (1) The location and dimensions of street furniture, signage, banners, flower pots, waste receptacles, or any other objects must not impede a clear accessible path of travel for pedestrians. (2) A clear accessible path of travel requires objects to be cane detectable to the ground. 1 e a estrian i . nals Government and prescribed public sector bodies having responsibility for pedestrian signals must include Accessible Pedestrian Signals where pedestrian signals are installed. 14. no an Ice ontrol Government and prescribed public sector bodies must make their snow and ice control standards for pedestrian facilities publicly available. 1 er ency vacuation ' Ian (1) All buildings not required under the Nova Scotia Fire Code to have a Fire Safety Plan and all residential buildings that have 4 or more units with an occupancy of less than 11, must keep an Emergency Evacuation Plan at the principal entrance of the building. (2) An Emergency Evacuation Plan must: (a) contain the following emergency procedures to be used in case of fire: (i) notifying the fire department; (ii) instructing occupants on procedures to be followed when a fire is detected; (iii) evacuating occupants, including special provisions for persons with disabilities requiring assistance; and (iv) confining, controlling and extinguishing the fire. /17 (b) identify supervisory staff to carry out the evacuation duties; and (c) identify the training of supervisory staff and other occupants in their responsibilities about the evacuation plan. (3) The Evacuation Plan must be reviewed by the building owner/operator at intervals not greater than 12 months to ensure that accounts for changes in the use and other characteristics of the building. 1•. lace ent of efi • rillators Where defibrillators are mounted, they must: (a) be on a barrier -free path of travel, (b) be adjacent to a clear floor space of a minimum of 820 mm wide by 1390 mm long; and (c) be mounted no more than 1200 mm above the floor level. 17. Loc ers (1) Multi -use recreation centres must have accessible lockers that comply with the following: (a) be provided along a barrier -free path of travel; (b) be adjacent to a clear floor space of a minimum of 820 mm by 1390 mm in front of the locker when the locker door is open; (c) have controls mounted between 400 to 1200 mm above the floor; (d) be operable with one hand in a closed fist position, without requiring tight grasping, pinching with fingers or twisting of the wrist; (e) be located in proximity of an accessible bench or accessible change room with a bench; and (f) not allow storage on top of the locker. (2) For purposes of subsection (1) a minimum number of accessible lockers must be provided in accordance with the following table: Number of lockers Number of Designated Accessible Lockers 1-30 1 31-50 2 51-150 3 151-300 4 (for every additional 50 lockers 1) 5+ /18 1. . ools Outdoor and indoor swimming pools intended for public use must have: (a) one of the following at the shallow end of the pool: (i) (ii) a slopped entry; or a pool lift (b) visual contrast along the edge of the pool and access points; and (c) tactile warning indicators on the edge of pools. 1 u oor • u lic eatin areas Outdoor public eating areas must meet the following requirements: (a) a minimum of 20 per cent of the tables provided must be accessible; (b) where less than five tables are provided, there must be a minimum of 1 accessible table; and (c) the tables referred to in subsection (1) must: (i) be on a barrier -free path of travel; (ii) located on a level and firm surface that extends at least 2000 mm on all sides; and (iii) be equipped with knee clearance of at least of 800 mm wide x 430 mm deep x 685 mm high. enc es (1) Where Government and prescribed public sector bodies install benches in areas intended for public use that are adjacent to a barrier -free path of travel, they must be: (a) located on a firm, stable surface; (b) be adjacent to a clear floor space of a minimum of 820 mm x 1390 mm to permit maneuverability; (c) have a seat height between 430 mm and 485 mm from the ground; and (d) be free of any sharp or abrasive edges. (2) Where there are more than five benches, a mix of options including benches with back rests, benches with arm rests, and benches with both must be provided. /19 1. evelo • ent of lan for ccessi • le ut oor aces (1) Government must develop a multiyear plan to address access to recreational trails, parks, beaches, and public outdoor play spaces in Nova Scotia. (2) The plan must ensure that there will be a minimum of the following in each specified geographic region by 2030: (a) 1 accessible recreational trail; (b) 1 accessible park; (c) 1 beach access route, if applicable; and (d) 10 accessible public outdoor play spaces. When developing the plan, Government must seek input from persons with disabilities, Municipalities and Villages, and trail subject matter experts. (4) The plan referred to in this section must be made publicly available. (3) 22. a ' oun ;s (1) Government and privately owned frontcountry campgrounds must have a minimum number of accessible campsites as designated by the following table: Number of sites Number of Designated Accessible Campsites 1-30 31-50 51-150 51-300 (for every additional 50 campsites 1) 3 5+ (2) An accessible campsite must meet the following requirements: (a) be on a firm, stable ground surface; (b) have a barrier -free path of travel to accessible potable water station; (c) have a barrier -free path of travel to an accessible washroom; and (d) have an accessible picnic table equipped with knee clearance of at least of 800 mm wide x 430 mm deep x 685 mm high. / 20 u oor . lays . aces Government and prescribed public sector bodies must comply with the following design specifications for outdoor play spaces: (a) include a barrier -free path of travel to associated buildings, where applicable; (b) include a barrier -free path of travel to pedestrian facilities, where applicable; (c) incorporate accessibility features, such as sensory and active play components, for children and caregivers with various disabilities, into the design of outdoor play spaces; (d) be situated on a firm and stable ground surface; and (e) include sufficient clearance for children and caregivers to manoeuvre in and around the outdoor play space. 24. • ut oor classroo s Outdoor classrooms attached to a public school must include: (a) a barrier -free path of travel from the building; (b) a firm and stable ground surface; and (c) accessible seating options. Government and prescribed public sector bodies must comply with the following design specifications for water filling stations: (a) be located on a barrier -free path of travel; (b) be adjacent to a clear floor space of a minimum of 820 mm by 1390 mm; and (c) be operable with one hand in a closed fist position, without requiring tight grasping, pinching with fingers or twisting of the wrist. /21 DRAFT General Regulation under the Accessibility Act Accessibility Plans No later than April 1, 2026, Accessibility Plans required to be prepared under the Act must include a plan for addressing the availability of accessible washrooms in buildings. / 22 Guidelines Public Address System In buildings where a public call system is available, the system should be capable of being zoned to specific areas of the building. Power assisted exterior doors Where exterior power doors are installed automatic sliding doors are preferred Public building clearance Organizations responsible for aspects of the built environment should ensure that measures are in place so that access to building entrances and accessible parking spaces remain free from debris, including snow, leaves, and other types of debris. Pathways (1) Building interiors should have a barrier -free path of travel with accompanying signage, ensuring all users are able to easily locate and access key facilities, including, an information desk, elevators and washrooms. (2) Building interiors should have clear unobstructed site lines to key facilities. Gathering Areas In buildings accessible to the public that have areas designated for gatherings, including, but not limited to, libraries, conference facilities, and shopping areas, the following should be considered: (a) providing a range of adjustable lighting options, including dimmers and task lighting lamps with control switches located within an accessible reach range; (b) luminance (colour) contrast in the design of the space that enhance depth perception, reduce visual noise, and facilitate visual communication, orientation, and wayfinding; and (c) a designated quiet space. / 23 Storage for Mobility Aids General Where storage space for mobility aids is provided, it should be conveniently located on a barrier -free path of travel and have signage identifying the location. Passenger Elevator Audible Signal Elevators should have an audible signal to announce each floor. Vision Glass Doors in a path of travel should have vison glass to allow visual access to the other side from both seated and standing positions, except where fire safety cannot be maintained or where there is an issue of privacy. Building Materials Buildings should be constructed with materials that minimize mold growth, allergens, and contain low volatile organic compounds. Colour Contrasting Washroom accessories should be colour contrasted against adjacent surfaces. Principles of DeafSpace When developing new spaces intended for public gatherings, consideration should be given to the principles of DeafSpace: (a) Space and proximity: More space is needed between individuals when they are speaking in sign language; (b) Sensory Reach: Wherever possible, a room should be arranged to allow a Deaf person to have a view of 180 degrees so they can interpret visual cues in the space; (c) Mobility and Proximity: Wide barrier -free pathways that allow for communication in sign language while moving; (d) Light and Colour: Soft blue and green tones are preferred background colours to facilitate communicating in sign language and reduce eye strain; and (e) Acoustics: Spaces should be designed to reduce reverberation and background noise. Storage of Accessible Recreation Equipment When constructing a new multi -use recreation centre, consideration should be given to having sufficient storage space available for accessibility equipment (such as beach wheelchairs, hockey sledges, etc.) during periods when it is not in use. / 24 Libraries When public libraries are considering the placement or installation of display shelving consideration should be given to sufficient reach ranges for persons with disabilities in accordance with CSA B651, Annex A. Aisle configurations should incorporate clear floor space of one of the following at the end of the aisles: a) 2100 mm in diameter, or b) 1700 mm wide by 1500 mm long. Aisles should be a minimum of 1200 mm in width. Adult Change Table Buildings owned or operated by a public sector body that are primarily intended for public use should have at least one adult change table that aligns with section 6.3.4 of the CSA B-651 Standard. Relief Area Buildings intended for public use should provide a relief area for service animals. Waste Management Systems In residential buildings where a common space for waste management is provided, the waste management system should: a) be on a barrier -free path of travel; b) have an opening or lid no more than 1060 mm above the floor level; c) be securely fastened to the ground, post or wall. Transit Stops Where transit stop is located on a barrier -free path of travel it should comply with Section 8.5 of CSA B651. Gated entry parking areas Owners and operators of commercial parking areas with a gated entry should consider installing the following: (a) An emergency call button; and (b) a communication system that allows individuals to communicate by text, email, or alternative technology when the gate is not working. / 25 Streetscaping The planning process for new streetscaping should be reviewed by the Accessibility Advisory Committee of the authority having jurisdiction to ensure designs are accessible and provide for a barrier -free path of travel. Signage Accessibility Where new signage is being provided in the built environment, such signage should comply with Section 4.6 of CSA B651 "Signage". Community Gardens (1) Where community gardens are provided consideration should be given to including at least one accessible garden bed. (2) Where an accessible garden bed is provided it should be: (a) located on a barrier -free path of travel; (b) raised to enable access to the bed by a person using a wheelchair; / 26 Building Code Amendments Note: The Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations below are not all new. In order to accommodate screen readers and accessibility, the new or amended portions for this section start with the text E and end with the text E D. Section 3.8. Accessibility (See Note A-3.8., NBC) 3.8.1. Scope (See Note NS -3.8.1., NSBCR) 3.8.1.1. Scope 1) This Section is concerned with the barrier -free design of buildings. 2) Buildings and facilities required to be barrier -free in accordance with Subsection 3.8.2. shall be designed in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3. 3.8.2. Application 3.8.2.1. Application and Exemptions 1) The requirements of this Section apply to all buildings, except a) detached houses, semi-detached, houses with secondary suites, duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, row houses, boarding houses and rooming houses, b) buildings of Group F, Division 1 major occupancy, c) buildings that are not intended to be occupied on a daily or full- time basis, including automatic telephone exchanges, pumphouses and substations, d) houses used as roofed accommodation for not more than 10 persons including the owner and the owner's family and that meets the requirements of Sentence (5), e) industrial occupancies with an operation that are not adaptable to barrier -free design, and f) fire, rescue, and emergency response facilities intended to house vehicles and their crews. (See Note NS -3.8.2.1.(1)(f), NSBCR) / 27 2) In roofed accommodation one sleeping unit conforming to Article 3.8.3.25. shall be provided for E every 10 sleeping units or part thereof. E D 3) E Not less than 50% of the sleeping units required by Sentence (2) shall be provided with at least one barrier -free shower. E D 4) In camping accommodation where sleeping accommodations are provided, one sleeping unit conforming to Article 3.8.3.25. Shall be provided for every 20 sleeping units or part thereof. 5) Where an alteration on the entrance level is made to a dwelling unit used as roofed accommodation to add sleeping accommodation, all of the following shall be provided: a) one sleeping unit conforming to Article 3.8.3.25., b) a barrier -free entrance designed in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3., c) a barrier -free path of travel conforming to Article 3.8.3.2., and d) one parking stall for each required sleeping unit under this Sentence conforming with Sentence 3.8.3.4.(3). 6) Buildings described in Clause (1)(a) shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Subsection 3.8.4. 7) E Except as exempted by Clause (1)(a), in a building with more than 3 suites of care or residential occupancies, a) barrier -free units conforming to Article 3.8.3.26. shall be provided according to Table 3.8.2.1. and, b) every unit complying with Clause (a) shall conform to Subsection 3.8.4. E D (See Note NS -3.8.2.1.(7), NSBCR) 8) E The requirements of this Section take precedence over other requirements contained in this Part and Part 9. Number of units in building Minimum number of units conforming to Article 3.8.2.25. 0 to 0 25 to 45 Greater than 45 1 plus 1 unit for each additional 20 units or part thereof E / 28 3.8.2.2. Entrances (See Note A-3.8.2.2., NBC) 1) Except for service entrances, E all pedestrian entrances E D to a barrier -free storey of a building referred to in Sentence 3.8.2.1.(1) shall be barrier -free and shall connect to a barrier -free exterior path of travel complying with Sentence 3.8.2.5.(1). 2) A barrier -free entrance required by Sentence (1) shall be designed in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3. 3) At a barrier -free entrance that includes more than one doorway, only one of the doorways is required to be designed in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3. 4) If a walkway or pedestrian bridge connects two barrier -free storeys in different buildings, the path of travel from one storey to the other storey by means of a walkway or bridge shall be barrier -free. 5) Where a principal entrance to a building of residential occupancy is equipped with a security door system, a) both visual and audible signals shall be used to indicate when the door lock is released, and b) where there are more than 20 suites, a closed-circuit visual monitoring system shall be provided that is capable of connection to individual suites. 6) Where a house is required to conform to the requirements of Sentence 3.8.2.1.(5), the house shall provide one barrier -free entrance in conformance with Sentence (1). E Except for Group B, Division 1 occupancies, vision glass or transparent doors and panels complying with Article 3.3.1.20. shall be used in entrances required by Sentence (1) to be barrier -free unless prohibited elsewhere by the Code. E D 3.8.2.3. Areas Requiring a Barrier -free Path of Travel (See Note A-3.8.2.3., NBC) 1) Except as permitted by Sentence (2), a barrier -free path of travel from the entrances required by Sentences 3.8.2.2.(1) to be barrier -free shall be provided throughout the entrance storey and within all normally occupied floor areas. (See Article 3.3.1.7. (Protection on Floor Areas with a Barrier -free Path of Travel) for additional requirements for floor areas above or below the first storey to which a barrier -free path of travel is required.) / 29 2) A barrier -free path of travel for persons in wheelchairs is not required a) to service rooms, b) to elevator machine rooms, c) to janitors' rooms, d) to service spaces, e) to crawl spaces, f) to attic or roof spaces, g) to the floor level above or below the entrance level in buildings unless the floor level above or below (see Note A-3.8.2.3.(2) (g),NBC) i) is served by a passenger elevator, a platform -equipped passenger -elevating device, an escalator or an inclined moving walk, ii) is 600 m2 or more in floor area, iii) contains facilities that are not contained on the entrance level, but that integral to the principal function of the entrance level, or iv) E contains an assembly occupancy more than 100 m2 in floor area, h) within a parking level with no barrier -free parking spaces, E D i) to high -hazard industrial occupancies, j) within portions of a floor area with fixed seats in an assembly occupancy where those portions are not part of the barrier -free path of travel to spaces designated for wheelchair use, k) within floor levels of a suite of residential occupancy that are not at the same level as the entry level to the suite, or I) within a suite of care or residential occupancy unless required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(7) or Subsection 3.8.4. 3) In an assembly occupancy, the number of spaces designated for wheelchair use within rooms or areas with fixed seats shall conform to Table 3.8.2.3. (See also Article 3.8.3.22. for additional requirements.) E The number of spaces designated for wheelchair use within waiting rooms or areas with fixed seats shall conform to Table 3.8.2.3. (See Note A-3.8.2.3.(4). / 30 5) Except as provided in Sentence (6), in an assembly occupancy with more than 25 fixed seats, each row of seats served by two aisles shall have one adaptable seat conforming to Subsection 3.8.3. located adjacent to one of the aisles. (See Note A-3.8.2.3.(5) and (6) and 3.8.3.22.(1) and (4), NBC) 6) At least 5% of the adaptable seats required by Sentence (5) but no more than 20 adaptable seats shall adjoin a barrier -free path of travel. END Table 3.8.2.3. Designated Wheelchair Spaces Forming Part of Sentences 3.8.2.3.(3) and (4) 3.8.2.4. Number of Fixed Seats in Seating Area NEW 2 - 99 Number of Spaces Required for Wheelchairs 2 100 - 499 3, plus 1 for each additional increment of 70 seats in excess of 100 500 - 1999 9, plus 1 for each additional increment of 80 seats in excess of 500 2000 - 7999 28 plus 1 for each additional increment of 95 seats in excess of 2000 Over 7999 91, plus 1 for each additional increment of 100 seats in excess of 8000 END Access to Storeys Served by Escalators and Moving Walks 1) In a building in which an escalator or inclined moving walk provides access to any floor level, an interior barrier -free path of travel shall be provided to that floor level. (See Note A-3.8.2.4.(1), NBC) 2) The route from the escalator or inclined moving walk to the barrier -free path of travel that leads from floor to floor required by Sentence (1)shall be clearly indicated by appropriate signs. /31 3.8.2.5. Exterior Barrier -free Paths of Travel to Building Entrances and Exterior Passenger -Loading Zones (See Note A-3.8.2.5., NBC) 1) A direct exterior barrier -free path of travel that complies with Subsection 3.8.3. shall be provided between a barrier -free entrance referred to in Article 3.8.2.2. and a) a designated barrier -free parking area, where provided, b) E an exterior passenger -loading zone, where provided, and c) a public thoroughfare. E D (See Note A-3.8.2.5.(1) and (2), NBC) 2) In storage garages, a barrier -free path of travel that complies with Subsection 3.8.3. shall be provided between each parking level with barrier - free parking and all other parts of the building required to be provided with barrier -free access in accordance with Subsection 3.8.2. that are served by that storage garage. 3) Exterior passenger -loading zones shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. 4) Where on -site parking is provided, parking stalls for use by persons with a disability shall be provided in accordance with one of the following: a) as designated by Table 3.8.2.5., b) one parking stall shall be provided for each viewing position required in assembly occupancies in Sentence 3.8.2.3.(3), or c) one parking stall shall be provided for each barrier -free residential suite. Table 3.8.2.5. Designated Parking Stalls Forming Part of Sentence 3.8.2.5.(4) Number of Parking Stalls Number of Designated Stalls Required for Persons with Disability 11-35 2 1-99 4 100 and greater 5 plus 1 for every 50 additional spaces provided 5) Where on -site parking is provided, parking stalls for use by persons with a disability shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. / 32 3.8.2.6. Controls 1) Except as required by Sentence 3.5.2.1.(3), controls for the operation of building services or safety devices, including electrical switches, thermostats and intercom switches, that are intended to be operated by the occupant shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. (See Note A-3.8.2.6.(1), NBC) 3.8.2.7. 3.8.2.8. Power Door Operators 1) Except as provided in Sentences (2) and (3) and except for doors provided with hold -open devices, doors equipped with a self -closing device shall be equipped with power door operators complying with Subsection 3.8.3. that allows persons to activate the opening of the doors in the intended direction of travel, where the doors are located a) E in an entrance referred to in Article 3.8.2.2., including the interior doors of a vestibule where provided, b) in a barrier -free path of travel, between the entrance referred to in Clause (a) and the entrance doors to suites or rooms served by a public corridor or a corridor used by the public (see Note A-3.8.2.7.(1) (b), and c) in an entrance to a washroom with a barrier -free water closet. E D 2) Only the active leaf in a multiple leaf door in a barrier -free path of travel need conform to the requirements of this Article. 3) Where more than one doorway is provided at a barrier -free entrance, only one of them is required to comply with this Article. 4) E Where doors, other than those described in Sentence (1), are equipped with power door operators, the power door operators shall be installed in conformance with Subsection 3.8.3. E D Plumbing Facilities 1) Except as permitted by Sentence (3), at each location where washrooms are provided in a storey to which a barrier -free path of travel is required in accordance with Article 3.8.2.3., at least one universal washroom complying with Subsection 3.8.3. shall be provided. (See Note A-3.8.2.8.(1) to (4), NBC) 2} E Except as permitted by Sentence (3), where more than two water closets or a combination of more than one water closet and one urinal are provided in a washroom located in a storey to which a barrier -free path of travel is required in accordance with Article 3.8.2.3., at least one water - closet stall shall be barrier -free in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3. E D (See Note A-3.8.2.8.(1) to (4), NBC) / 33 3) Washrooms located within a suite of residential occupancy or a suite of care occupancy need not conform to the requirements of Sentence (1) or (2) except where required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(7). 4) In a building in which water closets are required in accordance with Subsection 3.7.2., at least one barrier -free water closet shall be provided in the entrance storey, unless a) a barrier -free path of travel is provided to barrier -free water closets elsewhere in the building, or b) the water closets required by Subsection 3.7.2. are for dwelling units only. (See Note A-3.8.2.8(1) to (4)., NBC). 5) At least one water closet stall or enclosure in a washroom required to be barrier -free shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. 6) Where urinals are provided in a barrier -free washroom, at least one urinal for persons with limited mobility conforming to Subsection 3.8.3. shall be provided for every 10 urinals. 7) E here water closet stalls are provided in a barrier -free washroom, at least one stall for persons with limited mobility conforming to Subsection 3.8.3. shall be provided for every 10 stalls. E D 8) A barrier -free washroom shall be provided with a lavatory that complies with Subsection 3.8.3. 9) Where mirrors are provided in a barrier -free washroom, at least one mirror shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. 10) At each location where one or more drinking fountains are provided, at least one shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. 11) E At each location where one or more water -bottle filling stations are provided, at least one of them shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. E D 12) Except within a suite of care occupancy or a suite of residential occupancy, where showers are provided in a building, at least one shower stall in each group of showers shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. (See Note A-3.8.2.8.(13) 13) E At each location where a showering facility is provided for use by the general public or customers, or as part of a common -use area for employees, at least one universal dressing and shower room conforming to Subsection 3.8.3. shall be provided. E D 14) Where a bathtub or shower is installed in a suite of residential occupancy required to be barrier -free, it shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. / 34 15) E In buildings containing Group A, Group B, Division 2 or Group E major occupancies where at least one of these major occupancies has an occupant load of more than 500, at least one universal washroom on the storey on which the main barrier -free entrance to the building is located shall incorporate an accessible change space conforming to Subsection 3.8.3. E D (See Note A-3.8.2.8.(15), NBC) 16) E here laboratory sinks are installed in classrooms, one in 20 sinks or part thereof, but not less than 1 shall conform to Subsection 3.8.3. E D 3.8.2.9. 3.8.2.10. Assistive Listening Devices 1) In a building of assembly occupancy, auditoria, meeting rooms and theatres with an area of more than 100 m2 and E all classrooms E D and court rooms shall be equipped with an assistive listening system complying with Subsection 3.8.3. } E In each location where information, goods or services are provided to the public at service counters in buildings of assembly occupancy, at least one of the service counters shall be equipped with a) an assistive listening system or adaptive technology conforming to Subsection 3.8.3., and b) an amplification system, where there is a barrier to communication such as a glass screen. E D (See Note A-3.8.2.9.(2), NBC) Signs and Indicators 1) Signs complying with Subsection 3.8.3. shall be installed to indicate the location of a) barrier -free entrances, b) barrier -free washrooms, c) barrier -free showers, d) barrier -free elevators, e) barrier -free parking spaces, f) facilities for persons with hearing disabilities, g) E facilities required under Article 3.3.1.7.E D 2) Where a washroom is not designed to accommodate persons with physical disabilities in a storey to which a barrier -free path of travel is required, signs providing visual and tactile information in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3. shall be installed to indicate the location of barrier -free facilities. /35 E Except for doors that serve service spaces or are located within a suite, signs installed at or near doors shall provide the same information in both visual and tactile forms in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3. 4) Directional signs shall provide visual information in accordance with Subsection 3.8.3.. (See Note A-3.8.2.10.(4) 5) A floor plan diagram complying with Article 3.8.3.9. showing exits, means of egress, and facilities required under Article 3.3.1.7. shall be installed. E D 3.8.2.11. Counters 1) E here a service counter is provided, at least one section of it shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. E D 3.8.2.12. Telephones 1) In each location where one or more public telephones are installed, at least one telephone shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. 3.8.2.13. 3.8.2.14. 1) E Emergency Equipment In each location where eye wash stations or emergency showers are installed in an area where a barrier -free path of travel is required, they shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. E D E Kitchen o . reak rooms 1) Where a kitchen or break room is provided for use as part of a common -use area for employees, it shall comply with Subsection 3.8.3. E D 3.8.3. Design 3.8.3.1. Design Standards 1) Buildings or parts thereof and facilities that are required to be barrier -free shall be designed in accordance with a) this Subsection, or b) the provisions of CSA B651, "Accessible Design for the Built Environment" listed in Table 3.8.3.1., in their entirety. (See Note A-3.8.3.1.(1), NBC and Note NS -3.8.3.1.(1), NSBCR) / 36 Table 3.8.3.1. Barrier -free Design Provisions Forming Part of Sentence 3.8.3.1.(1) Barrier -free Application (Code References) ApplicableCSA B651 Provisions 4.3 and 5.1 Interior accessible routes (3.8.3.2.) Exterior accessible routes (3.8.3.3.) 8.2.1 to 8.2.5 and 8.2.7 Parking stalls and passenger pickup areas (3.8.3.4.) 8.3.3, 9.3 and 9.5.1 to 9.5.21 Ramps 5.3 and 5.5 Doors and doorways (3.8.3.6.) 5.2 Passenger -elevating devices (3.8.3.7.) 5.6.2 Operating controls (3.8.3.8.) 4.2 Signage (3.8.3.9.) 4.5 and 9.4 Drinking fountains (3.8.3.10.) 6.1 NEW Water -Bottle Filling Stations (3.8.3.11.) See Note 3 END Washroom facilities (3.8.3.12. to 3.8.3.16.) 6.2 and 6.3 Bathing facilities (3.8.3.17. to 3.8.3.18) 6.5 Communication (3.8.3.19. and 3.8.3.21.) 6.6 Counters (3.8.3.20. and 3.8.3.21.) 6.7.1 Spaces in seating area (3.8.3.22.) 6.7.2 NEW Emergency equipment and laboratory sinks (3.8.3.23.) See Note 4 7.4.4.2 to 7.4.4.4 Kitchen and break rooms (3.8.3.24.) 7.4.4.1 to 7.4.4.4 END Sleeping units in roofed accommodation (3.8.3.25.) 6.2.5, 6.2.6.4, 7.4.32, 7.4.5, 7.4.6.3, 7.4.6.4 Suites of care and residential occupancies to be barrier -free (3.8.3.26.) 7.4.1.5.2, 7.4.2.1, 7.4.3, 7.4.4,1 to 7.4.4.4, 7.4.4.9, 7.4.5, 7.4.6.3, 7.4.6.4 Note 1. Clause 3.8.3.4.(3)(e), NSBCR must be complied with as well Note 2. Grab bar requirements for water closets, showers and bathtubs are required to be met (Clauses 6.2.5 and 6.2.6.4). NEW Note 3. Water -bottle filling stations must comply with the NSBCR where installed if using the CSA standard for the design Note 4. Emergency equipment (emergency showers and eye wash stations) must comply with the NSBCR where installed if using the CSA standard for the design END / 37 3.8.3.2. Barrier -free Path of Travel 1) Except as required elsewhere in this Part or as permitted by Sentence (2) and Article 3.8.3.6. pertaining to doorways, the clear width of a barrier -free path of travel shall be not less than E 1000 mm E D. 2) E The clear width of a barrier -free path of travel is permitted to be reduced to not less than 850 mm for length of not more 600 mm, provided the clear floor space at either end of the reduced -clear width section is level within a rectangular area a) whose dimension parallel to each end of the reduced -clear width section is not less than 1000 mm, and b) whose dimension perpendicular to each end of the reduced -clear width section is not less than 1500 mm. E D (See Note A-3.8.3.2.(2), NBC) 3) Interior and exterior walking surfaces that are within a barrier -free path of travel shall a) have no opening that will permit the passage of a sphere more than 13 mm in diameter, b) have any elongated openings oriented approximately perpendicular to the direction of travel, c) be stable, firm and slip -resistant, d) have a cross slope no steeper than 1 in 50, e) be bevelled at a maximum slope of 1 in 2 at changes in level between 6 mm and 13 mm, and f) be provided with sloped floors or ramps at changes in level more than 13 mm. (See Note A-3.8.3.2.(3), NBC) 4) A barrier -free path of travel is permitted to include ramps, passenger elevators, or passenger -elevating devices to overcome a difference in level. 5) The width of a barrier -free path of travel that is more than 24 m long shall be increased to not less than E 1750 mm for a length of 1750 mm E D at intervals not exceeding E 24 m. E D / 38 6 E Where a section of barrier -free path of travel is less than 1500 mm wide for a distance of more than 12 m, it shall end in a clear floor space that is a) not less than 1700 mm in diameter, b) not less than 1700 mm by 1500 mm, or c) T-shaped with overall dimensions measuring 1700 mm wide by 1500 mm long, where the two arms of the "T" are not less than 1000 mm wide and extend not less than 300 mm from each side of the base of the "T" and the base is not less than 1000 mm wide and extends not less than 500 mm from each arm. E D (See Note A-3.8.3.2.(6), NBC) 3.8.3.3. Exterior Walks 1) Exterior walks that form part of a barrier -free path of travel shall a) have a slip -resistant, continuous and even surface, b) be not less than E 1600 mm E D wide, c) have a level area conforming to Clause 3.8.3.5.(1)(c) adjacent to each entrance doorway, and d) E be designed in accordance with Clause 8.2.1 of CSA B651, "Accessible design for the built environment." E D 3.8.3.4. Parking Stalls and Exterior Passenger -Loading Zones 1) If an exterior passenger -loading zone is provided, it shall have a) an access aisle not less than 1500 mm wide and 6000 mm long adjacent and parallel to the vehicle pull-up space, b) a curb ramp complying with Sentence (2), where there are curbs between the access aisle and the vehicle pull-up space, and c) a clear height of not less than E 3000 mm E D at the pull-up space and along the vehicle access and egress routes. 2) Where a curb ramp is installed, it shall have a) a minimum width of E 1500 mm, E D b) a maximum slope of i) 1 in 12 when the vertical rise is between 75 mm and 200 mm, or E 1 in 10 when the vertical rise is less than 75 mm, / 39 c) have a surface including flared sides that shall i) be slip -resistant, have a detectable warning surface that complies with Sentence 3.3.1.19.(1) and, iii) have a smooth transition from the ramp and adjacent surfaces and d) have flared sides with a slope of not more than 1 in 10 where pedestrians are likely to walk across them. E D (See Note NS -3.8.3.4., NSBCR) 3) Parking stalls for use by persons with physical disabilities shall a) be not less than E 2600 mm wide E D and provided on one side with an access aisle not less than E 2000 mm wide E D (if more than one parking space is provided for persons with physical disabilities, a single access aisle can serve 2 adjacent parking stalls), and parallel parking stalls shall be not less E than 7500 mm long, E D b) have a firm, slip -resistant and level surface of asphalt, concrete or compacted gravel, c) be located close to an entrance required to conform to Article 3.8.2.2., but not exceeding 50 m from the entrance, d) be clearly marked as being for the use of persons with physical disabilities, and e) be identified by a sign located not less than 1500 mm above ground level in conformance with the regulations respecting traffic signs made under the Motor Vehicle Act (Nova Scotia). 3.8.3.5. Ramps 1) A ramp located in a barrier -free path of travel shall a) have a clear width of not less than E 1000 mm, E D (See Note A-3.4.3.4., NBC) b) have a slope not more than 1 in 12, (See Note A -3.8.3.5.(1)(b), NBC) / 40 c) have a level area not less than E 1700 by 1700 mm E D at the top and bottom and at intermediate levels of a ramp leading to a door, so that on the latch side the level area extends not less than i) 600 mm beyond the edge of the door opening where the door opens towards the ramp, or ii) 300 mm beyond the edge of the door opening where the door opens away from the ramp, (See Note A -3.8.3.5.(1)(c), NBC) d) have a level area not less than E 1500 mm long E D and at least the same width as the ramp i) at intervals not more than 9 m along its length, and ii) where there is an abrupt change in the direction of the ramp, e) except as provided in Sentences (2) and (3), be equipped with handrails conforming to Article 3.4.6.5., except that they shall be not less than 865 mm and not more than 965 mm high, and f) be equipped with guards conforming to Article 3.4.6.6. 2) Handrails installed in addition to required handrails need not comply with the height requirements stated in Clause (1)(e). 3) The requirement for handrails in Clause (1)(e) need not apply to a ramp serving as an aisle for fixed seating. 4) The surfaces of ramps and landings shall a) be hard or resilient where the ramp is steeper than 1 in 15 (See Note A -3.8.3.5.(4)(a), NBC), b) have a cross slope no steeper than 1 in 50, and c) where exposed to water, be designed to drain. 5) Ramps and landings not at grade or adjacent to a wall shall have edge protection consisting of a) a curb not less than 75 mm high, or b) a raised barrier or rail located not more than 100 mm from the ramp or landing surface. /41 3.8.3.6. Doorways and Doors 1) Except where stated otherwise, this Article applies to swinging and sliding doors. 2) Every doorway that is located in a barrier -free path of travel shall have a clear width not less than E 850 mm when E D the door is in the open position. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(2), NBC) 3) Doorways in a path of travel to and into at least one bathroom within a suite of care or residential occupancy shall have a clear width of not less than E 850 mm E D when the door is in the open position. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(3), NBC) 4) Door -operating devices shall a) comply with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b), and b) be operable at a height between 900 mm and 1100 mm above the floor. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(4), NBC) 5) A threshold for a doorway referred to in Sentences (2) or (3) shall be not more than 13 mm higher than the finished floor surface and shall be bevelled to facilitate the passage of wheelchairs. 6) Where power door operators are installed, they shall a) activate automatically or through the use of controls that i) are located in a barrier -free path of travel, ii) are marked with the International Symbol of Access, iii) are located clear of the door swing and no more than 1500 mm from the door swing, iv) comply with Subclause 3.8.3.8.(1)(a)(iii), v) are operable from a height between 150 mm and 300 mm as well as between 900 mm and 1100 mm above the floor, and vi) are operable by touching or approaching any part of their surface with a fist, arm or foot, and b) unless equipped with safety sensors, i) fully open the door in not less than 3 s, ii) require a force not more than 65 N to stop movement of the door, and iii) E remain open for a minimum of 10 s. E D (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(6) and (7), NBC) / 42 7) A cane -detectable guard shall be installed on the hinged side of power - assisted doors that swing open into the path of travel. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(6) and (7), NBC) 8) Except as provided in Sentence (9) and except for a door with a power door operator complying with Sentence (6), when unlatched, a door in a barrier - free path of travel shall open when the force applied to the handle, push plate or latch -releasing device is not more than a) 38 N in the case of an exterior swinging door, b) 22 N in the case of an interior swinging door, or c) 22 N in the case of a sliding door. 9) Sentence (8) does not apply to a door at the entrance to a dwelling unit, or where greater forces are required in order to close and latch the door against the prevailing difference in air pressure on opposite sides of the door. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(9), NBC) 10) Except for a door at the entrance to a dwelling unit, a closer for an interior door in a barrier -free path of travel shall have a closing period of not less than 3 s measured from when the door is in an open position of 70° to the doorway, to when the door reaches a point 75 mm from the closed position, measured from the leading edge of the latch side of the door. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(10), NBC) 11) Unless equipped with a power door operator complying with Sentence (6), a swinging door in a barrier -free path of travel shall have a clear space on the latch side extending the height of the doorway and not less than a) 600 mm beyond the edge of the door opening if the door swings toward the approach side, and b) 300 mm beyond the edge of the door opening if the door swings away from the approach side. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(11), NBC) 12) A vestibule located in a barrier -free path of travel shall be arranged to allow the movement of wheelchairs between doors and shall provide a distance between 2 doors in series of not less than E 1350 mm plus E D the width of any door that swings into the space in the path of travel from one door to another. 13) Only the active leaf in a multiple -leaf door in a barrier -free path of travel need conform to the requirements of this Article. / 43 14) Except as provided in Clause 3.8.3.5.(1)(c) and Sentence (16), the clear floor space on the pull side of a swinging door in a barrier -free path of travel shall be level within a rectangular area of not less E than 1700 mm by 1500 mm E D measured from the hinged side of the door. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(14), NBC) 15) Except as provided in Clause 3.8.3.5.(1)(c) and Sentence (16), the clear floor space on the push side of a swinging door and on each side of a sliding door in a barrier -free path of travel shall be level within a rectangular area a) whose dimension parallel to the closed door is not less than 1200 mm, and b) whose dimension perpendicular to the closed door is not less than 1500 mm. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(14) to (16), NBC) 16) Where a door referred to in Sentences (14) and (15) is equipped with a power door operator complying with Sentence (6), the width of the clear floor space parallel to the closed door is permitted to be reduced to not less than 1000 mm. (See Note A-3.8.3.6.(14) to (16), NBC) 17) Where a power door operator is required, at least one leaf in each set of doors in the barrier -free path of travel through a vestibule shall meet the requirements. (See Note A-3.4.6.11.(4), NBC) 18) E Except for Group B, Division 1 occupancies, glass or transparent doors or doors with vision glass complying with Article 3.3.1.20. Shall be used in barrier -free entrances required by Sentence 3.8.2.2.(1). E D 3.8.3.7. Passenger -Elevating Devices 1) A passenger -elevating device referred to in Article 3.8.2.3. located in a barrier -free path of travel shall a) shall conform to CSA B355, "Platform lifts and stair lifts for barrier - free access", b) E have a clear floor space not less than 1500 mm long by 1000 mm wide, and c} have entry doors or gates i proving a clear with not less than 850 mm in the open position if located on the short side of the passenger -elevating device, or i) providing a clear width not less than 1000 mm in the open position if located at either end of the long side of the passenger -elevating device. E D / 44 3.8.3.8. Controls 1) Controls described in this Section shall a) where located in a storey where a barrier -free path of travel is required and unless otherwise stated, i) be in or adjacent to the barrier -free path of travel, ii) be mounted 400 mm to 1200 mm above the floor, and iii) be adjacent to and centred on either the length or the width of a clear space of 1350 mm by 800 mm, b) be operable i) with one hand in a closed fist position, without requiring tight grasping, pinching with fingers or twisting of the wrist, and ii) unless otherwise stated, with a force not more than 22 N and c) E where controls provide a feedback signal to the user, it shall be both audible and visible. E D (See Note A -3.8.3.8.(1)(c), NBC) 3.8.3.9. Accessible Signs 1) E Visual information signs required by Subsections 3.4.5. and 3.4.6. and Article 3.8.2.10. shall comply with Clauses 4.5.2, 4.5.3 and 4.5.4 of CSA B651, "Accessible design for the built environment." E D (See Note A-3.8.3.9.(1) and (2), NBC) } E Except as provided in Sentence (4), tactile information signs required by Subsections 3.4.5. and 3.4.6. and Article 3.8.2.10. shall a) have Braille and tactile characters in accordance with Clauses 4.5.6.2 and 4.5.6.3 of CSA B651, "Accessible design for the built environment," b) be installed on the wall closest to the latch side of the door or on the nearest wall on the right side of the door, where there is no wall at the latch side, and c) be centred 1500 mm above the finished floor with the edge of the sign located not more than 300 mm from the door. (See Note A-3.8.3.9.(3), NBC) 3) Signs required by Article 3.8.2.10. shall incorporate the International Symbol of Access or the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss and appropriate graphical or textual information that clearly indicates the type of facilities available. / 45 4) The floor plan diagram required by Sentence 3.8.2.10.(5) shall a) be installed between 900 mm and 1100 mm above the finish floor measured to the highest point of the diagram, b) have a clear floor space of 800 mm by 1350 mm in front of the floor plan diagram, c) be installed near the elevators or in a central location where elevators are not installed, d) incorporate appropriate tactile, graphical or textual information indicating the location of all provided facilities, and e) be colour contrasted with the background. E D 3.8.3.10. Drinking Fountains 1) Drinking fountains required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(10) shall be equipped with controls that a) activate automatically, or b) comply with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b) and are located on the front or on both sides of the fountain. 2) Where drinking fountains referred to in Sentence (1) are located in a storey where a barrier -free path of travel is required, they shall a) be located along the barrier -free path of travel, b) have a minimum clear floor space of 800 mm by 1350 mm in front of them, c) where they have frontal access, provide a knee clearance in accordance with Clause 3.8.3.16.(1)(e), and d) have a spout that i) is located near the front of the unit, at a height between 750 mm and 915 mm above the floor, and ii) directs water flow in a trajectory that is nearly parallel to the front of the unit, at a height not less than 100 mm. (See Sentences 3.3.1.8.(2) and (3), NBC, on horizontal projections.) / 46 3.8.3.11. E ater-Bottle Filling Stations 1) Water -bottle filling stations required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(11) shall be equipped with controls that a) activate automatically, or b) comply with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b). 2) Water -bottle filling stations required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(11) that are located in a storey where a barrier -free path of travel is required shall a) be located along the barrier -free path of travel, b) have a clear floor space of 800 mm by 1350 mm in front of them (See Note A -3.8.3.11.(2)(b) and (d), NBC), c) where they have frontal access, provide a knee clearance in accordance with Clause 3.8.3.16.(1)(e), and d) be operable at a height of not more than 1200 mm above the floor. (See Note A -3.8.3.11.(2)(b) and (d), NBC) E D (See Sentences 3.3.1.8.(2) and (3), NBC, on horizontal projections) 3.8.3.12. Accessible Water Closet Stalls 1) Water closet stalls and enclosures required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(5) shall a) be not less than 1500 mm wide by 1500 mm deep, b) have a clear lateral transfer space adjacent to the water closet that i) is at least 1500 mm long, measured from the wall behind the water closet, and ii) is at least 900 mm wide, measured from the closest edge of the water closet seat, (See Note A -3.8.3.12.(1)(b), NBC) c) have a clear floor space of E 1700 mm by 1700 mm E D in front of the accessible stall, d) be equipped with a door that i) can be latched from the inside with a mechanism located 900 mm to 1100 mm above the floor that conforms to Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b), is aligned with either the transfer space adjacent to the water closet or with a clear floor space not less than E 1700 mm by 1700 mm E D within the stall, / 47 iii) provides a clear opening not less than 850 mm wide when it is open, iv) is self -closing so that, when at rest, the door is ajar by not more than 50 mm beyond the jamb, v) swings outward, unless there is sufficient floor space within the stall for the door to swing inward in addition to a clear floor space of at least 800 mm by 1350 mm, (See Note A-3.8.3.12.(1)(d)(v), NBC) vi) where the door swings outward, is provided with a horizontal, D -shaped, visually contrasting door pull not less than 140 mm long, located on the inside such that its midpoint is 200 mm to 300 mm from the hinged side of the door and 800 mm to 1000 mm above the floor, and (See Note A-3.8.3.12.(1)(d)(vi), NBC) vii) is provided with a horizontal, D -shaped, visually contrasting door pull not less than 140 mm long located on the outside such that its midpoint is 120 mm to 220 mm from the latch side and 800 mm to 1000 mm above the floor, e) have a water closet located so that the distance between the centre line of the fixture and the wall on one side is 460 mm to 480 mm, f) be equipped with an L-shaped grab bar that i) is mounted on the side wall closest to the water closet, ii) has horizontal and vertical components not less than 760 mm long mounted with the horizontal component 750 mm to 850 mm above the floor and the vertical component 150 mm in front of the water closet, and (See Note A-3.8.3.11.(1)(f)(ii), NBC) iii) complies with Article 3.7.2.7., be equipped with either one grab bar at least 600 mm long centred over the water closet, or 2 grab bars at least 300 mm long and located either side of the flush valve that, i) conform to Article 3.7.2.7., ii) are mounted on the rear wall, and iii) are mounted at the same height as the grab bar on the side wall or 100 mm above the top of the attached water tank, if applicable, g) / 48 3.8.3.13. h) be equipped with a coat hook mounted not more than 1200 mm above the floor on a side wall and projecting not more than 50 mm from the wall, and i) be equipped with a toilet paper dispenser mounted on the side wall closest to the water closet such that, i) the bottom of the dispenser is 600 mm to 800 mm above the floor, and the closest edge of the dispenser is 300 mm from the front of the water closet. ) Universal Washrooms (See Note A-3.8.3.13., NBC) 1) A universal washroom shall a) be served by a barrier -free path of travel, b) have a door complying with Article 3.8.3.6. that i) has a latch -operating mechanism located 900 mm to 1100 mm above the floor that complies with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b) and is capable of being locked from the inside and released from the outside in case of emergency, and ii) if it is an outward swinging door that is not self -closing, has a door pull not less than 140 mm long located on the inside so that its midpoint is not less than 200 mm and not more than 300 mm from the hinged side of the door and not less than 900 mm and not more than 1100 mm above the floor, and (See Note A-3.8.3.12.(1)(d)(vi), NBC) c) have one lavatory conforming to Article 3.8.3.16., d) have one water closet conforming to Article 3.8.3.14. and Clause 3.8.3.12.(1)(e), e) have a clear lateral transfer space adjacent to the water closet that conforms to Clause 3.8.3.12.(1)(b), f) have grab bars conforming to Clauses 3.8.3.12.(1)(f) and (g), g) have a coat hook conforming to Clause 3.8.3.12.(1)(h), h) have a toilet paper dispenser conforming to Clause 3.8.3.12.(1)(i), i) unless a counter is provided, have a shelf located not more than 1200 mm above the floor, and be designed to permit a wheelchair to turn in an open space not less than 1700 mm in diameter. .) / 49 E A universal washroom required to have an accessible changing space as stipulated in Sentence 3.8.2.8.(15) shall a) be equipped with an adult -sized change table, b) have a clear floor space to accommodate the adult -sized change table that is 810 mm wide by 1830 mm long and does not overlap with the clear spaces required by Clauses (1)(e), (1)(j) and (c), and c) have a clear transfer space of 900 mm by 1350 mm adjacent to the long side of the clear floor space for the adult -sized change table. E D 3.8.3.14. Water Closets (See Note NS -3.8.3.14., NSBCR) 1) A water closet for a person with physical disabilities shall a) be equipped with a seat located 430 mm to 460 mm above the floor, b) flush automatically or be equipped with a flushing control that i) is located 500 mm to 900 mm above the floor, ii) is located no more than 350 mm from the transfer side, and iii) complies with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b), c) be equipped with a seat lid or other back support, and d) where it has a tank, have a securely attached tank top. (See Note A-3.8.3.14.(1), NBC) 3.8.3.15. E ater Closet Stalls and Urinals for Persons with Limited obility (See Note NS -3.8.3.14. NSBCR) 1) Water closet stalls for persons with limited mobility required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(7) shall a) be at least 1500 mm deep and 890 to 940 mm wide, b) be equipped with a door that has a latch -operating mechanism conforming to Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b) that can be locked from the inside and released from the outside in the event of an emergency, provides a clear opening not less than 850 mm wide when it is open, iii) swings outward, unless the minimum dimensions required by Clause (a) do not overlap with the area of the door swing, / 50 iv) is self -closing so that, when at rest, the door is ajar by not more than 50 mm beyond the jamb, and v) has a door pull on both sides of the door, near the latch side, located 900 mm to 1100 mm above the finish floor, c) have on water closet conforming to Article 3.8.3.14. centred within the stall, d) have a horizontal grab bar conforming to Article 3.7.2.7. on each side of the water closet that i) is located 750 mm to 850 mm above the floor, ii) begins not more than 300 mm from the wall behind the water closet, and iii) extends at least 450 mm in front of the toilet seat, and e) be equipped with a coat hook mounted not more than 1200 mm above the floor on a side wall and projecting not more than 50 mm from the wall E D. 2) Urinals described in Sentence 3.8.2.8.(6) shall a) be wall -mounted, with the opening of the basin located not more than 430 mm above the floor, b) be adjacent to an accessible route, c) have a clear width of approach of 800 mm wide by E 1350 mm long E D centred on the urinal and unobstructed by privacy screens, d) have no step in front of it, e) have a flush valve that i) is automatic, or ii) complies with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b) and is located 900 mm to 1100 mm above the floor, and f) have a vertically mounted grab bar installed on each side that i) complies with Article 3.7.2.7., ii) is not less than 600 mm long, with its centre line 1000 mm above the floor, and iii) is located not more than 380 mm from the centre line of the urinal. /51 3.8.3.16. Lavatories and Mirrors 1) Lavatories required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(8) shall a) be equipped with faucets complying with Sentence 3.7.2.3.(4), b) be located so that the distance between the centre line of the lavatory and any side wall is not less than 460 mm, c) have a clear floor space in front of the lavatory that is at least i) 800 mm wide, centred on the lavatory, and ii) 1350 mm long, of which no more than 430 mm is beneath the lavatory, d) have a rim height not more than 865 mm above the floor, e) have a clearance beneath the lavatory not less than i) 800 mm wide, ii) 735 mm high at the front edge iii) 685 mm high at a point 200 mm back from the front edge, and iv) 230 mm high over the distance from a point 280 mm to a point 430 mm back from the front edge, (See Note A -3.8.3.16.(1)(e), NBC) f) have insulated water supply and drain pipes where these pipes are exposed, (See Note A -3.8.3.16.(1)(f), NBC) g) have a soap dispenser that i) is automatic, or ii) complies with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b) and is located not more than 1100 mm above the floor within 500 mm from the front of the lavatory, and (See Note A -3.8.3.16.(1)(g), NBC) h) have a towel dispenser or other hand -drying equipment located close to the lavatory, not more than 1200 mm above the floor in an area that is accessible to persons in wheelchairs. 2) Mirrors required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(9) shall be a) mounted with their bottom edge not more than 1100 mm above the floor, or b) fixed in an inclined position so as to be usable by a person in a wheelchair. / 52 3.8.3.17. Showers 1) Showers required by Subsection 3.8.2. to be barrier -free shall a) be not less than 1500 mm wide and 900 mm deep, b) have a clear floor space at the entrance to the shower that is not less than 900 mm deep and the same width as the shower, except that fixtures are permitted to project into that space provided they do not restrict access to the shower, (See Note A -3.8.3.17.(1)(b), NBC) c) have no doors or curtains that obstruct the controls or clear floor space at the entrance to the shower, d) have a slip -resistant floor surface, e) have a threshold not more than 13 mm higher than the finished floor, and where it is higher than 6 mm, bevelled to a slope no steeper than 1 in 2 (50%), f) have 2 grab bars that i) conform to Sentence 3.7.2.7.(1), ii) one of which is not less than 1000 mm long and located vertically on the side wall 50 mm to 80 mm from the adjacent clear floor space, with its lower end 600 mm to 650 mm above the floor, and iii) one of which is L-shaped and located on the wall opposite the entrance to the shower, with a horizontal member not less than 1000 mm long mounted 750 mm to 870 mm above the floor and a vertical member not less than 750 mm long mounted 400 mm to 500 mm from the side wall on which the other vertical grab bar is mounted, (See Note A -3.8.3.17.(1)(f), NBC) g) have a hinged seat that is not spring loaded, or a fixed seat with a smooth slip -resistant surface and no rough edges, the seat being i) not less than 450 mm wide and 400 mm deep, ii) mounted on the same side wall as the vertical grab bar, at 460 mm to 480 mm above the floor, and iii) designed to carry a minimum load of 1.3 kN, / 53 h) have a pressure -equalizing or thermostatic -mixing valve that i) complies with Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b), ii) are mounted on the wall opposite the entrance to the shower at not more than 1200 mm above the floor and within reach of the seat, i) have a hand-held shower head with not less than 1800 mm of flexible hose located so that it i) can be reached from the seated position, ii) can be used in a fixed position at a height of 1200 mm and 2030 mm, and iii) does not obstruct the use of the grab bars, and have recessed soap holders that can be reached from a seated position. 2} E A universal dressing and shower room required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(13) shall a) be located in a barrier -free path of travel, b) have a door capable of being locked from the inside and released from the outside in the event of an emergency. c) have a lavatory and a mirror conforming to Article 3.8.3.16., d) have a shower conforming to Sentence (1), e) have a bench that is at least 1830 mm long by 760 mm wide and 480 mm to 520 mm high, f) have a clear transfer space adjacent to the long side of the bench that is 900 mm wide and as long as the bench (See Note A -3.8.3.17.(2)(f), NBC), and g) have a coat hook conforming to Clause 3.8.3.12.(1)(h). E D 3) If individual shower stalls are provided for use by residents and patients in buildings of Group B, Division 2, 3 or 4, care, treatment or home -type care occupancies, they shall conform to the requirements of Sentence (1) except where a) common showers are provided in conformance with Sentence (1), or b) common bath tubs equipped with hoist mechanisms to accommodate residents and patients are available. i) / 54 3.8.3.18. Accessible Bathtubs 1) Bathtubs required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(14) shall a) be located in a room with a clear floor space not less than E 1700 mm E D in diameter, b) be not less than 1500 mm long, c) have a clear floor space not less E than 900 mm E D wide adjacent to its entire length, d) be capable of being accessed along its full length with no tracks mounted on its rim, e) have faucets or other controls that i) conform to Clause 3.8.3.8.(1)(b), and ii) are located on the centre line or between the centre line of the bathtub and the exterior edge of the bathtub rim, at a maximum height of 450 mm above the rim, f) have 3 grab bars i) that conform to Sentence 3.7.2.7.(1), ii) that are not less than 1200 mm long, iii) 2 of which are located vertically at each end of the bathtub, set 80 mm to 120 mm in from the outside edge of the bathtub, with their lower end 180 mm to 280 mm above the bathtub rim, and iv) one of which is located horizontally along the length of the bathtub at 180 mm to 280 mm above the bathtub rim, have a slip -resistant bottom surface, and g) h) be equipped with a hand-held shower head with not less than 1800 mm of flexible hose that can be used in a fixed position at a height of 1200 mm to 2030 mm. 3.8.3.19. Assistive Listening Devices (See Note A-3.8.3.19, NBC) 1) Assistive listening systems required by Sentence 3.8.2.9.(1) shall encompass the entire seating E area. E D 2) E Assistive listening systems or adaptive technologies required by Sentence 3.8.2.9.(2) shall provide for the clear communication required for the exchange of information, goods or services. E D / 55 3.8.3.20. Counters 1) A section of a service counter required to be barrier -free in accordance with Sentence 3.8.2.11.(1) shall a) be not less E than 800 m E D long centred over a knee space conforming to Clause (c), b) a surface not more than 865 mm above the floor, and c) where forward -facing interaction with a person or a device is required, have a knee space underneath it that is (See Note A-3.8.3.20.(1) (c), NBC) i) not less E than 800 mm E D wide, ii) not less than 685 mm high, and iii) not less than 485 mm deep. 2) A counter that is used in a cafeteria, grocery store checkout or one that performs a similar function whereat movement takes place parallel to the counter, need not provide a knee space underneath it. 3.8.3.21. Telephones and TTY/TTD Telephone Services 1) A telephone required to be barrier -free in accordance with Article 3.8.2.12. shall a) be adjacent to and centred on either the length or the width of a clear floor space not less than 1350 mm by 800 mm, b) where a forward approach is provided, have a knee space underneath it conforming to Clause 3.8.3.20.(1)(c), and c) be located so that its receiver and operable parts are not more than 1200 mm above the floor. 2) Where provided, shelves or counters for public telephones shall a) be level, b) be not less than 305 mm deep, c) have, for each telephone provided, a clear floor space not less than 250 mm wide having no obstruction within 250 mm above the surface, and d) have a section with a surface not more than 865 mm above the floor serving at least one telephone. (See Note A-3.8.3.21.(2), NBC) / 56 3) Where public telephones are provided, at least one telephone shall be provided with a variable volume control on the receiver. 4) At least one built-in teletypewriter telephone (TTY/TTD) shall be provided and located in a publicly accessible location for all of the following: a) where 4 or more public access telephones are provided, including interior and exterior locations, b) where the building area exceeds 600 m2, in a Group A, Group B, Group D or Group E occupancy when telephones are provided, c) in a hotel or motel that i) exceeds 600 m2 in building area, or ii) is required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(2) to provide a barrier -free suite, or d) in camping accommodation required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(4) to provide barrier -free suites, unless a portable unit is available for use. (See Note NS -3.8.3.21.(4)(d), NSBCR) 5) Where public telephones are provided, at least one electrical receptacle shall be provided within 500 mm of one of the public telephones. 3.8.3.22. Spaces in Seating Area 1) E Spaces designated for wheelchair use in assembly occupancies as required by Sentence 3.8.2.3.(3) shall conform to the following: a) at least one designated space shall be clear and level for each increment of 200 seats and the remaining designated spaces shall be level and have removable seats, b) they shall be not less than 900 mm wide and 1700 mm long to permit a wheelchair to enter from a side approach and 1350 mm long where the wheelchair enters from the front or rear of the space, c they shall be arranged so that i) at least 2 designated spaces are side by side, and ii) at least one fixed seat is located beside each designated space, d) they shall be located adjoining a barrier -free path of travel without infringing on egress from any row of seating or any aisle requirements, and e) they shall be situated, as part of the designated seating plan, to provide a choice of viewing location on every level with a barrier -free path of travel and a clear view of the event taking place. (See Note A-3.8.2.3.(5) and (6) and 3.8.3.22.(1) and (4), NBC) / 57 2) Spaces designated for wheelchair use in waiting rooms or areas as required by Sentence 3.8.2.3.(4) shall a) be clear and level and b) comply with Clauses (1)(b) and (d). 3) Adaptable seats required by Sentence 3.8.2.3.(5) shall a) be located adjoining an aisle without infringing on egress from any row of seating or any aisle requirements, b) be equipped with a movable or removable armrest on the side of the seat adjoining the aisle, and c) be situated, as part of a the designated seating plan, to provide a choice of viewing location on every level with a barrier -free path of travel and a clear view of the event taking place. 4) Storage spaces for mobility aids shall be provided in a location a) that is on the same level as and in proximity to the adaptable seats required by Sentence 3.8.2.3.(5), b) that is within the room side of the fire separation required by Article 3.3.2.2., and c) where they will no infringe on egress. END (See Notes A-3.8.3.22.(4) and A-3.8.2.3.(5) and (6) and 3.8.3.22.(1) and (4), NBC) 3.8.3.23. NEW Emergency Equipment and Laboratory Sinks 1) Eye wash stations required by Sentence 3.8.2.13.(1) to be barrier -free shall a) be located along the barrier -free path of travel, b) have a minimum clear floor space of 800 mm wide by 1350 mm long in front of them, c) provide a knee clearance as described in Clause 3.8.3.16.(1)(e), d) be equipped with controls that comply with Sentence 3.8.3.8.(1), e) have the spray heads located at a height between 750 mm and 915 mm above the floor. 2) Emergency showers required by Sentence 3.8.2.13.(1) to be barrier - free shall a) be located along the barrier -free path of travel, b) have a minimum clear floor space of 800 mm by 1350 mm centred under the shower, and c) be equipped with controls that comply with Sentence 3.8.3.8.(1). / 58 3) Laboratory sinks and counters in classrooms required by Sentence 3.8.2.8.(16) to be barrier -free shall be installed as follows: a) a minimum of 1200 mm clearance between counters and all opposing base cabinets, counter tops or walls, b) the sink shall i) be mounted with the rim between 810 and 860 mm above the floor, ii) have a knee space at least 800 mm wide and 200 mm deep, and a toe space 800 mm wide, 230 mm deep and 230 mm high, iii) have a clear floor space 800 mm wide by 1350 mm long, of which 480 mm may extend under the work surface, iv) have faucets that are equipped with lever handles or automatically activate, and v) have insulated hot water and drain pipes that do not abut the required clear space, c) base cabinets shall have a toe space at least 150 mm deep and 230 mm high, and d) any work surface provided next to the laboratory sink shall i} be a minimum of 800 mm wide by 600 mm deep, be between 730 mm and 860 mm above the finish floor, iii) have a clear floor space of at least 800 mm wide by 1350 mm long centred on the work surface, of which 480 mm may extend under the counter or work surface, iv) have a knee space a minimum of 800 mm wide, 480 mm deep and 685 mm high, and v) if electrical receptacles are provided, have on located on the front or side of the work surface. 3.8.3.24. Kitchens and Break Rooms 1) Kitchens and break rooms referred to in Sentence 3.8.2.14.(1) shall have the following: a) one section of the counter shall comply with Sentence 3.8.3.20.(1) or be adjustable between a height of 735 mm and 915 mm, b) have an electrical receptable located at the front or side of the counter referred to in Clause (a), / 59 c) where a sink is provided, the trap arm shall be installed no higher than 305 mm to the centre line of the pipe measured from the finished floor, and d) a clear floor space of 800 mm by 1350 mm centred in front of each sink, ii range, iii) cooktop, iv) refrigerator, v) dishwasher, and vii) other major appliance. E D 3.8.3.25. Sleeping Units in Roofed Accommodations 1) Where sleeping unit suites conforming to this Article are required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(2), they shall have a) sufficient space to provide a turning area of not less than E 1700 mm E D diameter on one side of the bed, b) sufficient space to provide clearance of not less than E 1000 mm E D to allow for functional use of units by persons in wheelchairs, c) an accessible balcony, where balconies are provided, d) at least one closet that provides i) a minimum clear opening of 900 mm, ii) clothes hanger rods located at a height of no more than 1200 mm from finish floor, and iii) at least one shelf located at a height between E 400 mm and 1200 mm E D above finish floor, e) light switches, thermostats and other controls that are specifically provided for use by the occupant mounted not more than 1200 mm above the floor, f) electrical receptacles located between 400 mm and 550 mm above the finished floor, a GFI outlet located not more than 1200 mm above the floor, g) / 60 h) an accessible bathroom that shall be designed to provide manoeuvring space up to each type of fixture required to be used by persons in a wheelchair conforming to the following: i) a floor space of not less than 3.7 m2 with no dimension less than 1700 mm when the door swings out and 4.0 m2 with no dimension less than 1800 mm when the door swings in, the clear floor spaces required for the fixtures in Subclauses (v), (vi) and (vii) are permitted to overlap, iii) grab bars conforming to Clauses 3.8.3.12.(1)(f) and (g), iv) a coat hook conforming to Clause 3.8.3.12.(1)(h), v) a water closet conforming to Article 3.8.3.14., vi) at least one lavatory and mirror conforming to Article 3.8.3.16., and vii) a shower conforming to Article 3.8.3.17. or a bathtub conforming to Article 3.8.3.18. (See Sentence 3.8.2.1.(3) for determination of minimum number of suites required to have barrier -free showers) E have a towel bar or rack located not more than 1200 mm above finish floor, located close to the lavatory, and E D an entrance door to the suite that i) has a lock that is operable with one hand, ii) E complies with the requirements of Article 3.8.3.6. and, iii) has door viewers installed at a height between 1050 mm and 1150 mm above finished floor and between 1450 mm and 1550 mm above finished floor. E D 3.8.3.26. Suites of Care and Residential Occupancies to be Barrier -free General 1) Where a suite of care or residential occupancy is required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(7) to provide barrier -free access, it shall be served by a) a entrance door to the suite that complies with Article 3.8.3.6., b) a barrier -free path of travel to, into, and throughout each required suite in accordance with subsection 3.8.3., c) an accessible balcony, if required, in accordance with Clause 3.3.1.7.(1)(c), and /61 d) barrier -free controls for the operation of building services or safety devices, including electrical switches, thermostats and intercom switches, that are accessible to a person in a wheelchair, operable with one hand and mounted not more than 1200 mm above the floor and electrical receptacles that are located between 400 mm and 550 mm above the finished floor, except as required by Clause (3)(f) and Subclause (4)(c)(v). Sleeping Area 2) Where a suite of residential occupancy is required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(7) to provide barrier -free access, it shall contain at least one sleeping area with a) a minimum floor space of 12.25 m2, b) at least one horizontal room dimension not less than 3.35 m, and c) at least one closet that provides i) a minimum clear opening of 900 mm, ii) clothes hanger rods located at a height no more than 1200 mm, and iii) at least one shelf located at a height between E 400 mm and 1200 mm E D above finish floor. Bathroom 3) Where a suite of care or residential occupancy is required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(7) to provide barrier -free access, a minimum of one accessible bathroom shall be provided with a) a floor space of not less than 3.7 m2 with no dimension less than 1700 mm when the door swings out and 4.0 m2 with no dimension less than 1800 mm when the door swings in, b) a water closet conforming to Article 3.8.3.14. And Clause 3.8.3.12.(1) (b) and (c), c) a lavatory conforming to Article 3.8.3.16., d) E at least one shower conforming to Article 3.8.3.17., E D e) f) 9) where a bathtub is provided, a bathtub conforming to Article 3.8.3.18., a GFI razor outlet located not more than 1200 mm above the floor, and grab bars conforming to Clauses 3.8.3.12.(1)(f) and (g). / 62 Kitchen 4) Where a suite of care or residential occupancy is required by Sentence 3.8.2.1.(7) to provide barrier -free access the kitchen shall have a) a minimum 1200 mm clearance between counters and all opposing base cabinets, counter tops, appliances, or walls except in a U-shaped kitchen the minimum distance shall be 1500 mm, b) a minimum clear floor space of E 800 mm by 1350 m E D at each i) range, ii) cooktop, iii) oven, iv) refrigerator or freezer, v) dishwasher, and vi) other major appliance, c) a minimum of one work surface that i) is 800 mm wide by 600 mm deep, ii) is 730 mm to 860 mm above the floor, iii) has a clear floor space of 800 mm by 1350 mm, which may extend 480 mm under the work surface, iv) has a knee space a minimum of 800 mm wide, 480 mm deep and 685 mm high, and v) has a minimum of one electrical receptacle located at the front or side of the work surface, d) base cabinets with a minimum toe space 150 mm deep and 230 mm high, e) sinks i) mounted with the rim between 810 mm and 860 mm above the floor, with a knee space a minimum of 800 mm wide and 250 mm deep, and a toe space 800 mm wide, 230 mm deep and 230 mm high, iii) with a clear floor space 800 mm by 1350 mm, which may extend 480 mm under the work surface, ) / 63 3.8.4.2. 3.8.4.3. f) g) iv) with faucets equipped with lever handles or activate automatically, and v) with insulated hot water and drain pipes that do not abut the required clear space, where upper cabinets are provided, an upper cabinet with a minimum of one shelf not more E than 1100 mm above E D the finished floor, storage cabinet doors and drawers i) with handles that are easily graspable, and ii) mounted at the top of base cabinets and bottom of upper cabinets, h) all controls in compliance with Clause (1)(d), except as required by Subclause (4)(c)(v). Entrance Doors to Dwelling Units 1) All dwelling units shall have at least one entrance door having a clear width not less than 850 mm wide equipped with door opening hardware conforming to Sentence 3.8.4.6.(2). 2) Except as provided in Sentence (3), the entrance door in Sentence (1) shall have a threshold that complies with Sentence 3.8.3.6.(5). 3) The entrance door to a building described in Clause 3.8.2.1.(1)(a) shall be easily accessed and be capable of being made barrier -free from a sidewalk or parking area. Interior Doors and Corridors in Dwelling Units 1) Doors or passageways within dwelling units to habitable rooms and service rooms shall have E a clear width not less than 850 mm wide E D and equipped with door opening hardware conforming to Sentence 3.8.4.6.(2). (See Note NS -3.8.4.3., NSBCR) 2) Where a door is installed between an attached garage and a dwelling unit, the door shall conform to Article 3.8.4.2. 3) Corridors within dwelling units shall have a clear width of not less than 900 mm. / 64 3.8.4.4. 3.8.4.5. Kitchens in Dwelling Units 1) Kitchen sinks in dwelling units shall be equipped with lever -type faucets or hardware conforming to Sentence 3.8.4.6.(2). 2) All trap arms running from P -traps under the kitchen sink shall be installed no higher than 305 mm to the centre line of the pipe measured from the finished floor. 3) An electrical rough -in shall be located below the counter top to allow for the installation of an electrical receptacle conforming to Subclause 3.8.3.24.(4)(c)(v). 4) Duplex electrical receptacles located over a kitchen counter are not required to comply with this Subsection. Bathrooms in Dwelling Units 1) All lavatories in dwelling units shall be equipped with lever -type faucets or hardware conforming to Sentence 3.8.4.6.(2). 2) Wall assemblies that enclose a bathroom in a dwelling unit shall include reinforcement to accommodate the future installation of grab bars described in a) Clauses 3.8.3.12.(1)(f) and (g), for a water closet, b) Clause 3.8.3.18.(1)(f), for a bathtub, c) Clause 3.8.3.17.(1)(f), for a shower. (See Note NS -3.8.4.5., NSBCR) 3) E In buildings that contain more than three suites of residential occupancy and are more than 3 storeys in building height, all floors that have a barrier -free path of travel shall conform to Sentences (4) to (8). 4) There shall be at least one bathroom located on the main entry level of each suite. 5) The bathroom described in Sentence (4) shall be equipped with a minimum of a) one water closet i) that complies with Clauses 3.8.3.14.(1)(a) to (d), and ii) is located so that the distance between the centre line of the fixture and any wall or other fixture is not less than 460 mm, and b) one lavatory that complies with Clauses 3.8.3.16.(1)(a) and (b). 6) A clear floor space, exclusive of door swing, of not less than 800 mm by 1350 mm is required to be provided. /65 7) A clear floor space in front of the lavatory of not less than 800 mm by 1350 mm, centred on the lavatory. 8) The clear floor spaces required in Sentences (6) and (7) are permitted to overlap. END 3.8.4.6. Duplex Receptacles, Switches and Controls (See Note NS -3.8.4.6., NSBCR) 1) Operating controls in a dwelling unit include, but are not limited to, a) door handles and locks, b) faucets and adjustable shower heads, c) nonpropreitary duplex electrical receptacles, telephone, cable and data outlets and wall switches, d) controls for the operation of building services, safety devices and intercoms, and e) activation devices. 2) Except as permitted by Sentence (3), all controls in a dwelling unit shall be operable a) with one hand, using i) a closed fist position, or ii) another method of operation that does not require tight grasping, pinching or twisting of the wrist, and b) with a force of not more than 22 N. 3) A control identified in Clause (1)(a) or (b) need not meet the actual requirements in Clause (2)(a) provided that it remains possible for door hardware or a faucet, which conforms to those requirements, to be installed. 4) Except as provided in Sentence (5), the centre line height of the operating controls shall be located in a range between 400 mm and 1200 mm from the finished floor. 5) Sentence (4) does not apply where an additional or required nonproprietary duplex electrical receptacle is permitted by the electrical authority having jurisdiction to be mounted in a location other than a wall. (See Note NS -3.8.4.6.(5), NSBCR) / 66 Fire Code Amendments Measures in a Fire Safety Plan (Fire Code Amendment, 2.8.2.1) 3) The fire safety plan shall include, in addition to the information required in Articles 2.8.2.2. to 2.8.2.11., as applicable, information on: a) the emergency procedures to be carried out in case of fire, including i) sounding the fire alarm (see Note A-2.8.2.1.(3)(a)(i)), ii) notifying the fire department, iii) instructing occupants on the procedures to be followed when the fire alarm sounds iv) evacuating occupants, including special provisions for persons requiring assistance, and v) confining, controlling and extinguishing the fire, b) the appointment and organization of designated supervisory staff to carry out fire safety duties, c) the training of supervisory staff and other occupants on their responsibilities as regards fire safety, d) E the type, location and operation of the building fire emergency systems, including diagrams, E D e) the holding of fire drills, f) the measures for controlling fire hazards in and around the building, and g) the inspection and maintenance of building facilities provided for the safety of occupants. Posting of Fire Emergency Procedures (Fire Code Amendment, 2.8.2.7.) 1) At least one copy of the fire emergency procedures E for a building or part of a building E D shall be prominently posted in each floor area. 5) E The floor plan diagram identifying the emergency exits and areas of refuge required in Sentence 3.8.2.10.(5) of Schedule "C" of the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations shall be maintained in conformance with the requirements of Sentence 3.8.3.9.(4) of the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations. E D / 67 Government Actions Accessible Parking Permits Department of Public Works will continue its work to enact regulations under the Traffic Act that broaden the scope of regulated health professionals that have the authority to certify a person has a mobility disability. Temporary Traffic Control Manual The Temporary Workplace Traffic Control Manual is to be amended to require that where a section of an accessible route is affected by construction, a safe and secure alternative pedestrian route of at least 1600 mm in width is provided through or around the temporary work area. Outdoor Spaces Education Program Government of Nova Scotia is to explore options to develop and implement an outdoor spaces accessibility educational program with possible financial incentives to support the inclusion of accessible amenities in outdoor spaces. Heritage Building Accessibility Government of Nova Scotia is to explore best practices for adapting buildings with a designated heritage status. Accessible Campsites in Provincial Parks All existing frontcountry campgrounds owned and operated by Government will be required to have a minimum of 1 accessible campsite by April 1, 2028. Government of Nova Scotia will further consider the feasibility and timing of an amendment to the Nova Scotia Building Code Regulations that would require visual signaling for smoke alarms. / 68 Lunenburg County Accessibility Plan Submitted to the Accessibility Directorate: March 9, 2021 F Table of Contents Introduction 3 What We Believe 4 Glossary of Terms 5 Community Consultation 7 Areas of Focus 8 1. Goods and Services 8 2. Information and Communications 9 3. Transportation 9 4. Employment 10 5. Built Environment 10 Implementing the Plan 11 Responsibilities 11 Accessibility Advisory Committee 11 Accessibility Coordinator 11 Councils 12 CAOs/Staff 12 Timeline 12 Monitoring and Evaluating 12 Responding to Questions and Complaints 13 Reference Documents 14 Committee Members 16 2 Introduction This Accessibility Plan was developed by the Joint Accessibility Advisory Committee, a joint committee of the Municipality of the District of Chester, Municipality of the District of Lunenburg, Town of Bridgewater, Town of Lunenburg, and Town of Mahone Bay. This committee provided advice to the municipal councils in Lunenburg County on identifying, preventing, and eliminating barriers experienced by people with disabilities in municipal programs, services, initiatives and facilities, and worked with staff on the development and oversight of this plan. This document outlines the overarching goals for improving accessibility in Lunenburg County. In coordination with this Accessibility Plan, individual municipal units will be releasing local Accessibility Action Plans which will provide more details on action items, associated timelines, and budgets. These individual Accessibility Action Plans may not be available until a future date. 3 What We Believe We commit to fostering a culture of accessibility, encouraging the prevention and removal of barriers to participation, and building capacity in these areas amongst municipal staff, Council members, and the public. Several principles have guided this process and should remain as priorities as we move forward to implement this plan. • Working towards equitable access for all members of our community means that every individual has an equal opportunity, and everyone is treated fairly. Equitable access acknowledges individual circumstances to removing barriers. • It is essential to include first voice perspectives, or lived experience, of people with disabilities in the creation of this plan, actions, and decision -making processes. • As new standards are introduced and new technologies become available, we will review and update this plan to ensure its relevance. As such, this plan should be interpreted as a living document. • It is essential to continue to collaborate with other municipal units, the Accessibility Advisory Committee, the Nova Scotia Accessibility Directorate, and community partners to advance this plan and work towards improved accessibility in our communities. 4 Glossary of Terms Accessibility Act (2017) The provincial law enacted to achieve accessibility by preventing and removing barriers for people with disabilities. The law defines the role and responsibilities of the Accessibility Directorate and the Accessibility Advisory Board, and addresses standards, compliance, and enforcement. (nslegislature.ca/sites/default/files/legc/statutes/accessibility.pdf) Accessibility Advisory Committee A volunteer committee established by a municipality to advise municipal council about identifying, preventing, and eliminating barriers to people with disabilities in municipal programs, services, initiatives, and facilities. The committee plays a pivotal role in helping the municipality become a barrier -free community that complies with Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act (2017). At least one half of the members of the advisory committee must have a disability or represent an organization that represents people with disabilities. Accessibility Lens An Accessibility Lens is a tool for identifying and clarifying issues affecting persons with disabilities used by policy developers and analysts to access and address the impact of all initiatives (policies, programs or decisions) on persons with disabilities. It is also a resource in creating policies and programs reflective of the rights and needs of persons with disabilities. Barrier Something that makes it harder for some people to participate. Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act defines a barrier as "anything that hinders or challenges the full and effective participation in society of persons with disabilities, including a physical barrier, an architectural barrier, an information or communications barrier, an attitudinal barrier, a technological barrier, a policy, or a practice." Disability As defined in Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act: "a physical, mental, intellectual, learning or sensory impairment, including an episodic disability that, in interaction with a barrier, hinders an individual's full and effective participation in society." Equitable/equity A commitment to fairness. Equitable access is different from equal access. Equality means everybody is treated the same; equity means everybody is treated fairly, based on their needs and abilities. Equity recognizes and values differences, removing systemic barriers and accommodating individual differences, as needed. Government of Nova Scotia Accessibility Plan A multi -year plan setting specific priorities and commitments for achieving accessibility within the Government of Nova Scotia. The first plan was published in 2018 and covers the years 2018-2021. (novascotia.ca/accessibility/plan) 5 Meaningful In the context of our Accessibility work, the term meaningful is used to ensure the efforts being made are deemed valuable by those affected by the efforts. Plain language Clear, conversational communication that makes sense to the intended audience. The goal of plain language is to communicate so clearly that the intended audience can easily find what they need, understand what they find, and use the information (plainlanguagenetwork.org/). Prescribed Means "prescribed in the Accessibility Act General Regulations." The Accessibility Act enables the government to use the regulations to identify which organizations must comply with certain requirements. These requirements include forming an Accessibility Advisory Committee and developing an accessibility plan within one year. The use of the word "prescribed" in legislation is intended to give wide authority for regulations to be made that set down a specific rule or direction. 6 Community Consultation The Accessibility Committee undertook public consultation efforts in May and June of 2020. These efforts were hampered by COVID-19 restrictions that prohibited public gatherings and restricted resident movement. Despite these challenges, the Committee heard from more than 170 residents and organizations on the issue of accessibility through an online survey, phone calls, emails, and informational interviews. Respondent Demographics 46.53% Persons with a disability (visible or invisible) 27.08% Family member, friend, or caregiver of a person with a disability 26.39% Employed or volunteer at an organization that provides services to people with disabilities Many of which self -identified as all of the above 67.33% Women 26.67% Men 1.33% Non -binary Remainder preferred not to say 55.63% aged 55-74 28.48% aged 35-54 10.60% aged 74+ 4.64% aged 18-34 0.66% aged Under 18 33.11% Municipality of the District of Lunenburg 25.83% Bridgewater 13.25% Municipality of the District of Chester 12.58% Town of Lunenburg 10.60% Town of Mahone Bay 2.65% Village of Chester 1.99% Do not reside in Lunenburg County 7 Areas of Focus Consistent with the Government of Nova Scotia Accessibility Plan 2018-2021, we have identified commitments to improving accessibility within five areas of focus. These priority areas include (1) Goods and Services, (2) Information and Communications, (3) Transportation, (4) Employment, and (5) Built Environment. Working towards equitable access in these priority areas will help to identify, prevent, and eliminate barriers for people with disabilities to participate fully in our communities. This Accessibility Plan is a united plan based on universal standards. Each municipality has been provided with a template to develop their individual Accessibility Action Plans for each commitment. 1. Goods and Services The Commitment Residents and visitors with disabilities have equitable access to goods and services provided by our municipalities. 1.1 Services — Enhance services provided by municipal units by making municipal services and events more accessible to people with disabilities, including but not limited to accessible communication, accessible digital content and technologies, and welcoming service animals and support persons. 1.2 Service Delivery — Improve service delivery by developing and implementing ongoing awareness and training programs for municipal staff and Council to increase knowledge and understanding of accessibility, equity, human rights, disability rights, and accessibility barriers in our community, as well as developing and implementing new awareness and training opportunities as part of an orientation package for new employees. This will ensure that all municipal staff and Council are educated in and striving towards building competency in accessibility matters. 1.3 Physical Space — Upon entering a municipal building, physical spaces should be conducive to positive accessible customer service experiences. For example, provide chairs to rest in while waiting and/or sensory sensitive spaces to communicate with staff. 1.4 Programs — Deliver programming to people of all ages and abilities and commit to training all program delivery staff as per 1.2. 1.5 Events - Improve accessibility of public events planned and delivered by a municipal unit by planning events with an accessibility lens including location, event delivery, and/or participation. Planning should consider the needs of persons with disabilities including, but not limited to, having adequate accessible event parking, accessible portable toilets, and when possible, places to rest from sensory overwhelming environments. 1.6 Procurement — Apply an accessibility lens to all procurement processes, including creating common accessibility language, accessibility requirements, and factoring accessibility into the scoring process for procurement. 1.7 Internal Policy— Apply an accessibility lens to all policy, procedures, and practices. 8 1.8 Emergency Management — Emergency management plans and prioritization of critical infrastructure need to consider accessibility barriers and vulnerable populations to ensure safety of people with disabilities in contingency and evacuation plans. 2. Information and Communications The Commitment People with disabilities can equitably access information and communications provided by our municipalities. 2.1 Delivery of Communications — Improve communications about existing municipal programs, services, and events that are accessible to people with disabilities by delivering communications in a wide range of accessible formats. 2.2 Public Meetings — Ensure that all public open houses and meetings are as accessible as possible to all members of the public by offering materials in various formats, providing support to facilitate participation, and ensuring topics are discussed in plain language when possible. 2.3 Advertising/Marketing — Develop and implement a standardized symbol system for all public communications of programs and events to clearly identify what accessibility accommodations are available on site. For example, accessible entrances, scent free facility, and accessible washrooms. 2.4 Wayfinding — Improve signage and wayfinding for municipal buildings and public facilities by implementing signage and wayfinding consistent with accessibility best practice. Prioritize having signage and wayfinding where necessary, but not in excess. 3. Transportation The Commitment Residents and visitors with disabilities have equitable access to transportation provided by our municipalities. 3.1 Pedestrian Infrastructure — Improve connectivity in communities by improving pedestrian infrastructure where possible including constructing sidewalks, improving surface quality of sidewalks, and implementing appropriate curb cuts. Prioritize safety of pedestrian infrastructure by implementing audible signals, tactile walking surface indicators at crossings, appropriate lighting, and benches to rest where possible. Municipalities will comply with the Accessibility Act's Built Environment Standard (when implemented). 3.2 Snow Removal — Prioritize snow clearance at transit stops, public buildings, and in municipally managed parking areas. 3.3 Parking — Ensure all municipal parking areas and municipally managed parking areas have accessible parking spaces and appropriate drop-off locations for larger vehicles. Accessible parking shall meet the Accessibility Act's Built Environment Standard (when implemented). 9 3.4 Transit Connectivity — Where possible, support improving transit connectivity by expanding public transportation systems. 3.5 Transit Infrastructure — Improve existing transit infrastructure and ensure transit vehicles, transit stops, and signage are accessible to people with disabilities. 4. Employment The Commitment Our municipalities are accessible and equitable employers and support the careers of employees with disabilities. We will seek to attract and retain a skilled workforce that reflects the diverse residents of the municipalities. 4.1 Job Opportunities —Improve opportunities for people with disabilities to gain employment at the municipality by ensuring job postings clearly state they are open to people with disabilities, accommodations may be available in the workplace, and/or advertise job postings across different platforms. 4.2 Hiring — Improve processes, policies, and practices to facilitate and encourage the recruitment, selection, transition, and advancement of people with disabilities in their employment at the municipalities. Improve job standards to reflect the actual standards of the job and examine what assumptions are being made in the job standards. 4.3 Flexibility — Improve support and flexibility in the workplace by ensuring municipal staff and Council with disabilities have access to adaptive technologies, possible accommodations in the workplace, appropriate and supportive leave practices and return to work plans, and a flexible work environment such as the ability to work from home. 4.4 Culture of Inclusion — Build capacity among staff and senior leadership to cultivate a culture of inclusion that supports, retains, and provides opportunities for career growth to people with disabilities. Municipal units will develop Employment Equity Statements. 4.5 Representation — Actively recruit people with disabilities on all municipal committees and working groups. Review committee and Council recruitment materials to ensure they are accessible. 5. Built Environment The Commitment Municipal buildings and outdoor spaces within the municipalities provide meaningful and equitable access for users with disabilities. 5.1 Buildings — Improve and maintain the accessibility of municipal buildings and outdoor spaces to comply with the Nova Scotia Building Code, and the Accessibility Act's Built Environment Standard (when implemented), aiming to exceed them when feasible. 5.2 Public Spaces — Improve access to public spaces and opportunities for recreation by improving access to parks and playgrounds, lakes and beaches, diversifying recreation 10 equipment, and creating accessible parks, playgrounds and trails. Municipalities will comply with the Accessibility Act's Built Environment Standard (when implemented). 5.3 Washrooms — Look for opportunities to construct and maintain more accessible public washrooms and retrofit existing washrooms where possible. 5.4 Temporary Disruptions — Establish and implement processes to ensure accessibility is maintained during temporary disruptions including emergencies, evacuations, and/or special events. 5.5 Emergencies - Ensure emergency management and building evacuation plans are reviewed with accessibility in mind. 5.6 Construction Mitigation - Municipalities should ensure accessible detours are available when a sidewalk is closed for or affected by construction. The Municipality of the District of Chester, Municipality of the District of Lunenburg, Town of Bridgewater, Town of Lunenburg, and the Town of Mahone Bay hereby all agree together to work cooperatively with regards to the administration and implementation of the Joint Accessibility Plan and hereby agrees to jointly advocate the Provincial and Federal_Government to provide new funding initiatives and programs to support the further development and implementation of this Plan. Implementing the Plan This plan is a united framework and universal standards, agreed upon by all five municipal units. Each municipal unit is responsible for creating individual operational plans and operationalising those plans. Responsibilities Accessibility Advisory Committee • Review this Accessibility Plan at least every three years as required by the Accessibility Act and update as required. • Review Municipal Accessibility Report Cards annually and report on progress toward meeting the commitments outlined in this Plan. Accessibility Coordinator • Guide the work by the Accessibility Advisory Committee. • Book meetings, prepare and distribute agendas and minutes, assist Chair in leading the meetings, manage recruitment for Committee when necessary. • Act as a liaison with the Accessibility Advisory Committee and municipal units. 11. Councils • Recognize the significant cost of implementing this plan and the municipal operational plans and seek adequate funding to allow municipalities to meet the requirements under Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act. CAOs/Staff • Ensure the commitments outlined in the Accessibility Plan are reflected and operationalized in municipal Accessibility Action Plans required as public sector bodies under Nova Scotia's Accessibility Act. • Accept complaints, questions, and concerns submitted to them by the public. • Provide a summary of complaints, questions, and concerns to the Accessibility Advisory Committee. Timeline In 2017, the Government of Nova Scotia passed the province's Accessibility Act. A supporting document, Access by Design 2030, is the implementation strategy for how Nova Scotia will achieve an accessible province by 2030. It also identifies actions to improve public awareness, build collaboration and increase compliance with existing regulations. The Accessibility Act set an ambitious goal to become a fully accessible province by 2030. As such, we strive to have the commitments of this plan achieved by 2030, to be consistent with the Province of Nova Scotia. For specific timelines and budgets associated with the commitments and action items of this plan, please see your municipality's Accessibility Action Plan. As highlighted above, these individual Accessibility Action Plans may not be available until a future date. Monitoring and Evaluating Each municipal unit will be responsible for submitting an Accessibility Report Card to the Accessibility Advisory Committee by November 30 each year. This report card will track and report on the progress made towards the commitments in this plan, and performance of the policies and actions in their individual Accessibility Action Plans. The Accessibility Advisory Committee may also make recommendations to improve this plan. The Accessibility Report Cards of each municipal unit will be public documents, posted on their individual websites. The Accessibility Advisory Committee will review new directives, guidelines, and updates from the province as they are released, and determine if updates to this Accessibility Plan are required based on those updates. The Accessibility Advisory Committee will make recommendations to the municipal units on the need for updates to their individual Accessibility Action Plans. 12 Responding to Questions and Complaints • Anyone can lodge a complaint, pose a question, or express a concern about accessibility in Lunenburg County. These should be directed to the CAO of the appropriate municipal unit. • The CAO will respond within a reasonable time. Before responding, the CAO will consult with the staff person responsible for the area of inquiry. The CAO's response will contain the reasons for the decision. • If the complainant still has concerns, they can contact the Accessibility Advisory Committee Chair. • Anyone can appeal to Council if they are not satisfied with the response from the CAO or the Accessibility Advisory Committee. Council may refer any appeal to the Accessibility Advisory Committee for additional review and recommendations before issuing a final response to the complainant. • The CAOs will keep a record of all complaints, questions, and concerns submitted to them, and will provide summary updates to the Accessibility Advisory Committee on a regular basis. These updates will become part of the Accessibility Advisory Committee's continual review of the Accessibility Plan and may inform future changes. 13 Reference Documents The Built Environment Standard, under the Government of Nova Scotia Accessibility Plan 2018- 2021 will be released soon and include accessibility standards for the built environment, to prevent the design and construction of new barriers and remove existing barriers over time. The Clearing Our Path resource, produced by the CNIB Foundation (2019), provides international standards and universal design principles to build accessible environments for people who are blind or have low vision. Link: http://www.clearingourpath.ca/8.0.0-design-needs e.php The Guidelines For Accessible Recreation prepared for Lunenburg Queens Recreation Coordinators and Directors Association and Yarmouth Shelburne Municipal Recreation Association by Fulcrum Accessibility Consulting, 2018, includes a Basic Standards of Accessibility list developed as a result of accumulated insight and recommendations based on the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Accessibility for Nova Scotian's Act, and the Human Rights Act of Nova Scotia. Interwoven into these Guidelines are principles of Universal Design, the suggestions of persons with disabilities themselves, and learned techniques from practicing accessibility consultants and access audits on various buildings. Link: https://s3.amazonaws.com/southshoreconnect.cioc/CCH/Revised+September+5th+edition+of+ +April+7+Combined+Audit+/26+Accessibility+Report.pdf The Global Age -friendly Cities: A Guide document produced by the World Health Organization (WHO), 2007, outlines research and recommendations for communities to become more age - friendly, including but not limited to, recommendations for outdoor spaces and buildings, transportation, and civic participation. Link: https://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global age friendly cities Guide English.pdf The Government of Nova Scotia Accessibility Plan 2018-2021, released by the Department of Justice in September 2018, is a multi -year plan setting specific priorities and commitments for achieving accessibility within the Government of Nova Scotia. Link: https://novascotia.ca/accessibility/plan/government-accessibility-plan.pdf The Interim Accessibility Guidelines for Indoor and Outdoor Spaces, released by the Nova Scotia Accessibility Directorate in April 2020, provide ways to identify barriers to accessibility in the built environment and are intended to be replaced by the provincial accessibility standard for the built environment. Link: https://novascotia.ca/accessibility/docs/Interim-Accessibility-Guidelines-for-Indoor-and- Outdoor-Spaces.pdf 14 The Wolfville: Access by Design, An Accessibility Plan for 2019-2022, released by the Town of Wolfville in April 2019, is the first municipal -level accessibility plan. The Town was chosen by the Government of Nova Scotia to serve as an example for other communities in the province. Link: https://www.amans.ca/other-resouces/692-wolfville-accessibility-plan/file.html 15 Committee Members Accessibility Coordinator: Sarah Kucharski, Communications Officer, MODL Community Members (6 of 6 positions) David Outhouse First Appointed: September 01, 2019 Term Expiring September 01, 2022 Louise Hopper First Appointed: September 01, 2019 Term Expiring September 01, 2022 Patricia George-Zwicker First Appointed: September 01, 2019 Term Expiring September 01, 2021 Ellen Johnson First Appointed: September 01, 2019 Term Expiring September 01, 2021 Mary St. Amand First Appointed: January 30, 2020 Re -Appointed: December 2020 Term Expiring December 2023 Desiree Gordon First Appointed: December 2020 Term Expiring December 2023 Elected Officials (6 of 6 positions) Terms: 2yrs Municipal Unit Name Municipality of the District of Lunenburg Councillor Cathy Moore Alternate: Councillor Reid Whynot Municipality of the District of Chester Councillor Danielle Barkhouse Alternate: Councillor Abdela Assaf Town of Bridgewater Councillor Jennifer McDonald Alternate: Councillor Mike Conklin Town of Lunenburg Councillor Melissa Duggan Alternate: Councillor Susan Sanford Town of Mahone Bay Councillor Penny Carver Alternate: Deputy Mayor Francis Kangata Village of Chester Commissioner Martin Hiltz Staff Resources (6 of 6 positions) Terms: N/A Department Name Recreation Diana Johnson, Recreation Coordinator, ToB Communications Sarah Kucharski, Communications Officer, MODL Planning Jessica McDonald, Director of Planning, ToB Engineering Greg Jonah, Engineering Technologist, MODC Policy Dylan Heide, C.A.O. ToMB Heritage Arthur MacDonald, Heritage Manager, ToL 16 Date: October 3, 2023 Date: October 4, 2023 Date: October 17, 2023 REPORT TO: Chester unicipal Council, Chester Village Co ission EETI G ATE: ctober 26, 2023 DEPART E T: Corporate Strategic anage ent SUBJECT: IG Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: C E Fire Hall Conceptual Design Recommendation to Award otion 2023-290 FP Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO; Dan Pittman, Records Manager Chester Fire Services Committee Tara Maguire, CAO Subject to approval of both the Chester Village Commission and Municipal Council, and subject to the incorporation of the Chester Fire Services Committee, approve the award recommendation to Acre Architects for the Conceptual Design and Cost Estimates for a New Chester Fire Hall at a lump sum fee not to exceed $106,000 (HST not included). C T IT T Following a comprehensive evaluation of proposals from 7 firms; the evaluation team for the Request for Proposals (RFP) for Conceptual Design and Cost Estimates for a New Chester Fire Hall have identified a successful proponent. The Chester Volunteer Fire Department (CVFD) provides fire protection and emergency services for Electoral Districts 3, 7 and part of 1 within the Municipality of Chester. The Chester Fire Services Committee (CFSC) was formed as a partnership between the Village of Chester and the Municipality of Chester for the delivery of fire protection and emergency services. One of the objectives for the Committee is to develop recommendations for a new Fire Hall to serve the communities within their Fire District. To supplement internal resources of the CVFD, the Committee is seeking engagement of an external consultancy to work with the Fire Department and the Committee in the development of conceptual plans and cost estimates for a new fire hall. A scope of work was prepared with and reviewed by members of the Chester Fire Services Committee and was subsequently approved by the Village of Chester Commission and Municipal Council in June 2023. The Municipality was responsible for leading the procurement process. RFP MODC-T-2023-006 was published for open competition on July 22, 2023. The competition closed on August 25 with 7 firms bidding from a list of 21 suppliers who registered as plan takers. Proposals were scored in three phases. 1. Mandatory Requirements (Pass/Fail) Request for Decision Page 12 Each bidder had to have at least one professionally certified architect and one professionally certified engineer on their project team. All firms passed with each firm having more than one professional architect and engineer. 2. Technical Criteria (80%) An evaluation committee was formed that included representatives from the Municipality (fire services, engineering, executive), Chester Village and the Fire Department. The technical proposals were unsealed and independently evaluated using an 11 -point (0-10) rating scale based on the following weighed criteria. Item Weight 1. Experience and Qualifications 25 Brief description of proponent 5 Description of projects 20 2. Methodology, Schedule and Organization Chart 20 How the proponent will provide the Deliverables 10 Workplan with schedule and milestones 5 Organization chart illustrating working relationship 5 3. Project Team 20 Project team roles, responsibilities and experience 20 4. References 15' Three references over last five years 15 Total Points 80 A consensus meeting was held September 29th to collectively review and finalize the technical scores. Evaluators were consistent across all criteria. Variations were minor and where outliers were noted, the adjustments made had little to no impact on overall bidder scores and ranking. 3. Pricing (20%) Price submissions were unsealed following the technical evaluation. Scoring is based on a formulaic ranking of bidder prices above and below the median price. The median is awarded the full 20 points. Bidders greater or less than 25% of the median are subject to potential rejection. The winning bidder's price was below the median within 10%. The Chester Fire Services Committee met on October 4th, 2023, to discuss the evaluation team's recommendation and have endorsed awarding the Conceptual Design and Cost Estimates for the Chester Fire Hall to the highest scored proponent, Acre Architects. This is contingent on the incorporation of the Chester Fire Services Committee. The following motion was passed at the committee meeting: Motion: Moved by Norm Countway and seconded by Kirk Collicut: That the Chester Fire Services Committee approve the recommendation from the evaluation team to award the project to Acre Architects, pending incorporation. Motion carried unanimously. Request for Decision Page 13 The Committee will contract with Acre Architects and is responsible for the management of the consultant to ensure project deliverables are met. A Project Manager will be assigned by the Committee as the project point person and primary contact with the consultant. Village of Commission staff will be considered support for this project with Municipal staff pulled in on an as -needed basis. TI S 1. Approve the award recommendation for Acre Architects. • The evaluation team is confident in its consensus and conclusion that Acre Architects offers the best value from the bidders evaluated. 2. Cancel procurement and retender. • There is no guarantee that retendering this procurement will result in a larger pool of more qualified bidders. There is a corresponding higher risk that the current bidders would choose not to resubmit. 3. Cancel project. • Exercising this option implies that there is no need for a new fire hall. Further renovation of existing facilities would be required which has already been ruled out as suboptimal. IC TI S By-Law/Policy MODC Procurement Policy P-04 Financial/budgetary $50,000 for this project is included in the joint fire services budget for this fiscal year. The committee anticipates the remainder of the project costs to be accounted for in next fiscal year's joint fire services budget. Environmental Conceptual design will address environmental conditions and requirements for the new building and site as well as any impacts on municipal operations, infrastructure, communities, etc. Strategic Priorities The new Fire Hall will assist the Village in advancing the following Priority Outcomes of the Municipal 2021-24 Strategic Priorities Framework: Priority Outcomes: Environmental Stewardship 2. Explore options for integrating green energy and sustainable technologies in municipal infrastructure and program delivery. Priority Outcomes: Governance & Engagement 1. Ensure municipal service delivery is efficient and effective, communicated and accessible. Priority Outcomes: Healthy & Vibrant Communities 1. Ensure residents have access to facilities, natural assets, programs, and services that enrich a quality of life and provide safe communities for residents and visitors alike. Request for Decision Page 14 Priority Outcomes: Infrastructure & Service Delivery 2. Create efficiencies through innovative service delivery, and proactive maintenance and operations of existing infrastructure. Work Program Implications This work will be contracted with and managed by the Chester Fire Services Com staff is not expected to be significant. Has Legal review been completed? X Yes _No _ N/A C C T SI TE L/ T L ee. Impact on Municipal A Project Manager will be assigned as the Committee's project point person and primary contact with the consultant. Internal communications are channeled through the Project Manager and lead consultant to the Committee, and from the Committee to the respective Council / Commission. External stakeholder engagement is a primary requirement for this project. Engagement mechanisms and timing will be determined with the consultant at the beginning of the project. TS / F CI Acre Architects (https://theacre.ca/) What We Heard Report October 12, 2023 Summary of 2023 Public Engagement • July 6: Draft SPS & LUB Presented to Council and released to the public • July 11: Draft SPS & LUB pre- sented to VPAC • July 22: Public Session #1: Draft SPS & LUB • July 26: Public Session #2: Draft SPS & LUB • August 3: Public Session #3: Draft SPS & LUB • August 5: Public Session #4 Draft SPS & LUB • Staff met one on one and sched- uled phone calls to discuss the plan with mem- bers of the pub- lic (10+ meet- ings between August 8-25) A summary of public comments and feedback from Draft #1 of the revised Village of Chester Secondary Planning Strategy Summer 2023 Engagement A June 22 report to Council outlined the public engagement ac- tivities to be undertaken in support of the third round of public engage- ment for the Village of Chester Secondary Plan- ning Strategy and Land Use By-law Review. The scheduled engagement activities are complete, including an additional 4th public meeting scheduled for August 5. Due to the extreme rain event that occurred on the first scheduled meeting date (July 22), it was decided to add an additional meeting for anyone planning to attend who was im- pacted by flooding or transportation issues. This report contains collated feedback and comments from the four public sessions in addition to email com- ments, completed comment cards and phone calls and in per- son meetings with staff. Purpose of the What We Heard Report Comments and feed- back have been grouped into categories. Each category contains context and discussion points, followed by a series of options. Fol- lowing debate and dis- cussion, Council may direct staff to proceed with a particular option, a combination of op- tions, or provide direc- tion other than what is presented in this report. Staff will take this direc- tion for any changes and then work to prepare a Final Draft SPS and LUB. The Final Draft docu- ments will require Coun- cil to give 1st Reading if satisfied and set a date for a Public Hearing be- fore a vote to approve the new SPS & LUB will be held. THE ,\tI. NKCII'ALITYOF CHESTER .. I would like to see more affordable housing in Chester, including multi- unit residential development. I realize that water supply may be a limiting factor and I hope the question of developing a municipal water supply will be revisited." - submitted via comment card What We Heard Report Potable Water Staff Comment: isting properties, Concerns around pota- ble water and new de- velopment were one of the most frequently dis- cussed topics during en- gagement. The draft SPS contains a section on Potable Water, but does confirm that there are no immediate plans for a Central Water System and that short -medium term development is likely to occur without access to Central Water. Council has identified water as a strategic pri- ority in the MOC growth plan to be addressed across the Municipality going forward. Studies on potential water sources are ongoing but no final decision have been made at the time of this Plan Review. Summary of Public Comments: • No new develop- ment until Central Water is provided • All new development should be required to install cisterns to avoid impacting ex- • Without addressing water this entire plan is incomplete and shouldn't be consid- ered for approval while so much con- cern about water remains • New development should require water saving features such as low -flow fixtures, rain barrels etc., • Without knowing where there is and is not water we shouldn't be arbi- trarily promoting development, • Density will never be appropriate or af- fordable in the core • MOC should investi- gate options such as desalinization. Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to make changes to the draft LUB to eliminate two -unit dwellings and Accessory Dwelling Units in the R1 and Page 2 R2 Zone. Thereby significantly limiting new dwelling units in the Village core. 2. Direct staff to inves- tigate the potential to require all new development include installation of a cis- tern or other water on -site water supply 3. Direct staff to en- courage new devel- opment to utilize low flow fixtures and water saving measures such as rain barrels. Public education would be the primary mecha- nism as the LUB is limited in authority in this area. 4. Direct staff to add policy and language to the SPS to outline the need for a de- tailed aquifer study for the Village to be complete prior to the next (10 year) Village Plan Review. 5. Direct staff to make no chang- es in this area. THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER Page 3 R1 Zone Minimum Lot Size Staff Comment: The draft documents propose a significant reduction in the mini- mum lot size for the R1 (formerly Estate Resi- dential Zone). The cur- rent lot size of 40,000 sq. ft. is proposed to be re- duced to 10,750 sq. ft. Along with the new min- imum lot size, yard set- backs have been re- duced accordingly and new provisions specify- ing the maximum foot- print of a structure and an overall lot coverage percentage have been added. The intent be- hind these changes is to allow for select subdivi- sion of larger lots (where all other aspects such as wastewater, road access and potable water can be met) to allow the cre- ation of new dwellings. The lot coverage and maximum footprint pro- visions are intended to "scale down" the existing character of this zone, with homes surrounded by large yards. The po- tential increased density from select subdivision, coupled with other initi- atives in the plan to pro- mote housing could help support the case for ex- panded wastewater ser- vices. Summary of Public Com- ments: • Significant opposi- tion from existing residents of the zone, particularly Freda's and Simon's Point • Many comments that these changes will ruin the existing character and charm of this zone. This is what many come to Chester to see serve the intended purpose of protect- ing the character • Should leave this ar- ea and zone alone. It is already working, doesn't have good road access, not all lots have access to sewer etc. Options for Considera- tion: 1. Direct staff to revert the R1 Zone to the existing 40,000 sq. ft. minimum lot area, 25 ft yard setbacks and remove the pro- posed minimum footprint and lot coverage provisions • Questions why these 2. Direct staff to review changes are pro- areas of R1 zone in posed? These areas the core and other will never be peripheral areas and "affordable" and no consider rezoning one is asking for smaller undersized these changes lots to R2 • The proposed lot coverage and maxi- mum footprint provi- sions were not well received and com- ments were made that they would not 3. Direct staff to add provisions so that the proposed reduc- tion in minimum lot size, maximum foot- print and reduced yard setbacks only apply for lots with access to the central sewer system "Most residents in the village do not want to increase the human population within the village boundaries. That is understandable; I do not want to be surrounded by those buildings, I believe this will ruin what we love about the village - submitted via written comment 4. Direct staff to revise the R1 zone and pro- pose a minimum lot size between 10,750 and 40,000 sq. ft. 5. Direct staff to make no changes to the proposed R1 Z � THE ME k Ill, Page 4 Marine Development Zone - Permit Residential Uses Staff Comment: The draft documents propose a new zone, the Marine Development Zone, to replace the ex- isting Marine Industrial Zone. The MD Zone is proposed to cover the existing Heisler Boatyard properties on back har- bour and will also be applied to the Rope Loft properties on front har- bour. The MD Zone ex- pands the list of permit- ted marine uses, primari- ly focused on marine commercial uses, such as boat sales, tours, rentals etc. but also includes restaurants and Tourist Accommodations (hotel, B&B, Short Term Rental) by development agree- ment. During public meetings and discussions with property owners in the proposed MD Zone, staff heard some calls to al- low purely Residential uses within the MD Zone. This was request- ed and suggested as a positive idea to further increase development potential within the zone. Summary of Public Com- ments: • This zone could per- mit a desired type of residential develop- ment that is currently unavailable. Devel- opments that incor- porate both residen- tial and marine com- ponents, for example condominium sales that come with a boat slip. Options for Considera- tion: 1. Direct staff to permit stand-alone residen- tial uses within the Marine Development Zone by develop- ment agreement 2. Direct staff to permit residential uses in combination with commercial uses in the Marine Develop- ment Zone by devel- opment permit (mixed use as -of - right development). 3. Direct staff to make no changes to the Marine Development Zone as drafted �C1PALI Ti?F "Being proactive with Air B&B is vital, controlling their affects on the village will certainly help for better relations whilst affording the village and surrounding areas the benefits visitors bring re revenue for businesses etc. " -submitted via email What We Heard Report Short Term Rental Regulations (Residential Zones) Staff Comment: The proposed regula- tions on Short Term Rentals including that the unit be confirmed as the primary residence, and the prohibition of Accessory Dwelling Units used for Short Term Rentals was generally well received at the pub- lic sessions. Questions were raised around how existing STR's would be regulated and were pleased to hear that lan- guage will be added so that all STR's will need to comply with the new regulations (ie. No grandfathering of exist- ing STR's). Summary of Public Comments: • Calls for better rules for caretakers of STR's when the property owner does not live there • Public supported that existing STR's will need to comply with new regula- tions, several opera- tors stated they were opposed to this re- quirement and exist- ing should be grand - fathered • New rules should not impact existing operators • Several operators commented that a more nuanced ap- proach such as a li- censing by-law to deal with problem properties but allow those good opera- tors to continue op- erations in the Resi- dential Zone. • If passed this will end the junior sailing program as those users rely on STR's • Long standing histo- ry of STR's here with existing clientele that return annually • Some owners may not be able to afford to keep their proper- ties if not permitted to STR them • Concern expressed about the impact on local economy and the secondary im- pacts on cleaning Page 5 and landscaping companies in the area Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to re- move the require- ment that the prop- erty be the primary residence of the op- erator of the STR 2. Direct staff to ex- empt existing STR's from meeting the new requirements 3. Direct staff to permit STR's in Accessory Dwelling Units 4. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. THE MUNKWA.LITY OF CHESTER Page 6 Architectural Controls Staff Comment: Most comments and dis- cussion around architec- tural controls at the public session were seeking additional or more stringent controls. Staff pointed out that there can be trade-offs between very detailed controls and affordabil- ity, which was not well received or supported by those in attendance. Most comments were critical of the plan and appeared to think this plan is a reduction in the existing controls as op- posed to reviewing and making select changes to many of the existing controls from the cur- rent Land Use By-law. Summary of Public Com- ments: • Architectural design is a key element to the existing Village character and needs more protection • The plan speaks to protecting the exist- ing character but does nothing to achieve this state- ment • Should prohibit un- finished concrete, concrete block and remove current ex- emption for build- ings less than 1500 sq. ft. • Metal siding/steel arch buildings should be prohibited • Chester is not afford- able, it is ok to re- 2. Direct staff to re- quire high quality move exceptions for siding and building buildings smaller materials than 1500 sq. ft. to allow vinyl siding we want to encour- age Options for Considera- tion: • The best solution would be an archi- 3. Direct staff to re- tectural design com- search the ability and mittee that reviews authority to form a and approves all new design review com- applications for any mittee whose role development in the would be to review Village. This is done and approve every in other areas and development appli- ensures that new de- cation to ensure the signs will fit in and design is in keeping support existing with existing charac- character ter 1. Direct staff to re- move any allowance for unfinished con- crete and concrete block and the allow- ance for vinyl siding on structures over 140m2. • Very detailed design 4. Direct staff to draft guidelines are need- additional architec- ed to specify exactly tural regulations, what is not desired possibly including and outline the styles prohibited and pre - and elements that ferred building styles, materials and more stringent archi- tectural details. 5. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. "I have a concern that the secondary planning strategy of maintaining the existing character of the village of Chester would restrict the development of the condos in Chandler's Cove as not being traditional architectural style and form" - submitted via comment card "We also believe the use of 'affordable housing' as a justification for approving new residential development in the village is being misused by Council. None of the residential buildings recently constructed in the village under the 'affordable housing' umbrella are currently being leased out at rent levels that are in any way affordable to the average person" - submitted via comment card What We Heard Report Affordable/Attainable/Increase Housing Stock Staff Comment: The plan's general ap- proach to gradually in- crease density and per- mit additional dwelling units received poor re- ception at the public sessions. Issues such as water, traffic, design and the cost of land were raised as reasons why this goal is not appropri- ate for the core of the village. There was little acknowledgement from those in attendance that the proposed changes would make an impact on, or increase housing stock and availability. Summary of Public Comments: • Affordability should not be a goal for the core village, it should happen outside the core • Density is more ap- propriate north of Highway 3 • The seasonal resi- dents subsidize oth- er ratepayers, densi- fying the Village will drive the wealthy residents away • The Village has al- ways been seen as the "cash cow" for MOC, these changes could cause an exo- dus of wealthy resi- dents Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to limit new development to precisely what is cur- rently permitted in the existing zones, thereby not allowing additional density in the Village Core (R1 and R2) 2. Direct staff to re- move the ability to create one accessory dwelling unit per lot 3. Direct staff to re- move the ability to create a two -unit dwelling in the R2 Page 7 Zone 4. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. THE MUNKWA.LITY OF CHESTER Page 8 Parking Staff Comment: Comments on parking ranged from support for the proposed parking exemption in the Core Commercial Zone to concerns with street parking on both sides of the street and conges- tion. Summary of Public Com- ments: • Would like parking to only be permitted on one side of the road • Concerns about large parking lots popping up in exist- ing commercial areas (Staff Note: the Core Commercial Zone no longer permits Com- mercial Parking lots as a permitted use) • Calls for a municipal parking lot(s) to ad- dress concerns • Parking spaces should be designed for smaller vehicles, sizes proposed are for large vehicles • Glad to hear about the proposed chang- es to parking re- quirements • Should prohibit parking lots so a de- veloper doesn't de- molish a building to create parking Electric Generation (solar) Staff Comment: This section of the new documents did not gen- erate a lot of public comment or discussion. There were questions around balancing herit- age and character with renewable energy at a small scale. Summary of Public Com- ments: • The proposed 2m height exemption for panels that are at- tached to a roof should be removed. Allow the panels but maintain the height limit (inclusive of any attached panels). Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to pre- pare a broader range of options to address parking concerns (ie. Parking by-law with enforcement, munic- ipally owned parking lot etc.) 2. Direct staff to reduce the size of required parking spaces (this may mean larger ve- hicles will be unable to park in some spaces) 3. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. Options: 1. Direct staff to re- move the height ex- emption of 2m for attached solar pan- els. 2. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. "...to me this reads that by development permit you could have solar panels up to 2m throughout the site line of the entire village. I do not think this should be allowed period in R1, R2 or the commercial core. Solar panels that are flush to your roof or have a slight rise could be acceptable but 2m. I think you'll find this unacceptable to most residents." - submitted via letter "We also believe the use of 'affordable housing' as a justification for approving new residential development in the village is being misused by Council. None of the residential buildings recently constructed in the village under the 'affordable housing' umbrella are currently being leased out at rent levels that are in any way affordable to the average person" - submitted via comment card What We Heard Report R2 Zone Allow Two Small Accessory Structures per Lot Staff Comment: The R2 Zone (formerly Central Village Residen- tial) was generally well received at the public sessions. Summary of Public Comments: • Comments that the R2 Zone should per- mit two "small acces- sory structures" per lot that do not count toward lot coverage. Currently the draft documents propose only one small ac- cessory structure per lot, but the zone al- lows two -unit dwell- ings, it makes sense to allow each unit to have a small shed. Options for Considera- tion: R2 Zone Increase Yard Setbacks Staff Comment: Staff heard from several residents that the in- creased ability to create accessory dwelling units, and the existing small setbacks in the R2 (formerly CVR) Zone would result in a devel- opment pattern that is not in keeping with the character of the area. While the former CVR Zone requires similar 1.5m side and rear yard setbacks, staff heard that these should be in- creased significantly in the new plan to better reflect the traditional development pattern seen in this area. Summary of Public Comments: • Having two -storey structures approxi- mately 5 ft from a property line is too close • This will change the feel and look of properties in this zone for the worse Page 9 Direct staff to in- crease the allowance in the R2 zone so that two "small ac- cessory structures" are permitted per lot without counting toward lot coverage. 2. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. • Looking at most properties in this zone, they far exceed the current 5 ft set- backs Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to in- crease required yard setbacks in the R2 Zone beyond the proposed 1.5m 2. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER Page 10 Institutional Zone Staff Comment: The Institutional Zone did not generate a large quantity of comments or discussion, however, several items were raised for consideration as fol- lows: Summary of Public Com- ments: • Institutional Zone is permitted in any character area via rezoning. This could cause problems due to the types of de- velopment that are permitted in this zone and could be disruptive if placed in some neighbour- hoods. Height Limit Staff Comment: The proposed height limits seemed to be fair- ly well received, with most questions focused on how we will measure height in the new plan. • Early in the process staff had identified the Yacht Club and Golf Course as po- tential properties to consider rezoning to Institutional. At one of the public meet- ings, Yacht Club rep- resentatives made it clear they do not wish to be rezoned Institutional and pre- fer to remain as a non -conforming use in the Waterfront Zone. Options for Considera- tion: 1. Direct staff to revert the zoning on the Yacht Club property, so that the use will • Height limit should be influenced by sur- rounding buildings (ie. Could exceed the average of adjacent buildings by a set percentage). Summary of Public Com Options for Considera ments: tion: remain as a non- conforming use in the Waterfront Zone (this will limit the ability to expand us- es or footprints of buildings) 2. Direct staff to alter the list of permitted uses in the Institu- tional Zone to allow it to better fit in ex- isting areas of the Village 3. Direct staff to alter policy so that the Institutional Zone is only permitted in select Character Are- as 4. Direct staff to make no changes in this 1. Direct staff to draft language to allow the height limit to exceed nearby struc- tures by 10% OR a different percentage (please specify) 2. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. "Every decision should be made based on preserving character and personality of Chester. This is what draws people to Chester and generates the most revenue for the municipality" - submitted via comment card "Establish a Heritage Area, including the Historic Anglican, Catholic and Baptist Churches and their cemeteries" - submitted via comment card What We Heard Report Heritage Protection Staff Comment: The draft plan maintains the existing Heritage Protection program cur- rently in place. There are Future Projects identi- fied in the SPS which would involve further study and analysis if it is determined that pursu- ing a Heritage Conserva- tion District or a more robust Heritage Property Registration Program is a goal of Council. Summary of Public Comments: • Several comments that the plan does not adequately ad- dress heritage pro- tection • Call for Heritage Ad- visory Committee to review building de- sign for structures adjacent to a regis- tered property • Restrictions around demolishing heritage properties. May only be rebuilt on same footprint • Registered Heritage properties should have incentives such as tax breaks, bonus- ing such as addition- al dwelling units, less parking etc. to pro- vide an incentive to Heritage property owners. Options for Considera- tion: 1. Direct staff to pursue additional Heritage Registration and/or a Heritage Conserva- tion District prior to completing the Vil- lage Plan Review 2. Direct staff to pursue additional Heritage Registration and/or a Heritage Conserva- tion district following the adoption of the new SPS and LUB. Policy will be added to the SPS to outline the expected actions. 3. Direct staff to imple- ment incentives for current heritage property owners in- cluding the ability to add an additional dwelling unit, pro - Page 11 vide less than the normal required on - site parking etc. 4. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. THE MUNKWA.LITY OF CHESTER Page 12 Expansion of Architectural Control Area Staff Comment: Comments on the con- tent of the Architectural Controls were discussed previously in this report. Staff also heard calls to expand the area covered by Architectural Con- trols. Some of these com- ments may conflict with other comments from the public that density Core Commercial Zone Staff Comment: This area has been zoned commercial since the previous plan. How- ever, the zone has changed and does allow multi -unit buildings by development agree- ment. The properties located west of Queen St. near Union are not currently in commercial use. Summary of Public Com- ments: • Request to remove Core Commercial Zone from properties on the west side of and new development should be focused on and north of Highway 3. Summary of Public Com- ments: • Several comments that new develop- ment where Queen St. meets Highway 3 is unattractive and not in keeping with existing character. — Queen St and Union • There was surprise, confusion and con- cern that the Archi- tectural controls do not extend to and beyond Highway 3. Options for Considera- tion: Queen Street from Un- ion southward to mid - block as it is currently and most appropriate for low density residen- tial use. Options for Consideration: 1. Direct staff to adjust the zoning boundary on the west side of Queen Street to replace Core Commercial with R2 from Union Street mov- ing south to mid -block 2. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. Direct staff to ex- pand the area cov- ered by Architectural controls to include Highway 3 2. Direct staff to ex- pand the area cov- ered by Architectural controls so that all lots governed by the Village Land Use By- law would be subject to the same design rules. 3. Direct staff to draft varying architectural controls for various parts of the Village 4. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER "I have particular concerns with the implications of the Corner Vision Triangle...I assume this by- law is intended to make driving the village streets safer. Frankly, one of Chester's charms is that there are many blind corners formed by both buildings and vegetation, and people drive carefully now because of these narrow streets and blind corners." - submitted by letter What We Heard Report Corner Vision Triangle Staff Comment: The concept of the Cor- ner Vision Triangle was welcomed by many in attendance at the public sessions. This topic did generate a number of good questions on the implementation and ap- plicability of the regula- tions and how they ap- ply to existing properties and various types of vegetation. Summary of Public Comments: • What about existing structures? (Staff Note: would only apply to structures when rebuilding or building new) • What about existing vegetation? Large trees vs shrubs vs weeds? • Will this take effect on the date of the new By-law? En- forced via com- plaint? Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to con- firm that the Corner Vision Triangle ap- plies to ALL existing vegetation (trees, decorative shrubs and bushes and Page 13 weeds) 2. Direct staff to draft language so the Cor- ner Vision Triangle applies to all existing vegetation except for large trees (By- law will have specific measurements) 3. Direct staff to draft language so the Cor- ner Vision Triangle only applies to exist- ing weeds and nui- sance vegetation and does not apply to existing trees or planted garden beds and shrubs. Rezone Former Hawboldt Properties to Non -development Staff Comment: The former Hawboldt properties are a small collection of parcels (totaling approximately 1.86 acres) located adja- cent to the Old Stone Bridge, with frontage on both Highway 3 and Vic- toria Street. During pub- lic sessions, concerns around development on these lands and flooding were raised. The lots were previously zoned HC and are proposed to potential be zoned R4 in the cur- rent draft. Summary of Public Comments: • Low lying properties are not suitable for residential develop- ment • Should be rezoned to Park or other low impact zone with limited development Options for Considera- tion: Direct staff to rezone the identified parcels to Parks and Open Space Zone 2. Direct staff to make no changes in this area. THE MUNICIPALIY OF CHESTER Page 14 Rezone PID 60093572 (3889 North St) to Highway Commercial Staff Comment: PID 60093572 is current- ly split zoned with the front portion Highway Commercial and the rear portion Central Village Residential. The first draft zoning map had proposed zoning this property and the two properties to the west as R4 (removing the High- way Commercial Zone from all three), leaving the Independent/ NSLC as the boundary be- tween Highway Com- mercial development mercial and R4. on the site. Summary of Public Com- Options for Considera- ments: tion: • The owner of PID 1. Direct staff to rezone 60093572 ap- PID 60093572 to proached staff to Highway Commercial discuss maintaining Zone the existing Highway Commercial Zone and expanding it so that it covers the en- tire property. • This would serve to facilitate future com- 2. Direct staff to rezone PID 60093572 and the two properties to the west to Highway Commercial Zone (this will closely mir- ror the current zon- ing) 3. Direct staff to make no changes to the current zoning map, PID 60093572 and properties to the west will remain zoned R4 as initially proposed. THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER Page 15 Staff Identified Considerations Staff Comment: In addition to the robust discussion and com- ments received from members of the public, throughout the engage- ment period, staff con- tinued to review and make note of any issues, typos or potential unin- tended consequences of the draft planning docu- ments. The following items have been identi- fied by staff and are worthy of consideration but did not necessarily generate substantive comments or questions at the public sessions. Residential Parking Ex- emption in Core Com- mercial Zone • The draft documents propose that no on - site parking be re- quired for commer- cial uses in the Core Commercial Zone. Staff wish to discuss the potential of ex- panding this allow- ance to also include residential uses with- in the Core Commer- cial Zone. • An undesirable result could occur where hypothetically a 10 unit commercial building used for short term rentals would require no on - site parking, while a similarly sized 10 unit residential building (owned or long term rentals of units) would require 10 on -site parking spaces. This uninten- tionally would incen- tivize short term rentals over long term housing op- tions. • Staff suggest Council consider expanding the on -site parking exemption for all us- es within the Core Commercial Zone Potable Water Policy Statements • Much of the public discussion and ques- tions related directly or indirectly to the availability of pota- ble water to serve existing and future development. • The current draft plan introduces some options for creation of new units in R1 and R2 through accessory dwelling units, but does not otherwise greatly increase density in the core, in part due to concerns around water • As a long range planning document prepared to guide development and growth over the next decade, the Second- ary Plan should more robustly address the issue of water and what if any potential solutions are being investigated. • Staff suggest that additional language be added to the SPS and that a commit- ment be made in policy that prior to the next Village Plan Review, either a cen- tral water system will be installed OR a de- tailed aquifer study will be undertaken to determine which are- as of the Village can support additional density beyond what is enabled by this plan. �C1PALI Ti?F Page 16 Other Related Feedback and Comments Staff Comment: In addition to the above comments and ques- tions, a number of other comments and concerns were expressed during public engagement ac- tivities. These comments while related to the Vil- lage Review, are not/or may not be directly ad- dressed in regulations contained within the Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law. Staff are pre- senting the following for consideration and dis- cussion by Council: Summary of Public Com- ments: Process/timeline: • Would like to have more meetings and public engagement • Don't push this plan through too quickly • More independent reviews and studies by outside profes- sionals should be conducted on the planning documents • There are too many unresolved issues, trust needs to be built before the plan can proceed By-law Enforcement • Raised at several ses- sions • Unhappiness with the current approach of a complaint driven system • What is the point of having rules if they are not enforced? • Many examples pro- vided of suspected violations • Most issues around Dangerous and Un- sightly By-law, resi- dents do not feel it is adequate or well en- forced • Current enforcement is ineffective at pre- venting future issues Street Infrastructure • Density and devel- opment should be prohibited, current streets are inade- quate for existing traffic • Roadways are not maintained, tax dol- lars do not show up on the roads (Staff Note: the comment- er understood MOC does not own or maintain streets in the Village) • Allowing more de- velopment will wors- en an already bad situation with poor roadways Climate Change • Comments that the plan lacks ambition or responds ade- quately to climate change. No setback from ocean, changes in water tables, storm frequency etc. could all be ad- dressed • Several questions around setbacks or lack thereof for pro- tection from storm surge and sea level rise • Climate change will worsen the existing water situation in the Village THE MEN PC!I ALITY OF CHESTER Page 17 Other Related Feedback and Comments ...Continued from Page 11: Hotel on Valley Road Staff Note - In addition to Central Water (addressed earlier in this report), the Hotel devel- opment generated the most significant discus- sion and upset at the public sessions. It was clarified that the devel- opment has already been approved under the current plan and that the new plan would re- quire a Development Agreement anywhere that a hotel is permitted. Summary of Public Com- ments: • Questions and calls for MOC to pull the permits already is- sued • MOC should take the developer to court to prevent the con- struction • MOC should pres- sure the developer to make changes to the design and unit numbers • If the draft plan had been in place, would the hotel have been approved? (Staff Note - while a hotel may have been ap- proved under the draft plan, it would have required a De- velopment Agree- ment with public in- put, meetings and opportunity for Council to request changes or conces- sions from the devel- oper). • Opposing comment that the hotel is a great project and sorely needed in the community • Disbelief that MOC could approve the Hotel without requir- ing the submission of detailed water study to show the hotel would not dis- rupt neighbouring property owners wells • Questions around why the hotel was permitted without public hearing or other public notice and engagement? �C1PALI Ti?F Next Steps • Preliminary Provin- Council resulting for consistency and dal Review com- from public consul- clarity (ie. Screen plete with no is- tation and What readers, font size sues flagged We Heard Report, etc). This work will Legal review has Legal Review com- likely be carried • been completed ments, Accessibility out by a firm spe- review comments cializing in this ar- • Accessibility review and produce a ea complete Draft #2 • Draft #2 presented • Staff will incorpo- • Accessibility and to Council. If satis- rate direction from general formatting fied, Council gives Accessibility Review and Formatting Legal Review Draft #2 Finalized 1st Reading and sets date for a Pub- lic Hearing • Public Hearing held. Public may speak in favour or against the new documents. Coun- cil will vote follow- ing the hearing Draft #2 to Council (1st Reading) Public Hearing Vote THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER A COPT OF THIS LETTER IS TO BE MADE & DISTRIBUTE TRIBUTETT TO EACH PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER: RAY CAMBRIA; -JOHN CAR . LL; m W...?' D D UMA RE S ; - AR LL NAUSS; -NANCY HATCH; CH; -DANIELLE BAARKH S . AN OPEN LE `l,d'Tl fZ TO COUNCIL: 24 August 2023 Municipality of Chester Council Municipality of the District : of Chester 1 3 1 .King Street, Chester NS BUJ 1,110 Dear Municipality of Chester Courici re. Village Planning Review We are writing to express our concerns with the progression of the Village of Chester Planning Document. Review process and. proposed Village Plan to date_ We call upon Council to take immediate action on behalf of Chester citizens by requesting further undertaking of professional due diligence arid public consultation by the Municipal Planning Department. In particular, taken to:. to ind - ith Municipal Planning! to, ensure appropriate steps to address the expressed concerns of Residents; 2.. dent i fttsianals to conduct any research or consultation required to ensure Residents are provided with an informed and transparent proposed Village Plan, and 3. Allow forfurber adequate public consultation of the revised proposed Plan poor to allowing the matter to proceed to Councilfor a final hearing. Planning Proce s Concerns According to Municipal published timelines, the Village Plan Review commenced in December 201.9.1 The majority of the Village Flan Review was conducted throughout the ,lobal. pandemic, a period in which society was focused on survival. Throughout this period traditional forms of community interaction, engagement, and communicationwere severely restricted by the requirement to stay Rome. As the community then transitioned out of rigid pandemic restrictions, the Village wasfaced with further significant socioeconomic burdens. (such as rapid. rates of inflation and, severe weather events), which continued to require the immediate n and resources of Chester Residents. Given the novel social conditions during this period, it was pertinent that the IVIunicipal Village Plan Review Communications Strategy and Timelines proactively ensured that all. Residents were made aware of the proposed Village Plan, and were given fair and reasonable opportunity " Municipality of the District of Chester, Voices and Choices at 'Tirnelin to express their views, and receive ass neared llnuli.ation. c that theirvoices had been heard. before the Plan. On June 2?,, ' ?'3. Council approved the public consultation meeting schedule; a key component of the public consultation process, with less than five weeks notices No mail outs were sent to ''village Residents advising them of the scheduled meeting?s, and the voluminous proposed Plan documents were not made publicly available until July 05, 210233, (less than three Kill -weeks before the first scheduled meeting). Given the Municipality has mailed out notices and surveys to the entire Municipality without issue on several occasions, (such as the 2020 Coastal Action Resident Water Survey, which was sent to 6,100 addresses, along with paid pre -paid return envelopes; and further reminder postcards)'", there is no justifiable reason as to why the much smaller Village core resident population, of approximately 800 people. were not provided with mailing notice of the public consultation meetings_ The four public meetings were all. schedul .'thin the sarrre two weep period', which restricted. attendance opportunities for .rnany residents, and allowed little: time for residents to reflect on the meetings or share future dated meeting dates with those in the co triunity. One of the. meetings took place immediately after the Village had experienced extreme weather conditions, and the fourth supplemental meeting was scheduled with little notice, was not contained on public posters, and involved a last minute change of meeting location, The public meetings were also not clearly signed from the Roadside prior to, or during, the meetings, which limited. opportunities for Residents to walk itt or drop into the meetings as they, moved through the community, The Planning Department also failed to ensure all meetings were recorded so that there was a clear and objective record of'meeting discussions. It was also not made clear how objective records of the meeting would be reported to the Planning Advisory Committee, related. municipal departments, and relevant stakeholders, Consultatir f'roces,sq. At the meetings, the Plain ng Department cited that approximately -35 individuals were iri attendance at each session, with many of the attendees at each meeting being repeat attendees.. This indication suggests that a significant majority of the Village's 800+ residents were not adequately informed or given opportunity to attend the meetings, !Chester is known to have a. rn n nity of big lv eked residents, particularly in. its Village Core, and given its history of 8 Municipality o Public Engagerner Voices and 'ChoiceS We'b•aite, t'f " dated 22 June 2023 3 Municipality: of the District of Chester, Voices- and Choices Websit Draft SPS & LUB Now Available! dated 05 July 2E123 ilfa t�,ew) at "NEW - Coastal Action Resident Mater Survey Municipality of Chester, 2020, es :c r5r� it 2g� t� r, surue r art - 1 er. t12 2t}.00 at pie 4 5 Municipality of the Distnict of Chester, Voices and Choices th!ebsi "Final Public Engagement .Schedule Approved' dated 22 June 2023 high response rates to requests for public engagement (as clearly data from various public consultation projects, including., but Water Study and 2020 Coastal Action. Resident Water Su attendance records serve as clear confirmation that the appropriately schedule or communicate their public engagement ficated by published response ignited to, the 2017 CI CL the tow public meeting „rig Department did not ions. At the meetings the Public were provided with tittle to no confirmation on what independent professional reviews had been undertaken to inform the Planning Department in their work, prior preparing their proposed Village Plan. The only clearly communicated professional preliminary study conducted was, an Architecture Study conducted by FBM, for which the explicit report results do not appear to be published to the public. The public meeting presentations also did not clearly express how the Planning Department incorporated the findings of this Study into their proposed. Plan, and a representative of FBM was not made available to provide their independent feedback on how the proposed Plan aligns with the outcomes of their Study`.. Furthermore, the Municipality relied on mailed out Village Plan Citizen surveys as past of their preliminary public consultation process, but no specific Resident responses were shared with the public at these meetings. The Planning Department also did not provide explicit explanations on. what portions of the proposed Plan, if any, were reflective of the values and expressions made by Residents in their. surveys. The Planning Department also did not have any representatives from other Municipal or Provincial departments, such as Public Works present for the public meetings. This was problematic given the Planning Department's representations that the Public Works department would. play critical role in responding to the resource related implications resulting from the proposed Plan. The Planning Department also failed to invite any independent environmental. engineers (such as hydrologists) to the meetings to facilitate dialogue between the Residents and. Planning Department on relevant resource considerations relating to the proposed Village ;Plan_ ent studis rewiaus:ly This is of notable concern given that several resource rnana, for t e Mtrnici clean in i ted that the Villa alitw increase d o wh]le e P d develonm nt as the curre t minent nde inniru The Municipal Planning Department has stated, in published timelines, that it is their objective to complete the Village Plan Review by end of 20236. Throughout the duration of the public consultations Municipal staff and a council representative made explicit expressions of their personal desires to propel this project forward in an imminent manner, with 1 -feather Archibald, Senior Development Officer, candidly declaring at the August 03, 2023, meeting, "We want this to be done!" VoiCias ar i bo s W & It i i at 1irnsr These expressions were made at the public meetings by Planning Department employees, all while the Planning Department also put much blame on some of the Village's current and in - progress development concerns, on an apparent lack. of foresight by the Municipality and Community when the last Planning review was conducted. Given that it is their view that much of today's Village controversies are a result of yesterday's compla,certcy.. we would think that the Planning committee would be dedicated to taking the necessary time to ensure the current Planting review is founded in adequate research and integration of resident, insights„ It is our respectful view that this project simply has not been adequately assessed to allow for a final hearing at this time. Much. of Chester hasj not been properly in rued on an('e ro n.ed wp n . rrar have ev n providedwith tangible data t, substantial environmental and comxnur ity cpncerns that arise as a result of the Municipality°°s proposed Village Plan, r. e Proocased Plan A age .114 s When asked about the motivating, 'actors behind the Village Plan Review, Mr, Garth Sturtevant resolutely cited economic growth and development as his leading objective in preparing the nt Village Plan. At the public meetings the Residents of Chester clearly and reDtedly ed ubstanti ]lv ifferent values for V° loge Plan. including resptansiblu res urc+ hit e tttr . It ilage. and culture. At the meetings it was clearly expressed by Village Residents that Chester nce and economy is fo.. nded art preservation of character homes and coastal, charm. R.- of Chester Village are not .seeking the cheap institutionalization of the Village core, and are instead seeking planning, provisions that ensure any renovation or new build in the Village: will only enhance the existing landscape. The V'illage's historical and coastal properties, and use of quality in -keeping and sustainable building :materials is what has given Chester its reputation as one of Nova Scotia's greatest architectural treasures. Chester iclent are see a Muni al rain in its je acy as a 'commurOir built on beauty..war d. and, internationally to visit. Chester for its unique ent forth. and structures is essential iri ensuring that to Residents and a tourist attraction to rnany°. rategP that wil➢ ensure that the Villas history.. People travel vernacular. and preserva Chester retains its appeal as both a Village residents also indicated at the public corisultatic rr meetings that those who have invested their life to Chester, in maintaining their honh.es, and contributing to the communityare deserving of having the enjoyment of their Properties and. Property values preserved. As such, it is assent t tlh.e Villa e Plan ens that an. r chap es r de -e t I1 wvances . wit, riot djlute tl e value or enjoyrn,ent of existing prop , and will ensure protection against the privatization of publicly enjoyed spaces, such as access to the water from Chester Village's various harbours. NV note that careful consideration should be made in relation to the feedback offered by Residents at these public mecti s. given that they are the individuals with lived experience relating to the resource,concerns in the Village, They are also the ones with an innate "(Pawing of the invaluable role that Chester's existing landscapes,. such as our picturesque waterfront plays in attracting interest to Chester Village 1t rs our respectful reuucst t. t °until use their a r P t ensure that the l'la i rtrnent adapt their proposed posed Village Plante. reflect and incorporate the clearly expressed values of C 1..s.te'i Residents. which includes preserving Chester's existing resources, heritage, and culture. Wat'r The public consultation meetings confirmed that the Village of Che ter es env°trod en sustainable resource manage/Rent, Water quality and quantity remain a substantial concern of the Residents of Chester, and as such, any Village Planning strategy must take a proactive approach in evaluating potential for erosion of water supply within the Community. The Residents concerns surroundiwz water arid setati resource m.an.a ernelt are not un.f ended. riven eX that quantitative studies back 10 1967 have in lkated. that the Village dies nol have ade bate owater su rlyr to meet_...the demand of residents and businesses.' Despite this Mr. turtevant's proposed Plan focuses on. increased density within the Commit n ty and ignores the undeniably consistent conclusions offeredby various water resource studies conducted for the Municipality: Chester does not have adequate water supply to support the, xrtin' deeds of the Village, let alone new demand as a resm t increa ed density^ or d e;lo ent. Any plan which allows for the potential of significant development and increased density in the Village core is not only short-sighted but undeniably reckless. At the public community presentations Mr_. Sturtevant, the 1e i senior planner responsible for the Village Review, admitted that he had not conducted or incorporated any quantitative studies on the impacts of the proposed increased density in preparing his Plan, nor had his Planning Department engaged any third -party professionals, such as environmental engineers (hydrologists), to provide the Village with anindependent assessment on the viability of their proposed Flan. This lack of quantitative analysis is particularly concerning as the August 2017 water needs and options preliminary assessment prepared for the Village by CBCL Limited, Consulting Engineers, indicates that approximately one quarter of the sample participants experienced water supply issues.s � cR� Repo E: Water Survey Municipality 4f Chester,2'O at page 1 aryr Groundwater Supply Ass ment, Village of Chester Cerrtraf Water Systern. Needs and 0ptiarrs tafysss Final rdo umeatWattt3stfu CVO 17/23gforigmriaV L tf 'D at :page iv In the executive sc ary to the report. C1CI_ concluded: "The survey results and collected er quality' data indicate that water quantity and quality problems are cornrnon throughout the Village of Chester_ _ . May well owners are required to observe conservation measures_ and several properties are without a consistent ;supply. Shortages show that water recol't� ofiheyCOMM P�EV'th r extsti Led arts d that the tontial 'Or her dove o densiiv f rnphasi: added ] The report repeatedly concluded that the Village core could not: sustain. increased density or development, and also confirmed that in a 2016 drought several residents experienced water shortages to such an extent that they were without tap water for periods of one week to four months.l ° The report further stated: "Existing climate models suggest that the rate and. frequency of extreme weather events is increasing in. Nova Scotia,. which would indicate that drought events such. as those experienced in 2016 are likely to be repeated. Climate and well data compiled b NSI)NR appears to support this, Periodic_ intensive reductions rechar e to shallow a a ers in Cre t r r lr.'k .lv t cr ntinzre to causes skkr a poierrtially lbtth incredlrea,,fT'equeney. Heir duration in utur ' veers".11 (emphasis added] While Mr. Sturtevant repeatedly indicated resource management was not within the scope of his role as a Senior l' Municipal Planner, the Canadian Institate of Planners (CIP) defines the planning profession as: hey scientific, aesthetic, and orderly disposition of land, resources, facilities, and sew°ices with a view to securing physical, economic, and social efi ciency, artd the health and well-being. of urban and rural communities- .1 9 CBCL Preliminary Groundwater S Report, 2017. „WWI $1X81•[40,k baabc.8 4 2i�„ A. 9 11 CSG1. Preiirn Report., 2047, e1taaiI4Bbbba X17._ r Systerrm; Needs and 4 ti i"is A iysis Final gev y Asses ern, Villarge of Chester Central Water Systems deeds and 't r s 1r aly sis Final ft/attachments/ CSCL Frelirrrir pundwater y Assessment; Village o Repot, 2047,, elealGt 12 Oat 4Usie I 'ruiner 'What iSPf lniro9?' Asrehit. t page by pitons Analysis Final It is a Planner's v P rule to reate to develop a. r port ibI and sl.astainablc plan, and a +ills e Plan that has not considered resource issues, firs a Villae known .for its considerable water shortages), is not a ,plan. that looks to secure the physical, economic, and social efficiency, and the health and: well-being of the community', We ask Council. to affirm Planniuig's role in ensuring that the Village Plan presented is one founded in professional integrity through adequate consideration of resource management. Qua Data 1 independent Resident concerns relating to the general lack of c uanti.ta.ti studies or independent re Fiew of the proposed Village Plan is not limited to resource management, but also extends to the broader nature of the Plan and its proposed implernentatiora. Given. e tv f the entire villa ze and its res considered by a diverse set of professionals, This Plan is not unduly centralized, and allows for the resident and: professional voices. al Flan to reflect a diverse mosaic of panic , lar area of c. ncern was the lack of any assessment,....on the Ability pf our current. e e. e ervic es i frastructu_ure to support the potential density proposed by the Planning, ent liven tl t the Province just experienced grave wildfires, and Chester has been. known to lose several noteworthy structures to fire throughout the years, it would only be res on.sible to have. e r ed. Villa a., a re ented to eme =enc- erg°ice rso so that they can provide their professional opinion. on the potential risks associated with the proposed Plan.. The proposed Plan rnutst also be assessed in tight of the Municipality's ' bligations trr its Residents under the Municipal Government Act, which; cites in its pre -amble that "municipalities are a responsible order of government accountable to the Peop:le_u3" Reviewing the proposed Plan in lightof this 300+ page Act, as well as other relevant provincial and federal legislation, (including, but not limited to, any envi:rotunental, well & septic regulations, and National Provincial. Building Cocks,) is essential, Such an undertaking requires specific expeerti.sc, and. should be done responsibly and thoroughly to ensure the Council is not presented with a Plan for approval that is in conflict with the Municipality's broader obligations to adhere to and enforce laws for the benefit of the people, Throughout the public meeting process Mr. Stonewall indicated some of the lack of research to date is due to the Municipal Planning having a small team, that is already overburdened with their current workload, if the Municipality is already organizationally burdened by the current demand from Chester Residents, it is pertinent that tlteintroduction of any proposed planning Apt of Nona. Soo t page 12 provisions are professiortallvY rcvie wed and introduced in a manner that ensures that '. illat e and its governcrtent will not be unduly burdened with ►ender®res aurcecl population grow th and. .ev°,elopme It is our view- that the Municipality. e Busnesses,. and. Residents all benefit from further foresight and consolation.. We believe a pro -active, unified. approach among Council, Village Residents, the Planning Advisory Committee, the Planning Department, and other stakeholders., is the best path forward in ensuring that Chester's legacy is maintairned. It is a privilege to liv=e and work in Chester. and 1v ll rI lint Conclusion from a su talin A responsible con tt: l is a good council, and with that, Chester's legacy is founded in comrnuni and erivirot mental integrity_ ad safe V We respectfully request C Department to engage in responsible research, revisi+ n, and further public engagement, before presenting their final proposed Village Plan, oin nity confidence by directing S ae Planning In Social. Consciousness & Cornnnunity, The Chester Coalition of Common Sense Citizens cc. Municipality of District of Chester Planning Department Municipality of District of Chester Planning Advisory Cora rnittee Voctada Survey Responses To The Se1~inndary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw Barry Redmond Brenda Mulroonny d Yes Yes,. and I hair concerns Brian Wallace 6 No Ma - 'DAM 21923 - Yes„ and I have concerns Page 9 in Esta hfs , such a s a critic i I Ii ne has y re.a5 ve s.n ata Y nyr concerns 1 clock know where to begin I I have written r letter dealing, 'swish 1.he Chest. r look a nd arch 1.1 'sues which I ha.e sent to various interested -anti concerned peoysle rrid g rnul Including Carsncli,both as ai whole and individual courk+Iinrr j tiros Plrtnnirip; Department / and the Building Department, M will' Sarnd that letter' to vim VOGEA'€A acfdress. I am con -mined ai+rrapi a9t a re;Y;ving.. the sire of residential estate'pro{rertYe.s. existing, properties In th w'Ilage are a defining landscape feature of the village. Once g 'ne'it list reclaimed. I feel 'there- sttauld be stricter architectural c+introls< There haw rece+atly tineaa new s'tructair+ s bulls ;in no way represent the feel 01 Ckacster. 1 find i1 itilLlrit os, ih t traditional board and taattert are suit p rrnitted but Several Other rn;ater'ials and architecture are. Taaditional materials should be used on the entire building not just the street facade.. I think It Is unacceptable to Cheapen ditwn m atelials needed foe strtICluref, of any sire. Many villages, town a nd cities- architectural 'appe;arar es ,pre noticeable in'whxt I call growth rings. This method if unedprii''tttSIlse 1raalationaiarchitecture ofthe community but allowing for tbemore modemorleSS expensive to be constructed in its .growth rings, I. also feel allowing, for building growth without planning list the support salmi -r .r. le.; avatar„ sow streets, parking to name a low puttirst the cart before the horse, c1'ection in Estate tut rala,aurrernenta on Peninsula, etc. will not create affsrdab n usl and igrC th the limited water supply issues already present and that the existing lasts arc on Septic rather han public sewer. A very dramatic and risky charge which is. fraught with potential unintended nsePrrenCcs,. particularly when it will atcurnplish little in term cif its stated goals, s of 13j2Si2a Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw Carol [)odds Cynt Y F'rrrry ung llkawidterg,ht Yes Ytts. andi ham tcnc rYP� a 1,, c: 't R xian Atras :ere vstfnerable if :tang fit g oes ahead. fe r us on Zoning R2 corrtrncrc'ial down town core, 5 or above for bulkiings. llth the loopholes currently in place in the planning protean re buildings and mat flak etc. the nlage is threatened. ter 3,uppty and parking art; already huge Issues and adding in the core vxc s a=x;r;t buil:1iasys particularly 5plus or more is threateniiAyr to e4Y.^ryone„ R ae+:Idrntral and also R2 commercial as prcafrrsed shows nu reri pert for rrsrdcnts and also the integrity of iho 14 ;e, Planning permission from what i Cran s+ar PI lows nor anything to be built so better to say -NO to t:10iirag rather than risk bt iildlnF; that threaten our write r supply ar+d parking on what are already ero v led t,trepts, thank you My family owns 2. horned on .the Peninsula_ f3lvichn rite, test ttr:'tots intOsi lots w�culd dramii �Y 6 aurally c:ha rige (kit; rhin:octet of the peninsula., diminish its Eta Lily and harm the tt,:u system, .And for. what purpose? It will not create affordable hawsiia„ rmitted construction rn ateri its; auni Yes, died r have ccrroernas bats and furt.rt`r dennif ica III! character of Chester will he maintained.. Ya>s. aaatt 1 :erns mknt R15 infrastructure development, in this real ageitty that conducts the study slsould For reasons th,it ere dilf'rrult ter ascent policy through. the public k rot beet Ili;) ) 91515, taavid Creighton h rc rr al cfctar r utignr fur how • n Conducted? Governments requite this r)f tarivi private residents should acquire thin of thcg {fovttnrn nt, The apsprom.; by the resident s in order to assure iindepe.ndence. It appears that corners are ckrt in order tv gar.sh this dy ditiprised during the process. We expect better conduct 8DV°-MA Chr 2 23 z As of f1/2_wj2:3 Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw d Y Yes i3iana l trbcnrk Yes Thy dkrbltrof Hill i VOCiO&)A:1OZ3 hose c s, and I halvta concerns brae 3 uld t c rskeisi nlail salutlan re ss th hnfraatr use fwator,•srrwer, parking and Toads'".. frodensity'mncreaseS Shaul[! he cor rder d'in r Zones. New bylaws are is u:tafta1 1f ,apprapriately es forced,, Today that is not happening. Multiple examples have Lineert pr<wided to the IF'tanni ng Committee whn have openly stated that ,J 1$ is not their problem, thrat,hos another deparlWatt, s resp am€IkrilMt�y,�{u@ Without enfdrrcemetil then the fsn,Arit worth the packer at,iibs written an.. rthi'tecsural design in Ilse {slam. requires stre ntpt ienirrt; to specify the. exact rego rr rwrents netri(rd -to protect the; ,.+itiCdetiter look, .u. Some effort. wits made to enhance the existing plan but ntrot trncrtugh tluxrght has been given to ensure the, design Integrity at the core village is preserved. It appears that sonar, member's of Council and the Planning ComMittete ate not working to protect the interests of the lfrrki htmskvwn+e•rs_ Clearlythe only falk:cbenefiting from the proposed charbNesare rl 'irloperti. This it. arnaa:ce,ptable. ] inrtl ly i n roalking with many people in the village It Is clear that not a•nrut h c0mrnuralcal.ion has rred between the easrncml and residents. Therefore the current prapiv, aal needs to be put on hold' until appropriate here kc;irres are taken to inform all reSirl,enfS of the consequences •of the planned rt s, Only then can we provide all the net— dt prry'input for consideration before rnvvi of; forward fx,5 any charges. Proposed arc] ctrl[ ii design perimeters, water supply, rn.unicip. l sewage eiri;i1 over( rule d th1 Ii he issues you :ntentioo in the attatbcd cfoCurnent. ]any& here and I'm grateful ViCOCTA1?A is being active, mb change aaradism verycanc,ernc have ter n trying to gtt the yes yes., a nd uthors of this lirnscicf St Ccs da ry Planning Strategy and where a rie they dom bell rd. be very Ilttle concern about water sum/it, or dlsturlying existing supplies. Cie[ rid of the &B's' and we would aurae again floe mores affordable horses available for 11111 tline tifslrirTMnts wfaa adcf tiro the quality o1 Out Vi'llage.1.ot sizes should NOT tic up for debate. Yes No, a and 1'd like to know nr1 I Mawr Cooreerns 101101 ttt quarter acre, uplsty, safari ht`b' fs liter[+ctsr i1 In Chester the charm will di•sappe.ar 'T'here Is lots cif land to develop an the land side of ttse old highway or affordable 'hosts , lvtitintairaing the character architecturally is nut ;lhuays easy but there definitely should be Soiee ttroad'factorsi o split up properties on the back harbour e penlrssula and, Nauss Point wotitd'te a travesty I The Maple e currCnily paying the Incredltddy high taxes would leave• the t;hester as we know it and love, gone forever' 11 ! e it;rte area k s a bsolutely ridiculous given Ilse lac e,,d cube dpi wells . Those things plus 7 house couldn't fit on a AS 'of B.1•7`/Z3 Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw a (ray Dennis ington to -Ann Grant YOS Yes Yes Ye S s, t have concerns s. Yes, an I ha e r eeiza m Yeas, and I Irav ccncer 1'rC9tt b~ 0011 No, orail I'ei like Yes, and t have cioncerrss , know more more As txual, toutici1.. ,cans tc+fawrur developers rather than Chesterre.sidentw, the ;alrn bring, t:o bring it petty tax rrtentiVrot the municipality. c'otepirrpi.t such as Bornnc h,3w barilt rttrerc,ie7uSrcnka' on the tirartf end of t uei n 5t, which stick out like a badly lii)ure eS thumb.. tt appears they now have their Ira old ;'koland property. on the corner tor Onion and King,, They ,and sc n1 e Other contracts rs arc enlyinterested In. cashing in„ not 5 )ire.Eci4yt,i1ott the remaining. architectural quality of Itt•stc dle.g wiphou¢ an far aatar hearth [something to drift! where the water will cor'ne front? d lot size ser.iamt, extre it Si IsCty rk JWRAi villdyco NOT o wnl bier water supply is I Firm qual C�oai gnu litailrl rrrorc hear p Ry li rot ct Clnestcr's .,., r..: beflewea�ttsndrnr�nts.'ytr�k Iannl strafe wwI character. the amendment a i ii phoning .s,taatetyy ax r re drafted with di at topers in mind rather than hnsc rsf ucc Irving here. uppriint sllncwiegt ie)r smTiler lots. (t laickef addressing; Chester's limited water resources is ileck,4ilinit, sr wn ti)VoCrDADA 2023 Page 4 i.inah?e tnattend public meetings due to work a itrncn . t tiitvo anoil°ser public rneetiii regtalred, e'a'ten though I may again have work cornntitments. i also wesJd hair expected better notification abut the. meetings, e.,g, notices in rriaiIbnie i arid Debbie's list. Alter reading V(?CTA[}A's synopsis, I have coneerns abort tack of arc 1. al ee> R he facade of a building to comply with the traditional i for Chester} rnatedafs would cltartge, rn, the character id the Village, Reducing lot sire requirements to allow for greater density makes no sense, Besides chat-at/lo, the • tihar'aacter of cer'taln neighbourhoods, this would also increase: the ri.sk.of earlier and' longer drnuf;hli, l hc. Vllli§gE hats been subgect to droughts, ;and thorcforte dry. ,wells In.samtr cat eS, for several years. There should be no increase in density unfessfunlit the wetter'sup,rfy for the Village has been soured. As of .8/2S/?-i Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use ylaw Julia Creighton ¢yn'Sh Yes 'yes and I hose concerns Yep, ancf 1 have concerns e_s, said i have t.:Onceirns 1 would like to si e rh tr:vduti.onal architzrttar ias Rhea II ap e preserved as moth ors is prorti people moaning.about the fact that the Isnur.e that tint Spat put. up i rit+Y: ar typlc ii 'Chester house -the house the Dr keasby put up on that property —13Db was nM a e lror5ter house either.. aloe deterrent to any development in (Yrott.;tatr a stdential, hotel or other commercial i$ the lack. of voter sets 4bfb yuf•ficienl to conform with the existing building code.. pit?'Sr f 1y tl►c survey so people can and whether they are full or atppreciate'Voctada concentrating on the 4 {saints ithas: think'drat4lrntrnt deadiI'n shtraiid he extended; t manage to attend one meeting but have not had time la digest everything with crazy sarrnnte r . d"off icult to give'impOrtarrt questions one's 1u4 411t4r: inn; "agree 1009 that subdividing land In so:+":'oiled 3 peninsulas would create undesirable outcome - not, bec?tese of increased density, rrt`cessarily, but because of incre aSer1 tr',aftic in areas where it is pleasant to walk,, and because f don't trust that the new struttures vzi II be In keeping with the "Chester chars-cter betel I have attended many meetings about desirande architectural elements of Christer over several yearr, but continuo to see monstrosities built - concern about implementation and policing - the duplexes COQueen Street ;7.G simply not in keeping with the rhe seer character « as serape -one whose well has run do/several hates and who limes dose to the new hn eJ, l am very t:oncerneti about water .issues and have nest been' able to grasp whether this Iss.rte i$ being .given the weight It warrants ' I am pleased drat the new by-law will restrict Airfinb•ing to principle reside Ices, but would like to know how this is going, to be controlled In practice ' I'd like to know 'why Chester is operating:; units Sy -year -old by-law,, though this does explain why the, Planning &apartment hits no power against developers; how d'a'd we tilictw this to happen? °1 applatad the Planni.nt nerf3rtment's hard work in going;'this far, boat I'm afraid I'm a little laded - Just exhausted ley }tars :ind years of hideous and large lotuses being built here • the Spat.: property, etc. The wor's.t part Is that we have to Iiwi will ft and the owners will spend. a very lirnitilwl time lit their prorperty * 1'rra finery cttr4corned about attracting young families to tilt" tviunl it a9'lty and applaud the department"S• attempts to Isrrswvde lvoi,asing that Is alfordable Concern in the approach to'increasang density ca rrat water rescues. Concerned Ohm. c'Mntry+ into .n suburb- Concerned abut lack of Controls on arc.hitectural mutually ,'attroe 1 eg,P.0 community guidelines and standards this iseeck tee be a by-law so the guidelines are enforceable. k of intoematlaa'?,'kwsttar and septic, Mil ng,. ad., ic, truild�n facades, OVOC'TDAM 2013 Page S. A5 01 805/ Voctada Survey Responses To TheSecondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw th JahnsKz cagh Robertson lI INN reµ arrr tirttwn n Yes Yes h 1 hive concern d f have concerns Y1175, and 1 ve concerns Yes, and I have no if,Kurly etctlaarm art ltml rrlre I W lwa ....risking fn. r tear armd whyR i seen the t lr at emf aalrr rr�at s the lack. of d se. "icc , ,end parking,. 1 would suggest t hi 0114F,12 Is, already at a max ft,r dens ity. nk .d further detail and di!:cu Sion with !VIM: „..„..- 1th every tlrlitp yt?u htrwe writ ten. l'mttended the last meeting tmt as t titre, pI and the..y pent moreantt telling itsto wr ri i ye '1t.:kenswe could' have nn (rur property and hews/ tr.o trirn 0417 road plantings and $1;iinmcd goer evm:.rylhiiip else, When people asked aF, gut water and density they in and they moved on to the next questioner, Everyone a with a Ia.t gu lot will be able to 'die dntd sell CO a part of their prolxrty and this will create too much density in the village with zero architectural control;. It's happening all over ncc place and its very very Wytl„ We nerd water in the Ilarge or fire trucks that can iiil up with fresh water tea douse fires. A. house do<:asod with salt water Is st wrote I sa id no to wafer hits now I've changed my mind. The other thing is I'm really ustratetf becarr$iP, I've lone to endless mrrrtting, in the oast about. Cheesier planning and nothing Livery rahrrnrve-s: Nothipp". Ugly mierSive .buildirigs are being,, built trecause we haa+e revs) C.oiltrolS, Chester is getting ugly, R 'i acre (canape J'tr waelI and sc tae ran 1nt to t-aizt, et han e. or estate to warter ran kill and m uln character of area Architectural roles and enforcement WATER r' iaccoa imradiatleg those already here No, and I'd like ire know more hat a deems t ll the; Drop c g if orals aredesl designed with Improvements Chester to make Chester a tuhurh of liallfax:Thls I at airily not why unicgav; and chaa'isheat character of Ches1.err for the wore. Nlatggie Etrown Yes, and I h,mr does oatt rr t u'rrt cite: C arster fc el e vet will di?brij rave a negates r.?fipr°v t>'et wafer su y_'i'he� a re.hil'oc-lural controls are virtually rtrrn-exist nt, ibi ml� terial controls are very uwrrok ;and norninal in rma turr rind certainly do not. support tht Chester look. I've reiorence tea cr balance with crasi: generally means ecjst pr;rv,ril5 c:o that statement, completely undermines the attennfiS. at Chester look and feel controls. t:7VOCTDAl 2D2: Page 6 Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw Yes Rachel oxvi Pert ka Phil' t'o laah uVOC:TDAOA 2023 concerns Yet, and I haveconcerns I ha ccoaxcere Page 7 C, Ittckraf traskparency, lack cf lea *rs po t:,e€fts rallelse,. It prrtenl rrffVicers .scope and the role ttaey ttavr: vrlten It comes to variances tie➢tf ut inv nrlghbours" Building, materials to rethio costs for developers, iaf core on Valley Rood with hotel and other posSlble'aca tiOn rentals ' i n Valley Fed was neveilaiartofthe traffic study previously done in('hurter, Airbnb need for enforcement and clarifIca hell on village stand on boarding houses in a carnniCrei l care. Density in R1. & R2 gentle nr ntlressup'lae it radfculous especially under the guise of reffordatAn houslrvg. SCAM 9>am is 2 rnentr!rs: by development agreement , Archetecturai design does not include metal skiing vine I or cinder blocks I dart's think. I need to gis cvri live. attended 4 meetings I feel the next public ritdel rg Should kie held after the revision to date ale dose. Totally espooSe teducl:irtn In mini inunt lot s1.. T devious way 1 he water supply Issues has been disrltrat+KtF Itr.ticee or root density lamre,tses arstl trsa ire to develop Chester at any cost. The char ohrss cummerciat strip on Highway 3 - what. a tcrfiltlC Whether si,ghtiines at intersections wall be enforced and the refusal tc mandate 4 -way slops r'o 4r5n t;:weIlert Kdt the plan. "NI 'ideas. lost the signature architCt:turat el Rs in the. Chester style. Thank you cling we attended w'oo4 tl a f aaa sea nrF real chance to devele nil explore As of R/25/23 Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and Land -Use Bylaw Sam FiPixie. Susan Crocker Suzan l rani r Syd DurraoirseisO Timoth it Yeti Yes Yes Yes and 1 Isoutpht less than an Ipurchased,'I gut the t had s upplled water hi my neighbors' taxatY'fy nf' d, and nty'ra igh rs wwl:oo has been using the well raising .2 c1rildren had a washezrarxf:r dis.hwashr•.r,always had s.uffiraent 0,r3te.r, Upon she sale to of their.stih' disaster! let and well, t1 ' put Its z drilled wt'P L. And didn't haw any water onitipla ints, However, as a new home,, owner, as a sr`ngle sca.som:al resident .soil being:very water frugal, 1 had to buynidditionaf trucked -in water every late issly or early August and have had to do .o every war since. ,,end now the t w construction directly across the Street from me has a huge welt to support the m ItIple-famflydwol Inge,. It's basic, The Fact is that as derisi'ty ls<rs lncat'ascct around in traytur TACT of decreasing well cwater Is a reality. we naust regulate and monitor the uric of all of our watr r - As a 't G- year-seasonaI resident, I treasure rnywell and want to know S hat others s rrl corrierving, and that the use of water by new construction is reviewed 1a In fight. of the currant diminishing supply of water: and our dry wells. Where ,arc the hydraulic reports and why arc they not available to the neigfatiors and public? Sandra Swenson nsific ataan of ienirasula, provost's/ Sr♦=lis ws,. concern t unsuccessful. of Ynhr'iAlynratitx-n rf' droposedinnsns of s1i a= norm prurercuj an I sw�atcr aces; irclnl: the character of Ches. will Ye-s, here nerds ter be store. public repot, rind sprriflc,t, ...., °° Yes, once I hay: caaticerass "t' Ily° nutrnach(Yt°rwY't, d .groups to lyid-the Municipality send a letter tta every taxpayer in the district adlusi thorn Of the plan change process sosti the kty issues and Invite particip,atisaea2 limy were all the at her resideet:i; Mantled? mple- In the: effort to :address concerns over air b and: b's (0414r,1 04. alfordblc housing, the unicl tllty is about to eliminate the ITIVE al come unity that has been part of also 5umrrittr economy of` ,ade*s/i enrrraticrns, Do these peoples eve..n know how this will impact them? them, are to tackle the issuer of chart term rentals crowding out residents • registration, higher (;r'operlysax tan sarond hones and taxes equivalent "1.v- 0 and ti's perhaps. Ltut first tins the analysis to fully understand the.r>wibkc tip the vitla.ge and the implications of any such change. 1)o the homework; •o the matht The rani- $,ower,, ntiil. Arch land dr•.n rodaritlon ctf estate resistorstio1 ot poorly lot sries... u�l defined artkaYtr;�:tsra'� caantrtai. ��_ Lank of deflnatYtoia "village leak ontrolf+ d des°elect nt and restrictions l idea, f"DADA 707.7 Page, g As of 6/XS,ra.1 Voctada Survey Responses To The Secondary Planning Strategy and. Lan-Us 'ylaw 1VOfi'DA M 1023 I1ca t IeiPe trr uit h t u' r t szy 11 a t nit re t mein then3s new develop.rients will 'impact their rt ighbaurs, ?r we. want 9:a lherease density we lnrrastaucture in place t service it. Page 9 AS 4tB/25123 THE =MCI OF CHESTER Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and Land Use By-law (LUB) has been underway since 2020, Public Drafts are now available for review and comments. Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visit vo cesandchoices,cafvillagereyiew, for more information or to submit comments online_ Date: Marne: Community: Comments:. ...Please continue on the reverse side af'k is form To; Municipal Council Members Re: Planned recommended changes on several items ma;intain the current requirements in the Estate Residential- now R1 Residential area of the Village of Chester designate a Wetland expand our historical Areas consider architectural guidelines 1) On page 11-12 of the' proposed Vision and Goals of the Secondary Planning Strategy, the document states it "contains specific objectives for the Village of Chester," including "that the existing character of the Village of Chester is viewed as... the model for future developrnent. This character is expressed through .a primarily residential environment which respects traditional architectural style and form_" Th1s. concept of unique character is repeated throughout the document, In addition,. as stated on page 40, "Concerns about a lack of potable water and existing community character provide support for rnaintaining traditional land: regulations iri this area, while, seeking new opportunities where deemed practical," First, thanks to you and your done. Our concerns arid reco arming and development officers for a huge task that is most part well mendations for improving the plan are on several points as follows= 1. Do not change the current requirements for the R1 Residential Area aswe feel they will significantly change the quality and character of the areas, f=ormerly called the Estate Residential area, the R1 includes the 3 peninsulas of Nauss"s Paint, Sirron's Point and the Peninsula Road area. The suggested changes cannot be sustained without :municipal provision of sewer and: water service, as well as the widening of the roads to :modern standards by the Province. All this at tremendous expense=. Specifically: *The reduction in minirnuen size of the lots from about 3,700 square meters to 1000 square meters will allow multiple houses on the existing lot, changing the desirability, appearance and unique quality of the areas *The reduction in the requirements for side yard, front yard and rear yard will effectivery promote a 400% increase in the density of the various peninsulas, again changing the appearance and uniqueness of the area, dramatically impacting the well water availability, the septic field effectiveness,. the condition of the roads, and negatively affecting the overall appearance of the area. *Where is the infrastructure to support all this usage? ""Visitors and potential new residents find these three peninsulas to be valued features of the community, Why destroy a huge commJnity asset when there are other,. more effective ways to develop moderate income housing 2) Consider designating land on either side of the river that connects the Back Harbour with Starufo Lake as a wetland. It perio=dically ills the area beyond the river with water and contains biological activities. It is very marshy., Perhaps consider working with the current owner to make the whole Hawbolt area a park with a wetland focus_ 3, Establish a Heritage Area including the Historic Anglican, Catholic and Baptist CIiurcFres and their cemeteries, 4. Include in your requirements fear a new or remodeled building that the buildings have material constructed of wood, shingle, or vinyl that looks like wood or shingle so that any new homes complement the neighborhood and fit it, THE MUNICIPAi LTY OF CHESTER R Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-lawl A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and Land Use By-law (LUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Drafts are now available for review and comments_ Public input, cornments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform any changes to the final documents, You can leave comments in the space below or visit voicesandchoice . t ilia+ ere ie r, for more information or to submit comments online, Date: Name: Cornrn'uni Comments: Tank you for y u put! E MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law.. A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and. Land Use By-law CLUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Drafts are now available for review and comments, Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform, any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visit voices dchoices.ca/viltlagerevieW1 for more information or to submit comments online. Date: Name: Community: Comments: 14 "igypp,"HE e continue on the reverse side of this fog .' THE MUNICIPALI. CHES us know your thoughts and ideas aout the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and Land Use By-law (LUB) has been underway since 2020. Public. Drafts are now available for review and comments. Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and wall help shape and inform any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visit voicesandchoices.cajvillagereyiew, for more information or to submit comments online. Date: Name: Comm ni ...Please continue an the reverse side of this form 8/27{23. 10;48 AM Chang e.org Pelitiorr - Support our Operr Lefler to Chester Council -272,3 Village Plan Review! n Charlge.e;rg Petits - de Comments Updates Support our Open Letter to Chester Council - 2023 Village Plan Review! Started Petition to 243 Signatures August 23, 2023 Municipality of District of Chester Council (MrrtidipaJi:ty of District of Chester) Why this petition ma 147 people gned today 500 Next Goal https 1lwwww.change,Qrg/p!! er-tc hesteracouncil-r village-plan-review?redireut=te,lse 1110 8/27f23, :p;48 AIM Petition - Support our Open Letter to Che i9-=2023 'Mage Plan Review! Change.org Started by gheste1 Co if ion ? 9,... nse Mans f +CQwnrrnan S�er* Citizen _... EA , .K_ _ PDF VERSIQNJERE Open Letter L Chester council. FOR EASI�Ft ��A(��111G �CIvI�K �}IN CtUR �..�.._� Chester �.,..�._.,.. _ AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCIL: 24 August 2023 Dear Municipality of Chester Council: re. Village Planning Review We are writing toexpress our concerns with the progression of the Village of Chester Planning Document Review process and proposed Village Plan to date. We call upon Council to take immediate action on behalf of Chester citizens by requesting further undertaking of professional due diligence and public consultation by the Municipal Planning Department.. In particular, we ask that Council work with Municipal Planning to ensure appropriate steps are taken to: 1. Adapt the proposed Plan to address the expressed concerns of Residents; 2. Engage independent professionals to conduct any research or consultation required to ensure Chester Residents are provided with an informed and transparent proposed Village Plan; and 3. Allow for further adequate public consultation of the revised proposed Plan prior to allowing the matter to proceed to Council for a final hearing. Core Planning Process Concerns Timelines ÷ Communication According to Municipal published timelines, the Village Plan Review commenced in December 201 9. The majority of the Village Plan Review was conducted throughout the global pandemic, a period in which society was focused on survival. Throughout this period traditional forms of community interaction, engagement, and communication were severely restricted by the requirement to stay Home. As the community then transitioned out of rigid pandemic restrictions, the Village was faced with further significant socioeconomic burdens, (such as rapid rising rates of inflation and severe weather events), which continued to require the immediate attention and resources of Chester Residents. Given the novel social conditions during this period, it was pertinent that the Municipal Village 147 people signed today ht/p v.thange.vrgip/apen-letter-to— pester -council -re -villa a- tan-revievOredirect=false 2/10 THE MUN'ICIP1LI Yo7'` CHESTER Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and Land Use By-law (LUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Drafts are now available for review and comments, Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform anychanges to the final documents„ You can leave comments in the space below or visit voicesandchoiices.ca/v llagereview', for more information or to submit comments online. Co unity: Co Vents: ...Please c.Qntinue cin the reverse side oaf this form THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHEST R Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use -law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Stra`:egy (SPS) and Land Use By-law (LUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Drafts are now available for review and comments. Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visit voicesandchoices.calvillagereview, for more information or to submit comments online. ...Pie cu crr the reverse side of this form Thank you far your inpu r t ,ic4 tlat k+! I.tt, roar !,L stir aV+U � ULe bylAjicr ,itl . ,da vit e`a+l +;41o r, Serum, Uttyslboiouglh Couni,.3,1, and A .ilil t nt,+t rc+14y the litdiu ; i tatais k1la sigtsal en findings to silicas at sear, laitti 'lames ',vhlai Lpparaids. JL'. p u LL own s ystem, ii;'Lka rye' 3l''.11, yap° tii`1`11 1111TH C°lSMOV, Now Ltrunswiek, coinpt'ial p aruvicle a riav agatio nal direct= wit ,' ar:itelvilal' ..,° (f=: t ' th-%f fA hs' lalir VOOTOe n, who ,t€€''-' a writ) ill( men at the Mast er rL {fir' .r .attfa'rlfi .,.IS tilt v .,rr: ti ._- 'ht . ,. ..itd r J' ti, rr)ll:al 1ho. o_ •J.ori t? yrai)ltrr llst'it fh. of 'all rl Vii.11 1t5 " Ca n ti4t_ �,Ito1o . F! .0111 . clip wheels, !1 .'h{ Ifatir,'sk)ill fell Ir. 'Pigs ==lir 613 ','zl.;ht hand corner, one id . This was o nce p art c€cil-t- s4:4is'�134' ,ii t l;)it 1'ed the villagee , ott t;ll attar, sometime during the iid and l ate eigundretis. To the left sctcll r!f the picture, close to the Ston e drudge, can he seen the remains of • ,ito latrt aaaeil , wher e a {,urge: of wooden structure was O fUi: built aer OSS the ],y onl., Thlu brook runs from Stallford's Lake and at this point empties into .;,.L1t water whi ch L fay t'i5 the Back Harbour, that, lies beyo nd the Sto ne Pe •:, 1...- a:e i st1_fn:. ::t.' .l;t? ,,:oaet, conning. {lie coach to Chester i , .11,',' of ,ri.»r uL Road, brrii ,gaiif passe ngers and mail. This route __ 7,,: •,(,,,,,, ,.s! :tc ;rllil many times the 1 ..,tt .l 1 d `.4 putt 1:t ' LLL tula t <tll si %!A 't 5:- , outc't continue its Journey up ..;,. ..;:ii 4o i itC- Coliltt,lala plum:, vl"LGtt y3 i3 •r tD , ers could disembark, Still ,L.; ;1Lt:I' tfal t off, UL U - ii go it 1''-'4, .t'. w 1 . it s way to d1;liWCL the mall at the :,,,:-.1. office on Ult.:. p,utlerty of Cila!]eia 1ir'ol n, King Street. From here it ;:;' ,'l°:i 4)'l, iLi Lii(;i '.i , this ti iu UCa the oilier (side of the vill- ►,,, ita .:-.,t;" cl ,i t:n 1 ..1t. C;'l et i`:1 at 6,111L9rr';i iiliro", This was the Wised changes occurred i:' .1Llt _=.L 4,L- -: �, s, [) - 1 , -.Ltt, it,°..1. ... SCk(S ir:t` tts �.t.td ., ..L.,Y 11 1, acrid t1 - . .uE of clic slage catch changed also. :tiousl' 1 ..`if ";11`, !11[1[1 Haute Was near ti being r!onst1'!1^tp"l, rIn would .:-,:1_+; ink n,_ 1-coalIs was a terrible stung known as the 'ride tV }is(' iii the brook to the ltriclic was washed away. Trttig e was b uilt to t ;i eu of Ch est er, hen the Sto ne t ;ighty-rive yearn c',i► ntr °acter's n ame „,s1 t£. ', it J a t. g,]` the !bridge; is i. ill,-: ;:`i' '£,1l #€ 5 l'a , '.gas store{# while a s la„ t text r :1. bpi ii !area{ wit sit uated f urther up the iii- :.,a-eae 81l ildi.rat ::' a lhsed as a 63111., To the right of this which over -shadowed the Smith's shop the atnithy came to the book established in 1890 and to - ..,m rkshiz equipment which s;L:os'crint he'ad 2) '7iiil.!iif tort i1 the livelihood of thi uh the Niel, Harbour a num- },. The growth of these v l ltt. were very pliable, ,a.,•.1 -Ruts and b rooms. 1.1 -[due, is ono or a side hill, ;tiler liar ?, teh-en with a stone in ncy was built in the 601115 Uri the second fluor. 60 of the chain of radio statio ns The glowing light from the three steel antenna towers that mark the site of the master station at Wake up Hill can be see n across the countryside. Satellite Statio ns at Jordan Bay, Shelburne Cou nty; Ecutn Secure, Guysboro ugh County; and Alma, New Brunswick, comprise a chain that relay the radio .signals, The signals provide a navagati onal direct. ion findings to ships at sea, and pla nes which are equipped with receivi ng apparatus. A monitor station was operated at Chester, staffed by four women, who +corked the eight hour shifts in conjunction with the men at the Master Station, checkin g and reporting any irregularity in the patterns as they were flashed. The monitor station was closed at the end of 1959, when th e Department of Transport incorporated the monitoring oper ations into their own system. Mr, Eric Redden is now in charge of the Navigation Statio n and with his staff main tains a twen ty-four hour watch over the operations HISTORY FRO M A PICTURE "THE OLD STON BRIDGE" CHESTER, N.S. by Mary E. Hume C f9f:i tit L�oldng at the picture, beginning in the looter right hand corner, one sees, between the fence and th e brook, a stilr of land. This was once part of the road that the stage coach tra velled when It e ntered the village of Chester, sometime during the mid and late eighteen h undreds, To the left side elf the picture, close to the Stone Bridge, ca n be seen the remains of the hutment, where a bridge of wooden structure was once b uilt across the broths. This brook r uns from Stanford's L ake and at this point empties into the salt water which forms the Back Harbour, that lie s beyond the Stone Bridge, Previous to the Halifax stage coach coming, the coach to Chester came by way of Windsor Road, bringing passengers and snail. This route was eve n bef ore the woode n bridge was constructed, and many times the coach had to wait for the tide to fall before it co uld continue its journey up the hill to the Columbia House, where passe ngers could disembark, Still further on into the village It would wend its way to deliver the mail at the postoffice on the property of CharlesBrown, Ki ng Street ., From here moved still further on, this time down hill to the oth er side of the vi11- age where the tired horses were cared for at "Blair's Barn". This was the early r oute of the stage coach; naturally as years passed changes occurred, other hotels were opened, and the route of the stage coach changed also. In the month of October, 1878, there was a terrible storm known as the Saxby Gale. A huge tidal wave caused the tide to rise in the brook to the height of four f eet, and part of the wooden bridge was washed away. It is open to question, exactly what year the Sto ne Bridge was built tt replace the wooden one . Mr. Edim uad Fender, a life time citizen of Chester whose boyhood h ome was near the bridge, remembers when the Stork; Bridge was being constructed, and places the time as being eighty-fiv e year; ago, which would make the year 1562 . He recalls that the contractor's name was Mr . Tufts. Showing in the picture's foregro und, to the right of the bridge, is small wooden building . It was in this building the grain was stored whit waiting to be ground at the grist mill which was situated further up tin brook. Later this same building was used as a barn . To the right of thi building one c an see the willow tree which overshadowed the Smith': blacksmith shop. From the blacksmith sloop the smithy came to the hrool to tire wago n wheels. Tlie blacksmith shop was established in 1840 and to day a member of the fourth generation works there using equipment whirl dat es back to the original founder . The willow tree also played a significant part In the livelihood of th early settlers. Throughout the, area at the head of the Beek Harb our a nun her of willow trees had been planted by these people. The growth of thes trees was kept cut back, and the sackers which grew out were very pliable These the settlers used, weaving ther e to shape baskets, eel -pots and broo ms The house in the background, on the left side of the bridge, is one t the earliest houses built in Chester. It was built against a side hill, aft. the Cape Cod design, On the ground floor was a cellar kitche n with a ston fire place and bake ov en. The huge three division chimney was built In th centre of the house and gave a fire place to two rooms on thesecond floe; Printed By ENTERPHISE CO ., LTD. �97rg, Nora Scotia T BRANCH OF OM ' INSTITUTE OF NOVA SCOTIA. FOUNDE D ON JANUARY 30, 1923 CO IG OF THE HISTO RY OF E VILLAGE OF CHESTER BEGAN IN JAN UARY 1966 COMPLETED IN CANAD A'S CENTENNIAL YEAR 1967 1: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction .............................. ..... .o...,...,..,..........,-.,,.....,.......... .. ..........,....,.,..,.,,. 4 2 Subject of Designation Application..,....................................,..............,.,.,.x...,.,.................................4 3 Applicant Information an......................._,..,,.,.,...,..........,.................,a......o....,®.,..,.......,,.,__.....-............ ...4 4 Background -The Library Story...................................., .._......._._.........,,......,,:,.,.....,.,.,,. , .....5 5 The Case for Designation as a National Historic Site of Canada.. ...............• 8 5.1 HSMBC Criteria ........ ..... .............,....,.....,..,.._,.,.__. ,.o..........,,......,.3 5.2 The Emergence of Public Libraries in Canada .........o ............................ 8 5,3 The Nova Scotia Context ......................... ....................... .................................................. 9 5.4 The Subscription Option - The Chester Lending. Library. . 10 55 In Loving Memory- The Zoe Valle Memorial Library ..................................p..,,..,.,.._._..-.... 11 6 Libraries Research Documentation. ........................................ . ...W........,...,.....,. ,..13 6.1 Objective,..........................................................,....................,..........,..,.,.,,,.,,................ 13 6,2 Methodology ..........................,,....,.,_._....-............-...............,.,.....,.,.....,_..._..-............,......,, 13 6.3 Results...................................„...,..,,.,....,.,........................,..........,..,,.,.,...,.............,.........,., 14 6.4 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................14 7 HSMSC Special Requirements for Places. ..................................................... .........o.........,.,.. 14 7.1 Consent of Property Owner........................................................................................o...... 14 7.2 Boundaries of the Site Proposed For Desig,nation-..__.....o............ ................................... 15 7.3 Components of the Historic. Property ................... -.a. 17 7,4 Site Condition................................ ..................... 17 7,5 Additional Documentation........................................................._,_,.............,.............,....... 17 75.1 Exterior Photographs of Library Building and Lightfoot Tower,..... 17 7.5.2 Library Interior Floor Plans.. .....................,.,......,.,..,..., ,_.............. 20 7.5-3 Interior Photographs of Library Building,.,..,...,..„....... ..... ............,.......,.. „... .22 7,5,3.1 Entrance Hall. ._...._...,.......................,.. , 22 7.5.3.2 Book Room...................................... .................................. ............................... ... 24 7.5.3.3 O�ndaatje Reading Room............................................................................,....,......,.._26 7.5.3.4 Club Room ..........................................................................m.....,....,,,.._.,_.................. 28; 7.5.35 Dining Room........o.........,.,..,,................... , ,. .........._.................,.....,,.,..., , .............31 7.5.3.6 Kitchen ..............................v,,.....,,,..,w,....,.,.,,.,.,....,...._... .32 7,5.3.7 PanCry Scullery.:...:...............a.,..,,...... ............,,..,.,...,,.,., 33 7.5A 1930 Addition 33 Appendix A ® Current Heritage Status Information. _ 34 Appendix B - Profiles of Canadian Libraries in Similar State Since 1930_ ................................... 37 A...y,,r--" r t.__.. �.,.. -K property Owner.........,._...,...., 58 ipport. ............. ........................................................... ... ................................ 59 John Ashton, HSMBC Nova Scotia representative..„„..,... ......... „.,...„........ 71 it Tower - Cultural Resource Level II._.................... ..„ ......................o., 72 ontents. ........................................................................................................... 77 New Planning bylaws July 25, 2023 Hi Garth A few comments on the proposed bylaw changes in the Chester downtown commercial zone; Parking Spaces: The suggested Minimum parking space proposed is 5.5M or 18 ft. This seems excessive, setting a minimum designed for large pick up trucks. This should not be the minimum standard, Suggested architectural guide lines call for 16 ft or 4.9 M length, Volvos, Jettas and Rav4s, all common cars are about 4.75 M, less than the 4,9M architectural guidelines. Driveways: l did not see a minimum width but 3.5 M is adequate. Minimum Frontage: II believe 16 M is much too large for the core area of Chester. This is not a residential area and larger than some of the existing downtown lots. I would favour 11 M as a minimum frontage. Allowing smaller frontage creates a more interesting village. lliuminated Signs: I would snake an exception for the theatre to allow a subtly lite marque, to be turned off after 1Opm. Parking for commercial occupancy: I would fa sour increasing this to 60 M2. The core needs encouragement for more commercialspace, Submitted by Tom Welch THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Plianning Strategy (SPS) and Land Use B -law (LUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Drafts are now available far review and comments. Public input,, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visityoicesandchQicesaca/village:review, for more information or to submit comments online. Date: Name: Community: Co m r ents: w..Ple se continue on the reverse side of this form. Comments on the Plan We are extremely concerned with some aspects of the proposed Planning Strategy and. Land Use By-law for Chester Village. The only rationale for the proposed reduction in the minimum lot size seems to be to increase the tax base for the Municipality. We see no benefit to current. property owners, As well, there doesn't seem to be anything in the plan that will control the appearance or size of proposed new buildings. We are deeply worried about the negative impact it will have on the village's unique character and atmosphere. The plan does very little to protect the distinctive nature of Chester, Also, the very real potential negative impact on water table levels is not properly dealt with in the plan. It inexplicably relies on developers to show that water tables will not be adversely affected. This is a blatant case of conflict of interest. Developers will most likely use whatever conservative assumptions necessary in their studies to guarantee a conclusion that benefits them. By all rights, these assessments should be done by independent. organizations. The plan has nothing to say about what will be done if the water table drops significantly as a result. If they drop, it will probably force owners to accept a costly new municipal water system, which most currently don't want, The new water system would, of course, greatly facilitate the development goals of Council. 'U'4'e also believe the use of 'affordable housing' as a justification for approving new residential development in the village is being misused by Council, None of the residential buildings recently constructed in the village under the "affordable housing' umbrella are currently being leased out at rent levels that are in any way affordable to the average person. In summary, the objectives of this plan seem to only benefit the financial interests of developers and Council. There seems to be very little that addresses the concerns and interests of the majority of current property owners in Chester, 100 Queen St Village of Chester -Cindy . ugar Bbyle 100 Queen St Village of Chester THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER Let us know your thoughts and ideas about the raft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and Land Use By-law CLUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Crafts are now available for review and comments. Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visit vaicesandchoices.ca/villaggreview, for more information or to submit comments online, Date: Name: Communsty. Co m Silts: ...Phase continue an the reverse side o is farm 47 Pleasant Street Chester NS BOJ iJ0 Office of Planning, Development & Building IVIunicipality of Chester 186 Central Street (by hand) dnd by email to planning ches.ter.ca Dear Planning personnel, he Villaee of Che Comments or Secondary Planning Strategy August 14, 2023 I have read most of this strategy and for the most part I find the policies and by-laws sensible and appropriate. Congratulations on a goad plan, well presented. I arrr particularly pleased to see that small set -backs will be allowed in the "Resider) tial zone 2". I have argued fear that in the past (Water Lane, with minimal setbacks, is my favourite street in Chester.) I am also happy to see the policies relating to retaining trees in the village. As a general comment, I would like to see more affordable housing in Chester, including multi -unit residential development, l realize that water supply may be a iirniting factor and I hope the question of developing a municipal water supply will be revisited. In the meantime, I would like to see Spectacle Lake continue to be protected from development. There are just a few points l would make for your consideration: • Regarding Policy G-6, architectural controls: I think the policy should state that architectural controls shall not interfere with innovative building design aimed at energyefficiency or renewable energy. More broadly, 1 appreciate the heritage values and character of Chester, but would not like to see architectural controls so strict that all new buildings are required look as though they were built decades ago. Policy G-7: Small atter and this does not affect me personally, but can't see why cannabis is banned in the village. • Policy G-9 I am not sure I agree withprohibiting solar collectors in the front yard- • R2 bylaws: I suggest a smaller minimum lot size (less than 700 m'). There would likely be few lots smaller than this, but I think the flexibility should be there. I have a concern about the impactof wood furnaces and wood stoves on air quality in Chester. I expect this is a provincial matter, but mention it in case this is something that could be addressed through municipal regulations. Wood smoke is now recognized as being very harmful to health. The biggest risk, according to the EPA, its from fine particulate matter, and wood smoke also contains toxic and carcinogenic substances. At tirnes from fall to spring, I find that wood smoke pollution is bad enough that I minimize walking or running outdoors. I don't know what regulations to suggest but I view this concern as serious. And while a minor issue, I think burning of garden waste should be prohibited. Composting is a much better option. How Harms Your He+ So tto' peopfe like the smell l drf srr ke, II rerninds them of crisp lo ll days and winicr evenings beside aay 4 rsi pe ople don' t realize this smell k © dnnge r sign that meats their health is being affected nos if they were bretathing cigarette stroke, Woo d smoke is especially l arrokul to children, the elderly, and pcopfc with lung cru d hood disea se, This booklet discusses how wood smoke- affects sheolth, Fuhtitaiiue� 491,11r-4)23 tied luty T abl e of Cont ents Why is W ood Smok e a _Pr obl em? What's ire Wood Sm oke a nd How flh i Har fit Gen eral Health Effects of Wood Smoke ... Hr Muth W o©d Smokes Ar e Yo u Expos Tot How 4,,Vd.l the wo od is horni ng . , Now well snake rises aitd spreads The amount of rime you spend. arou nd wocx smoke N uty much air poll ution is in th e house . F , He afih Casts of Wood Stroke , , 7 7 8 9 What Curt You DO When eftrtcP m how to heat your he in - u Wynn horn wo od, Ify our neig'huits hum . , ... _ .. _ - , e . °t . Any time „ , o , , . ®..... a For more tiort . .... . . . e _ Bibliography. 3 Why is W ood Smoke a Problem, M any people believe that since wood smoke is a natural substance, it is not. harmful, . However, sm oke from tv'oad sto ves and fire places. is d inagor ha rt of Washingto n's ail pollutions problem_ Wood sm oke contains tiny particles and gases that Cali have serioui health effects when breathed.. When pit ple use wti ti st Lives awl ii epiiico;'llie R7icalM are released into the air. Suine-oftlie'i chemicals ate firii t±intros, some imitate the respiratiiiy tract (see I:1941re 2), and some may cause cancer, Woo d smoke is more of p oblertr iii the tii'inter when cold, stagnant air pre ve nt.=, it from risin g and dispers ing_ As wo od bu rning increases during these 'cold periods, the pollutants in the smoke are trippe d nea r the gro und. En neighbo rhoods where wood is horn ed, houses can have highe r indo or smo ke levels than houses in neighborhoo ds,,vlier wood is no t burned, The Smoke fro m yo ur neighbor' s wood sto ve caul seers iiitu your house even when your duos anal ss ili, rlciiws arl tl+asstl.5� ev en if you t .ui`I use ,1 wood glove 0c fireplace, y4U.ti3 hr StliirY li oke. Why is Wood Smoke a Pro -gem? page Wh at's in Wood Smoke and H aw it is Harmful Woad sm oke is a rttixturt of s olids, gas es, and liquids_ Much like cigarette smoke, w ood smok e -contains h undreds afair pollutants that can c ause ca ncer and other health problems: One of true pollutants that is of innst concern is fiiu particles, ',Hi e parti cl es in smoke ar e tiny hits of solidi ai d liquids oracle of partially burned wood . When you breathe air -with wo od smoke in it, you iitliala .ilte le paitic ks deeply into your l ungs, The Irartic cs c ontain toxic s ubstances that can rem ai n iii your lungs 1'or months, causi ng cha nges that I ead to disedses.rnd xurtctttral damage, Most wood smoke particles are z -S microns (pm) Or lest ire sip ill diameter than a h uman hair ('iegtrrcr). Flguro t: Compnri ort o n human hoes in n gentner to wo od smnka pa nicias Fine beach sand 9Ufrtri aver age diameter <2,Sprii err cfiar e H uma n hai /Own average diameter Wh at's in W ood Sm oke and H aw it it Harmta1 call these particles PMx „,,also koown line ,*These tin} particl es are $n srnall that they get past ary tract's lefkm.5es and, reach the deepest areas w ok which are tinny air sacs where n enters the blood stre ) (Frj+ire a), l;c lcl=r r i w o rrrning greatly increases fhe arnntt,n t of fine partid es. i afar sir_'trin es hav e shown that line particles, ov en ar ensue lev el,. zre harmful tcs hw i In health,' Since research show's that most of Washington's w intertime fln4 particle pollution conies from wood smoke (see Fi,nur e 3), man y of the health effects caused fine partieles may be related to wood smoke, ighpr's to Wo.ucl Smote,* o+sd Flaw At is Ftonn tul F1 ure o Si Dtewide sources of fine pnrlide p ollution in W ashingt on, Winter 2012' Many rot:her harmful l.:ilasta;nces, such as tonic '. OrStrUlI C chcm ki s, earLb8 carri ed into the lungs by line particles. An Drl;ank, chemi cal is a ny chemical made of both carbon a nd hydr ogen. Many organic chetnierrls in wood slrauke cvntribuis to health problems in the , r 4spirrttory trivia, i anllil csoTk ar-rai torganicchemicalsin4w oorlsmoke ttt;ltttl�: * formakleh *acet aldehyde, •acrolein, and • polycyclie aromiticdr arbonstM O,. po ol, 3 p age 4 Wh at's In W©id' ImatcP and k w tt Is Hwin,ful General He alth E of Wood Smoke ea s breathing wood smoke can ha re ? ttrrt and king -term. effects_ So me of the sh€irt•ternt effects may be: 4 irritated eyes, thro at, sinuses, and Lungs; • headaches; ■ reduced 1unIg fun cti rs, especially iii children; taxed risk ()flower respiratory diseases; * trir3rr severe or frequent symptoms from 'existing l ung rl sta is (such as asihrrra, emphysema, pn eumonia, a nd bronchitis); is)); and and stroke. trn (ring -term effects can be :. ■ c hro nic lun g disease including b•ryirithitis it d •chemica.l and stru ctural chan ges in lungs; a nd cancer, A dults with nu ll-nal health ge nerally have hater resists: rcirno te ffectr5o rfwaad Ittokc_However. they may feel tIhort of breath and notice it is more difficult to txers;ise They may a lso notice irritate d e yes, so re threes es, phlegm, chest tightne ss, headaches, and 'allergy }'iriptn rtns, Although anyone caii hav e health effects from wood smoke, those, most likely 1,0 tiV affected even .at tow le vels are; * infants and children, • the elderly, and *adults with e xisting he a t €tr lung e€a iditinrrs.1 G orto :A Health ',tired'," of Wood Siootca Inf arcts nlnd ehifdren: Children breathe rti trr e air ire proportion to their siz e tha n adults° Their lungs are also still developing_ Because of this, childr en can experience Hutt° he alth effects from polluted air than adults, Children who ,regularly breathe wood smoke are niOre likely to have shortness of breath, c+rriu hing, wheezing,. astla3ria, disrupted sleep, inflamed respiratory traits, and p neumonia. U niversity of Washington researchers have found more symptoms of respiratory disease in S eattle preschool t living in residential area ,s with high levels n1 w ood han in children li ving in areas with lower w ood Other st udies have r ound rliat us e tot -wood Stti u s:irtcr es e the risk of low er re spirat or* tract inf ecti ons such as branch ulitis a nti pne umonia in you ng childr en.'' {'hilri1 nc l tow er respiratory tract infe cti ons h av e 'been linked wit lichr onic lung diseas e lat er iti lire.' The elderly: Older adults are at gr eater risk from wt '.od s€noke if they have common chr onic health problems, which ta n lw w orsened by expeisure to fide particles, St udies slt gw lower heart rate variability (meaning the hertz is less able tra respond to changes in activity levels) when people bre athe lair°real .ed Levels of firer particle air polhtticirt,° Ys9 uiig pi. le adults are mor e suscefittbte to tltis'e Adults With exlsti ng heart at tang canditi ans: People with ex,isu n€ heart or lung conditio ns, as welt ale 5n3 Qkers and ex=srnakcrs, h ave less resistan ce to the eff ects of w ood smoke. They may have more severe symp- toms of their existing condi- tio n(s), For exampl e, wood sm oke worse ns asthm a, emphysema, pneuninnia., Ancl bronchitis. G toor oi i•Ioellth Moe Ls of W end Smok e How Muth Wo od Smoke Are You Exposed To Both thearnn irtt oftwi od sm oke you are exposed to and the revels of harmful cheinical.k in the smoke depend ore s ho w well the wood is burning tsmoltreri ng vers us burning heat)„ ▪ how quickly the smoke rime and spreads; and • the amount or time you spend breathing wood smok e, . both inadoor- s an ti outdoors, How welt the wood is bu rning I low well the wood burns depends on; the type of waxed bu rning device, * te mperature and arrtatwt of o ygcn Arid • rnnisttire content of the wood, Type of wood burnin g device; "There are h€ttritdre ds of triode's cif wood sto ves, They may operate differen t I'y based on altitude and chimney con ditions, which vary from hcnte to home., Using proper operatin g techn iques, newer, certi- fied wood stoves burn more cleanly than older, uncertified stoves_ tX sowe should also he the right sire fo r the Imrna and properly ittstalle. The re are also wide varisilions err the wi y different people oper ate W004 burning' dev ices. {Sete the section "What Can You Din" :Cori ofo rritation, ab rst holy rrr burn properly.) anpera tu r o nce amo unt a unt arf oxy ;et> i llie hcrttel° the fire, the 1es n-wke and po llution it paa>:adut'es arirT the; mo re OIL - oily it heals your home: Even ili ou gh a snmttl{tering 11're ma y OOSE' less +.voted, k pr oduces less heat and m=ot's smo ke, fires that .are getting, enough oxygen burn hotter than those that don't get enou gh: Bu nting !twist wood, o verlo ading the firebox, or not giv ing your tire etrotagh air all greatly ittetease the- fine particle pollution.r4`'a When fire temper e HOW M 1.06% Wood 'Smoke . Are Y ou rqao€ad raj pot, titre is higher, snare of th e smoke itself h or ns so th at less visible smoke is pr odu ced_ Hotter fir es release m ore of the energy that is st ored in sr:he wood, Moist ure c ont ent of th e wtrud; Wood bu rns best if i#s moisture content k as perectit or less, Wotitl that Is l teked, ctweted, and then dried for at least a year (turns hest, How well smok e rrfses and spreads Since p eople bu rn i nure when it is cold, w otatl sn>:ttke i! mainly a pr oblem in ,the winter. Wi nt er tvcatia er conditions involvi ng stag nant air and temp erature in versio ns ha7tit air, tnoverrtent, trap air poll ution dose to the gr ound, and k eep the air p olluti on M. our breathing space. A study dune in 4es"rttae during the wir!ti t7( .:;.ottt-200,5 is an example of wi nter wo od srrttrki problems, 'Tins at tidy she w cI wood smoke added to fine particle levels, l=ine p article le vels were highest in neighborhoods - where residential wood burning occurred, lire st udy's re ,s dermal sit e had a m uch higher increase in fine particles from sacid smoke (fail percent increase) c ompared to a site in the business district (9 percent incr ease).' In a studyckvne in 4 TaCtarri4 netglrhniiicsnd, theantott ot et line p articles (av erag ed Otter" a hill year) from wood s nrcrke increase €l by nearly 52 percent. On Stone dry , r,esielerit al: wood. bur ning was th e cause of as mint as 90 percent of di ne particle p oll ution in this rie:ighlnarho nil,“ The etmtrtrnl of time yo u spend around wood smok e Wotacl st ove use wars:errs air quality, both inside and otitsicle . Wood smoke does sin rise and spread during winter tempera- rsicins, it hangs close to the ground .Ind enters neigh s and ho uses, schools, hospitals, etc . Downwi nd With temperature inversions., abut valleys with ° elation are mrrn affected,. Wood smoke parti= hart they r erasain in the air for king periods get: int o buildings t%ith incoming cold air. The How. Much Wood Smoke Me' YOU Ergo° d'to amo unt of wood sm oke we 'lire rthe depends olt how mulch time we spend outdo ors denting sriaoky° conditions and how much Krrwkeisi #ours are there, In houses without can°rent wood burning, hire laxrlicIe levels are usually lower than outdoor ' reels, Butt in areas with high levols of woad smoke, e ve n h ouses n ot curi ng wood sto ves or fireplaces have higher indoor wood smoke R ifs_ i' In€loo t fine particle levels from wood sm oke in homes without nod stoves Caii lit 40 'ri percent of outdoor lc ls, acvortliregto a study in Seattle:" EScitlidrafty Iitiersesand air -light 3s.;iitseswithirrc$ot $d+aratelt i airexclt3ngt' alley,' woo d smoke tctcome inside," 6ytirir3p, the tw sitar nt0n tha, Seattle residents spend -o percent of their time indoo rs, In one stetcly, fin% tint particle pollution tame in€1oors.u' Flow much air po llution is in the house with a working stove? 1 yt+re4 sho ws the in cre aser' amount ofpollu tion in homes tha t t heat with word compared pared to those tit do n't, H ou ses using wood heat have higher levels of fine particles, benzen e. , PAPts, and other ahem teak For exa mple , study showed that . average tine particle levels were up to ;Lai ,percen t higher in wood -burning houses coon - wood bktrit- hwLI Irvels wr ie xc p rCOW higher.' AYGrage levels of ca ncer -cau sin g PA( ls, we re 300 to 500 perc ent highei,'Q Figure 4; faltrtanr hien:I me s irelide w oo d-haa trid hams Ma re Muth Wadi Srfl $ie- A re trau upii.la d To ? top Health C osts c ' n od Sr no e Many n ati onal a ntl rttt€ rttat r rtal s-trt his show that higher levels of fitic f xtrticl iii the air a associated with € iseases and noon -attire deaths.. In zone, Ecology analyzed the health and ec on omic iretpacts of line parti cle polluti on, including wood strictke, in Washington," Ecology's analysis estimates that fine particle poll ution ca uses about i,iuo deaths in W uhliigion each year= lit addition, the analysis shines that every year in Washington, fine particlrr Inn€Iuti an Contributes to health problems as sh ow n in the table b elow: W orsened asthma symptoms Acute bronchitis hlori-foul heart attacks Herat disea se n©t resOli o a a morn vi Pna der y "Ecology the total cost of th diseases (not C01101 t ug prcmati redezth;s) fear husincsseS, :lift Care nutitutions is abo ut $ii}[r million each year," T otal cost includ es medical care. prescription drugs, reduced productivity, lost work tihe, and rt issed school dtiy - Fteohh tart s al Wood Sm oke Thous ad What Can You Do? When Noo sing how t•o hoot y our hurtle: .tier° yo ur house is properly we ath eri zed to keep in • instead ofwarud heat, co nsider cl eaner i5 rtias at els sltclt as gas, electricity, or heating oil, I!f you mu st bu rn wood; Burnt dry wood; • Split woods before you stack [[, Wood pieces 6 inches in diameter dry easiest and horn best. •Stack wood loosety Enalternating directions to lady it. d ry. • Steam wood at least 6 inches off t he grou nd t€a .re duce exposure to ground moist tire, *Cover your wood to pn teat it from the 'weather. * Give it a year., Wood that has been split, dried, and stored under co ver for at least a year buttes hest Bono p3rd aerly, Build small fires to help the wood burn csomple[ely Addin g too lun ch wo od at one time :CU M dpwn On the air tu• the lire acrid leav es unburned dt•nrui, • keep you r lire hot, Da'ii periing down yo ur sto ve cuts off tilt, air, which wastes wood, creates a lot of smo ke, and yrrt>dttc very little heat. Check your chimney s. nrokc; If you cast see smoke coming from y wastin g fwtcl ,earl your lire needs more indfew td List, titt, thtwuvilstow pellet stow, orf%repfoce foryour borne: • 1,1see a wood s have or pellet sto ve that is set°tified in Washington, the right sire, and properly itastailtrel, l=rsr de tails , to to the Ecology's we b site at w ww.ery.wva_gov/pr rratirsinitto blionichidinf, WMeeY jibn pave 12 Obey fmr•n iro ns: • Co toivwwv. .irOaburnh€rttsortet to see inhere iS a burn bea n where you live. If th ere ls. sl tt`t burn , Burning tluringa ban can, hat'nt your family's and your neighbors' health or cause :w fir e danger. It is also illegal a nd you can get a line, If wood smok e is a problem In your rte_ ighborhoa Reduc e the amount of smoke yciu breathe by; Es crrising or clui ng outer physical activities at times wh en less smoke is in the air re Choosing a le ss str enuous as ti city whe n the air is smoky (fures:.ample, walkinginsteaatl rrf)tsNina Exercising for shorter :periods of tirrrt wvllcri the airis smoky; Closi ng windows, vents, doors. and plugging drafts, Some Inca[ governme nts have enacted 'nuisanc e laws ° tea deal with problems such as illegal horning, dust, and' od ors, if smnite. or other air palliation is affecting you, contact your' 'newt clean air agency ttrask about nuisa nce laws in your area ., Any times *When using air dean ha ve high efficiency porti co Fink i nf rn1ation ab+rut air , melee sure they absorbing {MLi'A) filters, rs and filters at i assvicaf uco ..9 0 4.risearelifheel.at°fparticles,tlrnr, . Use a vacuum cl ea ner th at has b F[EI°A filter .. Make wir e filters ar c clean . * Et?r inftrrtnatia n.ab out clea ner sattrc ref heat: htnr;'jlwrsne,entruncrceiw goviTh ogr ur nslEn ergy/Pvesi lefutri►,e vim, For m ore Information, •cQrit Utt. Department of Ecology., Air Quality Progrnarri,. entail;AClcaomnpents ecy_twrcr_gov phone; 36io-4vy� Oa Washi ngton clean ail - ag encies o nline: heel../l+rsvw,icy,ru ff.gnvlprogratnv,'rrritoo boat. Wiwi CooYoc, fl oe B Iiography tittrt tx dt.toret, ttof fftt otji 344 T xkr Yfffmtra "_Fl vaat. ka tviSKai. t. .ktntc .tg �I .t. �a t.T� „q rz:.. �.. t ". 7 . gag . ;f ,r.tf.704141 5xc rffttr:144—tt mitts$_ tom '.. 4af T Ygro .-4na. riff :4 ':. g.�3 § Kta...tL, r;. tit., 4.art. •I 11 4,..ta,t .4"04 ,4ftl iktet tittlffst we.ut ,:t :, 3 a,a 47ft,t# v itSkf aat., 74 tal. .. a akihre2 Idr3tter "tatt tl Zttt 3`4,€ [4b - NO 1 44 LAU. CI *.f . t,ut =x14 t.I TTwit b' , M4t 1 :4. iGna +t.t.tt as...y.40 40,4W ifftqf, 0 11,. .a as. r l;yi gPkt, ff ffsi i ''ittc a 1. 1.4roN t". tut; 4 4amn±,-3:ez'.4',At Pd. ititt.s: '§ff€� MON. i i ts§+r 3#.,_ :` �r 444 fdx + 4,, i °,.et r^ r 4 ,,, +€a,s-vx z 0.141/ ti r .. .qr . G(t„ta'* ht . 4.t sti Y :4q I VMS ' .t y.C` ekP` �r3 sa. d4v�+..l-g•"'i,DVy% °-y+Y. I.:41.0 ",4 ;4 ",a #'ry'�+`+ tt°,yeti `t•f.a re,tutu , tS .ri:r"4et 44 d 3'. .v"t rttl..ti,'v a 3 trw,* f*+ i4 . M. :4e:e-urrz`.'s ru3t .{ .'. am, ... .1a ,+ 4. loff,'g pos et;i. i{ Q t Ss a. 4:, '. 6-a,4't":Ss .x - x+ ! t .t tt t *t.ttt ii tttn? at,t tgt t kttt-tttttttai,s sd N ttttt- 44it" §. +:i:{t'. . 5's e ttet§ac.t i"TsyntnN rza lit WI Wt." ,, t.tig F€... .4k, :;{ Xtt,t .t �;. ,., . -s i y.-a.i amrz ^. .- tea c. .ae�: p tw.r c,�4 4- ::t rt ems, ifr.. -k" 4e m.., Ye.,n:tt. t4tItt ,w tette, 1. b'!:S:. Rt �.s :t�:'s:t,'r, Yd: in tt..4t t3., .wta.t 3. nttf t. 941 ,tit .tr-x ts a' mo ot ,.rt1 tftsttitati@. Sitftefea e s, et. . 17 ivr r^t* - .ap'�'16a ' mw —N.4 Ft's ' t#tW: d§. it' .0:i^ 3t* .P,,Ittt fottO of r#a+3r. trt ; : a.4 s}, 41:04 i}9aF?O saga 41 DEPART MENT OF ECOLOGY of Washington Tu reque t AF)A acr arnt4dUi4 (36) 1ca7'48041, Ti rel ay uat 'V ' Ur (677) 833 -63 0 ( FY).. El THE. MUNICIPALITY OP - CHESTER Let us know your though and ideas about the Draft Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law! A review of the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS) and Land Ube? By-law (LUB) has been underway since 2020. Public Drafts are now available for review and comments. Public input, comments and ideas will be presented to Council and will help shape and inform any changes to the final documents. You can leave comments in the space below or visit vokcesandchoices_ca "vi1lag,erevievy, for more information or to submit comments online. Date: Name Community: Corn men A r ; p e'e •,( ....Please continue on the reverse side ra'f this form 4,4/1, eg rINilson, 59 attain st, Chester These are my observations from the Planning, Review cornrnitt e meetings, arid they barely scratch tht surface.. I would urge you to take a closer look at these items before the draft. document proceeds t Council, The comments made by the senior planner at the opening of your last, meeting held on, Tire Aug Bkr, were unnecessary. He insinuated that the community meetings were derailed somewhat by people more interested in the hotel than the LUB plan. He completely read the room wrong. if: we are residents concerned by lack of infrastructure, lack of leadership and lack of transparency in regards to matters of great importance to our quality of life. You may think this dramatic but when you see things happening that go completely against what you believed was a shared view by residents and council about density and development, you ask questions, you seek clarihcatiOre id ask thincornmsittee to reread the document commissioned by the council,. Preliminary Groundwater Supply A:ss.essment. Village of Chester Central Water System Needs Assessment and Options Analysis 2016. 1 quote a section from that report "shortages show that water resources are stressed in localized parks of the community and that the potential for further development is limited". Oddly we trusted that to be true. What's changed? It seems that this plan has a different agenda, one driven by direction from Council to increase density This direction is not consistent. with previous studies in regards to water and sewer. It is not consistent with what the Village residents want in zones R.1 and P.2 (as referred to in the plan) or as we call it —the historical part of the Village. There are plenty of areas. outside the Village core for gentle density as well as the possibility for more affordable housing, No matter where any development takes place ail possible options for water must be included in the proposed development plan submitted for development permit or development agreement. The statement in the draft that 'tutu development in the near to medium term can be expected to be serviced by on site wells' is simply not good enough. The foundation of this plan appears to be based on all of us wearing rose colored ,glasses and' crossing our fingers that everything will be. OK. That is not a plan, it's the complete opposite of a plan, During the course of the four meetings, it was said many tithes by the planners and the development officer; that the situation we are in now is the result of the 2004 plan and subsequent amendments by previous planners, The time, has come to stop pointing fingers, assigning blame and in general being passive towards dealing with tough issues. It was also said many times during the course of these meetings and by Warden VU'ehber that this is our plan,. if you believe this to be true you must go back and make adjustments to your plan to reflect our desires. The document is fine as a starter point. The thing that is missing is our input- The document must have more community input with the revised document hosted by the planners, public works, Warden Webber and whomever else is needed to address concerns and answer questions. terms with this part of the plan,. but for the purposes of this letter and the committee's mandate 111 stick with the items below A question was asked about the responsibility on a new development to repair the r,ad after sewer hookup,. The response from the planner was that it was the responsibility of the developer,. Agreed, but why can't this be tied to the permit, At the conclusion; of a new build or conversion, the developers need to ensure remediati.on of the surrounding properties, before signing off including road surfaces,. if they don't comply no occupancy permit would be granted. In regards to development of any sort big or small, development permit or development agreement no resident in R1, R2, R3, R4, CC, HC, should be made to prove to 'Council that the development has degraded or devalued their property (e.g., drinking water quantity/quality, roads, change in water flows/drainage, etc.) With regards to the development of 2 duplexes on Queen St, it was asked during a, meeting how could this happen given that the current rules state 1 duplex per block in the village. it was explained that this was a unique situation where each one is in a different zone , 1 low density residential, and one on boundary of North St. That's untrue, Under the new plan that would be true, one duplex in R2 one in R4. When they were queried about vertical siding the response ways that again a unique situation. One in an architectural design control area one outside that area. So why were they both approved? Why do they both have vertical siding? It's difficult to have faith moving forward into bigger development prove ts, especially when the current one's are rife with indecision and the appearance of impropriety. Street scape When 1 attended meetings regarding, "Future Development Along Highway 3 in Chester Village", Aug 2022 did I mover consider that. this discussion was taking place without the same plan already in place for the Village core, That has to be rectified. implementation needs to be in place for all new development or conversions in R1, R2 and Core Commercial, Site layout, grading;, and planting plans must be submitted as part of the approval process for all buildings exceeding 2000 sq ft. Landscape beds must be incorporated into at least 25% of the building footprint in area. Landscape details and fixtures should reinforce Chester as a distinct waterfront community and are "playful and artful", Not my words, but the wording in the discussion paper, Solar Collectors In the general provisions :section of the draft section 4..13. This Bi- law shall apply to all solar collectors: Solar collectors attached to a building do not require a development permit, except for those lots located in the core village area, and may extend above the maximum permitted height of the structure by 2m. To me this reads that by development permit you could have solar panels up to 2m throughout the site line of the entire village. l do not think this should be allowed period in R1, R2, or the commercial core. Solar panels that are flush to your roof or have a slight rise could be acceptable but 2m, l think you'll find this unacceptable to most residents. Additional Consideration I would like to draw our attention to something that its not in the plan: but is undeniably something that will affect all of us. Insurance. In particular the lack of water and increased density - gentle or otherwise„ The fires this year have highlighted many things, for insurance companies, and planners things like egress, and yet you are planning to increase density on peninsulas with no egress, limited water and likely roads that do not fit the definition of two-way traffic, You are thinking about increasing density in a village with limited water. Insurance works on evaluating risk, the higher the risk the higher the premiums. It's only a matter of time before the residents of this Village will be facing increasing premiums because of the lack of water and increased density, Architectural Design The Chester Look..1 have no idea how mooch this Village has paid consultants overth.e past 40 years, to define what the Chester Look is, but I'm guessing it's considerable and yet here we are. Now you want to subdivide our 3 jewels, the peninsulas. It does not matter who you ask or what consulting firm you hire the peninsulas are undeniable the main stay of the "Chester Look"Altering the look of the peninsulas by allowing subdivision of the lots will bean irreversible decision and one that no resident has asked for. 1 hope that you will not be naive about the subdivision of these properties as assisting families with changing dynamics .as suggested by a member of the Planning Advisory Committee during the Aug $h. meeting. Developers will be looking at any subdivision differently_. In the latest: issue of Municipal Insight there was a statement that was part of an article explaining the Tillage Review_ Many items were mentioned and f want to draw your attention to one in particular " revised architectural controls airred at maintaining existing character and: design without overly burdening or increasing the cost of construction' , i may be wrong but I would guess that the resale or rent for new home's build with vinyl siding, metat sliding or cinder blocks will :not be reflected in the price as it is the postal code of Chester that drives the price. The outcome of using these products are properties that do not conform to the historical character of the core village like traditional use of shingles and wood clapboard, if only we had a book of our'histarical architecture that shows examples of the Chester Look!' I'm sure most of you have a copy of "Chester a Pictorial History of a Nova Scotia Village'' copyright 1983 Chester Chamber of Commerce,. This book was put together to show a vivid record of arrr common past. It was meant to be a record of what we have, not what we had. A history that could be carried on and protected as we move forward.. The premier at the time wrote the preface in it he calls Chester one of the most beautiful and picturesque communities to be found anywhere. Can we please create a document that guides us to keeping historical Chester on the right track. One that the architects of the original character of Chester would be proud of, One that will allow us to be proud of the progress we've made and are continuing to make, and one that the newest residents would be invested in, working together to protect the Village we all leave to call home.. In Closing Please note I feel it is the Council's negligence that has resulted in the 2004 Plan not being fully reviewed in the past ten years as mandated by the Municipal Govt: Act. The fact that this has happened was stated at the meetings by the senior ,planner and the ,development officer, How has this review been put off for almost twenty years considering all the changes we have seen since 2004? I would very much, appreciate this committee finding out the a.nswerto this, question from Warden Webber, as he has been the only constant during that entire time. Current situations in the Village where residents are feeling had been reviewed as. mandated. 1'rn referring to the hotel we wouldn't, 1 don't know ,., but neither does Council.. ,rie+ed may not exist today if this plan gybe we'd be in the same piace, maybe was hoping we'd be a village to lead, showing all of Nova Scotia how a small village can move forward protecting its history, residents, resources and the environment but this plan is not that, Let's do what's necessary to get this right, Respectfui, Peggy Wilson Garth Sturtevant Frorn: David Dobrosky Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 4:40 PM To: Planning Subject: Proposed bylaw changes EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attachments or click links frog n unknown or suspicious +origin.. I am writing to provide my feedback on the proposed bylaw changes for Chester. My comments are as follows: 1) The charm and character of the village must be preserved. Any consideration for increasing the density in the new R1/ft2 zones should be removed fromthe new plan. 2) Until village infrastructure (water, sewer, roads, and parking) is addressed to deliver long term, sustainable solutions (desalination for water as an example) necessitated by escalating climate change, then no consideration, for higher density should be given to the other development zones without clear analysis on the impacts to the village overall. Growth in one area of the village at the expense of another is not acceptable. 3) Architectural design elements in the proposed plan are a good first step. Unfortunately they do not go far enough to ensure the character of the village is preserved. Clear design requirements must be provided to property owners and developers so there can be no ambiguity about what can and cannot be built in each zone, Any further dilution of the characteristics of our village will result in long term negative impacts to tourism, loss of local businesses and lower property values. 4) Exist.ing, and new bylaws require strong enforcement. Too many examples exist where the bylaws were either ignored or the Municipality did not do an effective job in holding home owners or developers accountable to the regulations. It's far too easy to beg for forgiveness' especially when there are little or no meaningful consequences to their actions. As a resident of Chester l am concerned that, the vo ce. of our community are not being heard. Communication needs to be strengthened between the Municipality and residents to ensure everyone is appropriately informed and all have had the opportunity to provide feedback.. The tirneline associated with the proposed plan need to be revisited with a view of delaying any approvals until further consultation with village residents takes place. It will then be incumbent on the Planning Committee and Municipal Council to act on the wishes of its residents and not the one or two councillors who seem to be more concerned about benefiting the interests of developers versus the community at large. Regards, Dave Dobrosky 60 King Stree Chester Garth Sturtevant From: Sent To: Subject; Voices. and Choices - Municipality Tuesday, August 22, 2023 6:14 PM Garth Sturtevant New feedback on Village of Chester Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-la Review Follow Up Flag: follow up Flag Status: Completed Ch.e er <notifications eragagementhq,c ** EXTERNAL EMAIL*" Please do not open attachrrnents or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin, Hi Garth. You have received new feedback on the Guestbook on project Village of Chester Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law Review on your site, I believe that the current requirements in the Estate Residential, now R-1 Residential area in the Village of Chester should remain the same_ The current infrastructure, roads, and availability of water do not support creating more density. I would also have concerns about the status of the sewer infrastructure_ Based on recent experience at Nauss Point, there is no chance that the system could support higher density, There is very little knowledge about the condition of what isunderground or even the location_ l would guess, that this situation is replicated in multiple locations across the village. Maintaining the existing character of the village is paramount, while providing a frarnewark where property owners can continue to maintain and upgrade their properties. Walking thisline is the challenge that we should all embrace_ Investments need to be made by all property owners in municipal infrastructure that will ensure that our businesses i.vill invest and be sustainable and that residential horneowvners can be confident in delivery of fundamental services: sewer, roads, and definitely water. Thank you David Wilson Thank you for Added by dwilson Click here to view the feedback This is an auto -generated email sent when a contributi receive this email in the future, you can configure your to to not send ernails. ded to your site on EngagementHQ. If ycru da trot wish to Garth Sturtevan From: Colin Matthews Sent: Tuesday, August b, ZUZ3 is r rrva To: Garth Sturtevant Cc: Lizzie Moore; Christina Johnston:: Helen Matthews Subject: Re: Proposed Regulations for Short Term Rentals Follow Up Flag: Flag Status follovr up Completed " EXTERNAL EMAIL " Please do not open attachments or dick links from an unknown or suspicious origi Hello Garth! Our (new) Walker Road neighbor ;o) Lizzie Moore has. briefed me on your conversation today, I'll "try" to be brief in providing some personal context & history on my personal ties to Chester, then provide my general inputs on this matter. Let me just say up front that I appreciate your consideration and what I understand (from Lizzie) is a thought and measured approach that you are taking in compiling information and varied points of view, I am a native Nova Scotian; grew up in Truro, attended university at TUNS (now Dal's Engineering school), in 1994 moved west to Calgary, then. to California where l met my wife Helen and started raising our family (2 kids). We now live in Boulder, Colorado. Our children, Bruce and Megan, are starting their senior and junior years in high school respectively. All of my immediate family is in Nova Scotia; and my parents (Malcolm & Sandra Matthews) reside in the village on Duke Street. They began their Chester lives in 2990; and have served on the boards of the Chester Arts Center, Chester Golf Club, and the Chester Playhouse. Additionally, they were very active in raising money for the new Chester Health Center. After many summers visiting our Nova. Scotia family, we made the decision to buy the property at 162 Walker Road last fall - a pretty significant family investment which essentially symbolized my "'return to home." I am a former member of the Chester golf club (early '90s); and now am can the +vaitiist to resume that membership. 1 mention all of this as it speaks to our"residency intent." Additionally, we supported the Chester Heritage Foundation this summer, purchasing 6 dinner basketsl :o) With that as background, 1'A try to capture our intentions for 162 Walker Road.,.. As wire see our children through the end of high school and (hopefully) get them off to college, we intend to spend increasing amounts of time in our Chester home. This first summer, it was a month. Next year we are planning for 6-8 weeks. In years to come, 1 would like to spend June through end -Sep in Chester. The point of this being.. this is our Nova Scotia home. This is NOT a revenue - generating rental property for a profit purpose, With that said, we did have to significantly stretch our personal finances to acquire the property and a fundamental assumption was that we would be able to offset the home's ongoing (operating) expenses with a small amount of limited summer rental engagements... that would 'bridge" us to our eventual full time personal summer use, So, regarding our intentions and approach to renting -.- 1. 6 -night, 7 -clay minimum for 6 occupants or less. 2. 4-6 rental engagements per summer._ fewer to zero over S -years 3. Very selective and careful vetting of guests. We wish to form friendly relationships with our Walker Road neighbors, and have a high priority on that for many years to come. It is our sincere hope that whatever future council measures are passed will allow for us to use our property in this fashion. Bluntly, a 28 -day minimum for renting will introduce a non -trivial (and potentially serious) financial risk for us keeping our new Chester home... and/or prevent our own personal use. 1 Beyond our personal situation, some other considerations: I understand that "'healthy sum rr',er rental en agernent:5" are a huge support to the local Chester economy... • restaurants, theater, support se landscaping, etc, l could go on... As an example, we have a contracted rental engagennent scheduled for 2 -weeks in September. They are 3 movie production executives from Hollywood that are here for a film production, That type of "client" is a perfect match for our property, which 1 suppose would be in a higher end category (?)... and again aligns very well to supporting the community and its economy. l believe these types of accommodation i4 a certain respect rnake the movie business possible in the area. I ani not sure if this gives rise to some middle ground provisions onrental classification - as compared to the "fun weekender" profile. I wouldagree with fellow residents that this profile might be undesirable in a few situations. I speculate that there are others in my situation; and those that might agree with how responsible short supports Chester & area full-time residents in their jobs & day-to-day lives; and again the community at g Garth, Thanks very much for taking the time to read this. I'd be happy to have a phone conversation at some point if that could work with your schedule. All the best, Colin cc'd: Lizzie Moore, Christina Johnson {Troy sister)„ my wife Helen �n Tue, Aug 8, a FYI Sent from my [Phone 6 AM Lizzie Moore wrote_ Begin forwarded message: From: Garth Sturtevant <gstuLLrtevai tr ,chester.ta> Date: August 8, 2023 at 11:45:16 AM ADT To: Subject: Proposed Regulations for Short Term Rentals Hi Lizzie, It was great to speak this morning about the potential changes to Short -terra Rental regulations. 1 appreciate the discussion paints you have raised, and it is important for staff and Council to tear from operator's on existing Short -Term Rentals in considering any regulatory changes_ As mentioned, I have attached the draft Land Use By-law. I will point out a few sections that you may wish to review; • Pg 33 Definition for Short Terrn Rental • Pg, 36 Definition for Tourist Accommodation (Short Term Rentals in a Commercial Zone fall under Tourist Accommodation and are treated like other forms of accommodation ie. Hotel, traditional B&B). Pg 66 Section. 4.33 Short Term Rentals (this outlines how Short -Term Rentals in Residential Zones will be regulated) • Pg 7$-8O Core Commercial Zone (see Tourist Accommodations) • Pg 91.94 Highway Commercial Zone (see Tourist Accommodations) Hopefully, this will help outline the proposed changes. I'm always happy to setup a time to meet if you would like. Also, please feel free to submit your thoughts/comments via email and I will include them with the others received for consideration. by Council, Best, Ga rth Garth S ur'tevaft Senior Planner Community Development & Recreation Municipality of Chester PO Box 369 186 Central Street, Chester, NS, B 1,10 Office: 992-275-4135 General Inquiries: 902-275-2599 Web: w w,chaster,ce Consider the environment. Do you really need to print antis e GarthSturtevant Tram: Sent: To- 5ubj'e. Kirby Putnam Tuesday, August 8, 2023 5.23 PM Garth Sturtevant Vacation rental property changes. EXTERNAL EMAIL *' Please do not open attach rtaer is or click links fro ran unknown r r' suspicious or giro Hi Garth, Good chatting with you today. I"Il keep it very brief, I would like to suggest that any changes you plan to make to vacation rental properties include a ",grandfather clause" so that existing property owners would be protected from what could amount to catastrophic financial and and other unintended consequences, Further it would be most unfair to change the laws for rental properties to folks who bought property under the current bylaws. If you chartge any bylaws it should be OR future property owners. Thanks for your consideration,. Kirby cid: i rnage00 1. p ng 01 L 4DA4O ,.A3 02F87O A DIVISION OF'SMA INVESTMENTS HALIFAX NOVA SCOTIA h Sturte� From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag. Status: Friday, August 11, 2023 3:54 PM Garth Sturtevant Pro pQSed Chester bylaw changes Follow up Cornpleted. " EXTERNAL EMAIL ** Please do not open attachrn nts or click links frorrr an unknown or suspicious origin, Mr. Sturtevant, As a native Nova Scotian and Chester home owner 1 am concerned with the likely incomplete information l have learned about two proposed bylaw changes, those being the short term home rentals and the amendments to lot size and allowable housing units on the lot. With regards to the short term rentals I will let you know that I do not rent my primary residence on the Peninsula nor the guest house on Swallow Point in Chester Basin. I have many friends that do short term summer rentals in the village and have for years for a variety of reasons. One is so their children can attend the CYC youth sailing program. They are here for a few weeks then decamp and new families with kids arrive for the sailing Restricting the owner's rentals to an p possibly number of days will have an immediate and negative impact and destroy access to youth sailing. Other guests rent here as they have done in some cases as their families have for generations. Limiting that opportunity for our visitors is a capricious dismissal of their value to the area and pulls the DE welcome to Nova Scotia " mat out from under them. Not a good public image. Visit, albeit briefly, spend money, but don't stay -go home, Sad. The other issue 1 admit I am less familiar withand have only recently learned of the proposal , which incidentally has been the case with most of my neighbors. If the intent is to drive housing density in Chester the outcome is going to be unsatisfactory for all concerned , but no more so than on the Peninsula. The one road is inadequate much of the time to handle the existing traffic let alone what a significant increase in copulation volume would entail_ As evidenced by the recent; rain J flooding event with resultant near washout of the dirt potions of Peninsula roads making them inaccessible to anything other than a high vehicle is a clear safety issue. Additional housing density will put more residents at peril when the next washout comes and one, just one, car gets stuck blocking the road thereby preventing resident exit or safety vehicle entrance. Water and sewage disposal issues are in a universe of their awn, both in the Village and on the Peninsula if anything there should be real consideration to maintaining existing lot sizes, Dividing lots to increase density may temporarily increase the tax base but in the near term will drive valuations down. The driving force behind both of these proposals is unclear to me and would not appear to benefit the majority of Chester residents, home owners or guests . i So, ane must ask why, and why now? Tam Murphy 2 Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: ** EXTERNAL EMAIL *" Please do not open attach Mr. 5tusrtevant, Stuart Flinn Sunday, August 13, 2023 11:19 AM Garth Sturtevant Proposed Amendments to Chester By Laws 2023 Follow up Cornpleted "nit's or click links front an unknown or suspicious origin. I am a horne owner in the Back. Harbour, Chester. I have recently been made aware of proposed changes to bylaws concerning Short term rentals and amendments to residential housing lots sues and the allowable number of housing units per lot. I find both these proposals very concerning. As a long time Chester resident having both lived here full time in the past and now currently spending the surnrners, here for almost 60 years I think l can say 1 know the village and have it's best interests at heart,. The proposal to limit property owners from renting their own homes, that they ownand pay tax on, employ local tradesmen to maintain, and who support local businesses and charities is in my opinion an example of extreme government over reach. Trying to use the Halifax rental housing market bylaws as a one size fits all template for the village of Chester shows a lack of understanding on: how the social fabric and history of Chester works. Chester has always been a holiday destination going back to the days of the old hotels and guest houses. That has not changed. Today you see many families with long associations with the village , sometimes going back generations coming here for a week or two as their schedules allow, to enroll their children in summer activities ranging from sailing to tennis to swimming to golf. All these associated dubs and organisations depend on the seasonal income that summer residents, both long term and short term provide. Then there are the local res,taurants,shops, gas stations and other businesses that also benefit from summer visitors_ Trying to limit the ability of Chester homeowners who might only be here a portion of the year from renting their properties to other families who share the same feeling for Chester is short sighted and will in my opinion only diminish the special environment that exists here. The second proposed amendment that I am very concerned with is in regard to changing the long standing size of Chester estates. The idea that by increasing density here in the village will have anything other than a negative outcome is to me all but guaranteed. The reason that Chester has appealed to Canadian, American and European visitors over many past decades is because of what it is, It is the quintessential picturesque North East holiday village. By chopping' it up and trying to make it into a high density subdivision - on -the sea will forever destroy that charm. Those are some of the emotional and ascetic reasons why Chester should not be changed. The practical reasons are even more compelling. Chester, asevery resident knows has many issues with infrastructure and utilities, but the biggest problem must be water,. Both clean potable water and waste water. Both are inadequate. You should be well aware that historically Chester has looked for additional supplies of water but plans fail because of the, prohibitive costs involved. Spectacle lake was a non starter, as were many other ideas. So we need to be self sufficient, and supply is not infinite, it is very much limited, Increasing the housing density will only create shortages, As for the issue with waste water one only has to look. at the trucks pumping out the overflow at the head of the front harbour to know we are getting very dose to a possible environmental disaster with the existing level of residents, not to mention what might happen by increasing it by adding even more people. Of the many ideas l have heard of crowding more houses into Chester it is the idea that the land ajacent to the elementary school could be developed into an additional 300 plus homes is perhaps the worst, and would put more pressure an our already over stretched recourses. Having only arrived inChester the day of the last meeting I was not able to attend any of the four meetings on these two and the other proposals, 1 have however spoken to other residents who were present. The unanimous opinion from those who I have spoken to was that the proposals presented by the council were lacking in concrete facts and figures. When questioned on the detail of the proposals the councils answers were vague, severely lacking or just plain non existent. There is also the question of why all these changes and why now? What or who is the impetus behind all this ? That is a question that _rriany people are wanting to ask, Transparency and trust are the two things that make any business work and function efficiently, I trust that is what the council wants. So I think it is incumbent upon the council to speak directly and plainly about the size and scale of the changes specifically to .short: term rentals and to changing the existing estate size and unit size, and to listen to the residents who by paying their taxes here in Chester surely have the Village's best interests at heart, Regards, Stuart Flinn 2 My name is Barry Redmond, 4020 Hwy #3, Chester. A resident since 1987, I made my living in the area, designing, building,. and restoring old and new structures. I have a B.A. from Dalhousie University, a B.A. of Interior Design from the former Ryerson University in Toronto, my provincial carpentry papers from l.S Tech, and over 50 years experience in the construction industry, My projects included the restoration of the Lordly House Museum, the Zoe Valley Tower, and numerous barns, old houses, and a church relocation and restoration, in the area., I also did new builds: including the first John Risley cattle barn, his riding arena, and a number of design build houses, most notably a house in Mahone Bay for which my company received a h!_S. Heritage Design Award. Sorry for the self -embellishment, but felt it necessary to establish that lam more than qualified to speak on the 'following matters. My main concern, although not the only one, in relation to the new Secondary! Village Plan Review, is '..he lack of architectural guidelines irr order to preserve our heritage and so called "'Chester Look". As far as 1 can remember from going to planning meetings in Chester, there was a strong desire expressed to maintain our heritage character. There seems to be little in this review to address this issue, and recent trends in building of residential units in the area shows a strong need to do so. Example: the two new duplexes on Queen St, which have more in common with Lower Sackville or Spryfieid than Chester. strongly recommend more architectura'guidelines, especially in the Village Core Area as shown on the Unofficial Core and Outer Village Map, Village of Chester, Land Use By Law document. Perhaps an architectural review committee is the answer for part of that guidance,. We most definitely need to do away with the use of vinyl siding, fake brick, and the like, in this area, in favour of more traditional materials. The argument to allow such materials to encourage affordable housing, just does not cut it Also setting height restrictions and tier making exceptions for copulas and solar parcels, will only bring on numerous sightline problems. We do not need further height allowances, which will only give fodder for developers, who want to build structures that are not suitable to our vision, and will put further burden on our already overtaxed Volunteer Fire Department. G od design is about proportions and function, not height, and the nu her of roof lines, or window mullions you include. Anoti er very important area of which there is no mention, is demolition guidelines. We see this all too often in other places. People buy a character mouse, demolish it, and build a monstrosity. Although this structure may be considered beautiful architecture in the appropriate place, it often does not fit the character or is not in keeping with the style of the existing location, and we lose yet another bit of our charm, This is another area where an architectural review committee may be o valuable service. In keeping with architectural guidelines, it is important when plotting a property or village streetscape, to consider the density use, in order to not over -tax sight lines and tie overall village look, 1 am admittedly opposed to many of the proposed increased density guidelines in this review, particularly= in the core village area. To even consider doing so with our current water situation, is irresponsible and against all common sense. 1 believe tiis was adequately expressed in the 2016 Preliminary Groundwater Supply Assessment, Village of Chester Central Water System,. 1 thank. you for the time and opportunity to express my viievs, 1' plead to all the Councillors, to heed the desires of the residents of Chester to preserve its charm and heritage and not let the lure of more tax dollars, destroy what we have, We contribute a substantial share of the.Municipality tax dollars as it it stands, and are quite willing to do so, as long as we are given the respect and consideration we deserve. On ending, I include an excerpt from the Augustissue of the Municipal Insight in which Alien Webber, our Warden wrote: R'T.iis is important work that will impact those who live in the Village of Chester: It is important that we hear from you as the final outcome is meant to reflect your vision of the community moving forward," Unfortunately this document, as it stands, reflects the desire of the developers and not those of the people in the village, Respectfully Submitted: Barry Redmond Garth Sturtevant Fr ra Sent: To: Subject: Tom Welch Monday, March 6, 202.3 456 PM Garth Sturtevant; Heather Archibald; Derek Wells; Derek 'Wells.; Allen Webber Comments on Zoning in downtown Chester Folio v:+ up Flag: Fallow up Flag Status:. Completed * EXTERNAL EMAIL." Please do not per attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. To the Committee reviewing zoning regulations Please circulate I recently purchase 44 Queen St. I wished to redevelop the building by making three additional store fronts on Queen 5t and adding an office and two town houses inthe large backyard north of the Bank of Nova Scotia parking lot. Numerous road blocks. have prevented this redevelopment. 1) I was willing to provide adequate or even surplus parking but this would not be permitted because the current driveway is only 14 ft wide, not 20 ft wide as required, However I. observe several multi car parking lots about town that do not have a 2.0, ft driveway, Is a 20 ft driveway a reasonable regulation? 2) I had an agreement to purchase half of the back yard of the adjoining lot to provide parking_ This was not allowed due to minimum lot size regulations_ Severing off part of the neighbours lot would not be allowed because it would reduce his lot to below 8,400 sq ft For the downtown core does a 8,000 sq, ft. minimum lot size make sense? Is it neccessary for a house to have a large backyard in the village core? Minimum lot size: I would suggest the most beloved and the most visited cities are those that were builtbefore there were strict planning rules it place. People love the hodgepodge, narrow lanes with a home or two at the end,the buildings right on the street. These communities are vibrant and alive. Have you ever heard of tourist planning a visit to walk around a suburb? Absolutely not! As a tourist you want to visit old European cites or old, town Quebec or Montreal and maybe Lunenburg or the most beloved street in Chester, lower Water Street. None of these favourite places could be built under current planning regulations. Commercial Core Lot Suggestion Minimum Lot size:1,500 sq ft or 140 sq m, no set back from the street. Minimum frontage 20 ft or 6 m No set back on the sides if proper fire walls installed Downtown Residential Lot Suggestion Allow up to 45% lot coverage for he main building and a max of 50% if outbuildir . sheds or .surface is included. Insisting the other 50% remain ,green is important to ensure rainwateris ab villages wells. A parking spot should be required for :new residential Iuts yved impermeable bed to replenish the a) Minimum Lot Site: 2000 sq ft or 185 sq m with a minimum frontage of 30 ft or 9 m A 6 ft building set back on the two sides of the lot. A 15 ft set back at the rear of the lot. Set back from the street. reduced to 5 ft. would allow room for a flower bed on the street. b) Allow subdivision of current lots and severing off of back yards. No street frontage required for such course access to the street should not be less than a 12 ft driveway, Having houses hidden away of the much nore interesting viilag.e. We have several examples already in the village. Height Restriction I'm in favour of the current height restriction however it makes little sense and l w o rld suggest unfair when the lot is orr a sloping street such as Queen 5t. but of creates a. f would recommend the height measureme Commercial Taxes: be determined at the middle point: on the street front. Commercial real estate taxes are generally twice the residential rate. To encourage shops, and restaurants to populate the core 1 suggest the municipal council rebate 50% of the taxes to the shop owners in the core, not the owner of the building but the shop occupant, l would not rebate business offices. This rebate would not apply to the commercial development on, Hwy 3. Best regards Tom Tom Welch New Pianning bylaws July 25, 2023 Hi Garth A few comments on the proposed bylaw changes in the Chester downtown co commercial zone: Parking Spaces: The suggested ;Ainimum parking space proposed is 5.5M or 18 ft. This seems excessive, setting a minimum designed for large pick up trucks. This should not be the minimum standard. Suggested architectural guide lines call for 16 ft or 4.9 M length, Volvos, iettas and Rav4s, all common cars are about 4.75 M, less than the 4.9M, architectural guidelines. Driveways: I did riot see a minimurru width but 3.5 M is adequate,. Minimum Frontage: I believe 16 M is much too large for the core area of Chester. This is not a residential area and larger than sorne of the existing downtown lots. [would favour 11 M as a minimum frontage. Allowing smaller frontage creates a more interesting village. Illuminated Signs: 1 would make an exception for the theatre to allow a subtly lite rna , to be turned off after 1Dpm. Parking for canrne la! occupancy: I would favour increasing this to 50 M2. The core needs encouragement for more commercial space. $ubinitted by Tom Welch Garth. Stu From Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Syd Durnaresq Monday, August 21, 2023 2:26 PM Garth Sturtevant Carol Nauss; Derek Wells; Heather Archibald Chester Village Planning Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed " EXTERNAL EMAl't *" Ple-ase- do not open ,attachments or click. links from an unknown or suspicious origin, Hi Garth; A few more comments; + I just discovered that the boundary for Architectural Controls falls short of North Street (Highway 3). I thinkit should be extended to the first row of properties on the other side of North Street from the Village ▪ I am not in favour of lightening up the North Street design .guidelines. Having designed OHC to rrtet the current design guidelines I can confirm that the guidelines do force a designer to produce designs appropriate to our Village.. +� In the new Marine Development Zone I do not think tourist accom;rnodation should be a permitted use as there are ways of selling hotels as individual condominium like units which could easily morph into residential units thus circumventing the concept that residential uses are not permitted.. Thanks and best regards Syd Syd Dumaresgr FRAIL Architect, NSAA. SP Durnaresq Architect Ltd, 6389 Coburg Road, Suite 200 Halifax NS B3H 2A5 Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject: ** EXTERNAL. EMAI- Please do not open attachments or click links f orn an unknown or suspicious orighi. Syd Dumaresq <syd@spda.Ca) Mionday, ,luly 24, 2023 3:05 PM Garth Sturtevant; Allen l lebber; Carol Nauss Chad Haughn.,, Darlene Scott; Derek Wells; Derek Wells (Work); Emil, Statton; Hassen Hammond Heather Archibald; John Carroll Nancy Hatch RE: Save the Date - VPAC Meeting August 8, 2U23 Hi Garth: Not sure if VII be in Chester that day. A few comments on your excellent work (my opinion only): 1. Good start on the height changes but should measure from average grade to half way between the eave and the ridge Cutting down the lot sizes in the estate zone is too radical. The 1 acre lots define the character of some parts of the village and that character should be maintained 3. Very disappointed not to see at least start of a small heritage precinct. Still smarting over the loss of the Kentucky Bride's/Jib house and the replacement with that much too large out of character house. We are. missing a great opportunity here, 4. Could you please check to make sure the Cove Garden is zoned parks and institutional? Thanks and best regards Syd Syd Dumaresq, FRAIC Architect, NSAA SP Dumaresq Architect Ltd. 638'9 Coburg Road, . suite 200 Halifax NS B3H 2A5 From: Garth Sturtevant <gsturtevant@chester.ca> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2023 10:24 AM To; Allen Webber <awebber@ehester.ca>; Carol Nauss ches >; Derek Wells (Work) <chaughn@chester.ca>; Darlene Scott <dscott c chester_ca>; Derek. Wells <dwells@ ter.ca Emily Statton <estattorn@chester.ca>; Hassen Hammond Heather Archibald <harchi:balci chester.Ca>° i Hatch Dumaresc Subject: Save the Date - VPAC Meeting August B,. 2023 Good Morning. VPAC Members, I hope you are all doing ak following the weekend: withl e Chad Haughn Syd her and don't have any significant damage or detours to deal wanted to send out an early notice of the next VPAC meeting, scheduled for August 8''" at 4:OOpm. in Council Chambers. As you will see, the sole Agenda item is follow-up discussion from the presentation at the July VPAC, Additionally, by August 8th, we will have completed the series of 4 (we are adding an additional session as some folks may not have been able to attend on Saturday morning) public meetings, l will not have collated all of the feedback. by our meeting on the 8th,, but should have a good overview of the types➢ nature and category of comment and feedback that we have received. Despite the weather we had 27 members of the public attend the session on Saturday, and I felt it ,vent quite well to kick-off the public engagement_ If you are interested, l would encourage you to attend one of the rernnaining sessions to participate and hear the discussion and comments, If you have any questions or additional agenda items, please let wie know. Thank you, Garth Garth Sturtevant Senior Planner Community Oevelnpment & Recreation Municipality of Chester PO Box 369 186 Central Street, Chester, N , BO IJ0 Office: a .2-275-4135 General Inquiries: 902-275-2599 Web: www.chester.ca, 4 Consider the environment. Da yo o really need to print this e Garth Sturtevant From: hammond hass Sent Tuesday, July 25, 2023 6:27 AM To: Garth Sturtevant Subject: 3889 hwy 3 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flatq Status: Completed ** EXTERNAL EMAIL** Please do not open att,achmnents or click finks from an unknown or,suspicdous ra� Goodmorning Garth, The property that i would like to add to core corn its next door to The independent Grocery store, its a vacate land that develop it into a fast food franchise. Any question you can reach me at cial is located at 3889 north street n and hoping later in the future to thankyou Garth, Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject: CYC Business. Friday, July 28, zuzl Garth Sturtevant Zoning for the CYC Follow Up Flag: Followup Flag Status: Completed: ETERNAL EMAIL' l lea:se do not open attachrrhents or click links from an unkno °n or suspicious or4in. Garth.; Followup from our meeting back in (1 believe) February 1 believe both Stewart and r yPself indicated that the CYC was not interested in a change of Zoning for our location; This was confirmed through a broader Executive meeting, directly after. We see no advantage to a change and any change going forward just laves too many questions or unidentifiable issues that can't be anticipated' in the future, Let's make sure this is properly identified on any or all municipal plans that may be circulating: Thanks Jennifer Chandler Commodore CYC Garth Sturtevant From: Brian Webb Sent: Sunday, August 6, 2023 10:3 AM To: Garth Sturtevant; Planning Subject: Villa€ne of Chester Secondary Planning t,rategy and Land Use By-law Review Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status; Completed * * EXTERNAL EMAIL ** Please do not open attach rrrents or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin, Hello, I attended the public engagement sessions this week and wanted to pass along my feedback for the draft, but first want to commend you and the others for putting up with everything. i'Il .save an "unrelated" question for the end as well. 1. Really like and appreciate the reduction of minimum lot size in the R1 zone_ I know you indicated you have gotten some feedback on that already, but I fully support reducing those lot minimums_ z_ Appreciate the rationale behind the Ocean Infill zone and completely support this_ i hope this disincent'rvizes the use of infill as planned. 3_ Consider eliminating or further reducing parking minimums_ There are many locations both locally and nationally that have eliminated these minimums and I'd be happy to provide examples of this and/or meet to provide some additional local context for its potential impacts. I appreciate these minimums have been lowered or are non-existent in the CC zone for most uses and would request you consider going even further: * Parking minimums are problematic and could be mostly removed, especially for residential zones as they increase the cost of housing developments and reduce incentives for people to consider alternate forms of transportation by requiring even people without vehicles to cover costs for vehicle storage they don't require. * Most developers will continue to provide appropriate parking as the market for units without parking is small, but for those that believe there is a market for more affordable housing, removing these .minimums can reduce costs. (I can provide a local example of this if you would like to connect). * If this is not considered palatable, I would strongly suggest requiring "one additional parking space" for an Accessory Dwelling Unit on an existing lot should be removed. These units are a way to increase access to affordable units and I can think of many examples of how people could need their own housing but could share transportation, which would mean not requiring additional parking, * If even that isn't considered, I would suggest including a more clear and "endorsed" path to a variance that allows for the removal of parking minimums. I know this is the first thing listed on 4.39.1, but consider adding Language to section 4.26 that points to the ability to easily receive a variance for parking minimums 4. Related to this and slightly outside the scope of these documents - I don't see a lot related to walkability or alternate forms of transportation in these documents. Many LUB these days have bicycle parking requirements as an example. We currently don't have sidewalks leading from the community core down Valley Road (including to the food bank), which will have increased incentives for commercial development without parking in the future. 5. Appreciate the shift to using Development Agreements for non-residential developments at a large forward. cafe moving With the Coastal Protection Act appearing to be stalled and not moving, forward in the near future, has staff/council cansid.ered enacting regulations within the LUB that could limit development in areas that should be protected in. advance of provincial regulations. (e.g;. increased setbacks from high water mark f limitiing development in flood zones) 8. My final co- m,ent ist't suggesting a change of any kind - while I understand the desire to consider the "character" of the village, this- is to often used to control who can live in which areas of the commnunity and prices 'certain types of people' out of ever being able to live in certain sections of the community, While these documents can't change the fact land on the peninsulas will always be 4x that ofother parts of the community, enshrining more restrictive requirements in the LUB seems lrke overkill;) I would be happy to pop down to the office and chat through any of these things as well as my question, We are at 44 Valley Road next to the proposed hotel development. We don't share the same concerns we've been hearing at the public meetings, but water supply in general is naturally something we think about.. I know you have said council is. looking at a study on the aquifers and; taking another look at a central water system and I would like to know if you have an idea of the timeline for this? Given the developer is xx months into their active permit, are there any chances people would receive more reassurance that water will be fine before that development gets underway? Similarly, does it look like the Secondary Planning strategy and LUB will be approved before AB's team would need to get a renewal if/when that were to happen? Thank you,. Brian Webb Comments on Draft Village SPS and LUB. From : Ray Cambria Comments an SPS a)Policy 2.2 Housing. Page 22, '" The lack of a central water system coupled with uncertainty about groundwaster supply has led to a prudent approach to densification " b)Policy 4.1 Village Core and Peninsula area Page 48,...." Concerns around a lack of potable water and existing co munity character provide support for maintaining many traditional land use regulations c}Policy 4.1.7 Waterfront (WF) zone is there a typo here ? Should this be 4.1.81 d) Policy 51--3 Page 79.... 'A While providing adequate water supply for fire fighting All the above constantly refer to the lack of water in the village, and how development should reflect this reality. Many sections of the draft SPS appear to be designed to allow significant development in the village going forward. An example would be the reduction in the minimum lot size for those areas formerly zoned ER. The Lunenburg County District Planning Commission Discussion Paper on the village SPS and LUB, dated June 2000, page 12, section 5.2 duscussed groundwater availability. Or lack thereof. The report concludes " It is logical to limit new development and overall developrnent density in the village to a level that can be sustained by the existing groundwater supply ".. Policy section 2.2, mentioned above, (a) on the next page it reads.." one area of the village where rnulti-unit dwellings of of more than two dwelling units can be appropriately sited ". Allowing multi -unit dwellings is NOT a prudent approach to densification. Policy P-16 again mentions ulti-unit dwellings. This appears to me to be a classic, oxymoron. This entire section should be scrapped and redone with a more serious approach to densification, rather than paying lip service to the idea. e) Policy SI-5 I would reword this policy to read " We will take a sensible and realistic approach to increasing the density within the village core by ensuring development protects the integrity of the aquifer Except we have no idea of what the aquifer loop like. °' THE ENTIRETY OF POLICY SECTION 2.2 IS LUDICROUS AS WRITTEN. In my opinion it calls into question the integrity and effectiveness of the entire draft. SPS and LUB. f) Policy section 9.7. Development Agreements. ( IAA's) 1 considered commenting ire opposition to their return. Garth made a corrmee tonights information session that changed my mind. DA's were removed as a tool of the planning dept because of perceived public opinion that the then planners misused them. Now they are being returned with the current planners saying "We know there was an issue , but we won't do that, Please trust us. " Okay, if 1 buy that, my next comment is " 1 may trust you but what about the next bunch of planners ?" What if they behave like the first bunch.? The issue is that having DA's available as a tool for planners only works if the planners can be trusted. 1 am not necessarily against DA's used properly, in the best interests of the villagers, but what if they are misused, again, Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. g) Policy G-21. Outdoor wood furnaces. 1 believe that this wording should be broader to reflect control over all outdoor burning including fire pits, chimineas, and burning barrels. A person with a health concern suddenly confronted with a new neighbour who uses a burning barrel needs to have protection. Com inen LOAM Corner Vision Triangle I don't understand this at all. The triangle described, in almost all cases, is part of the Prov of NS Public Works highway right-of-way, and is not owned or under the control of the homeowner. Is there an expectation that Public Works will respond to a corner that fails to meet the criteria? Have you ever called Public Works and asked for something? The worst blind corner in the village is the North west corner where Main St meets Duke St. Looking left from Main is completely obstructed by full grown mature trees. Who will cut those down? Not the homeowner 1 assure you. The other issue with corner vision is that in congested high traffic areas such as downtown and the South St / Lido area, the the corner vision is not blocked by vegetation, but by illegally parked vehicles. No one seems prepared to enforce the Highway Traffic Act regarding parking at intersections, so why bother with a concern about vegetation. If you clear the vegetation, you will only create more space for illegally parked cars. A useless LUB that will never be enforced. 2) LUB 4.322. Shipping containers. 73.7 (c) related to the non-commercial use` What does this mean? This is within the HC zone. How could there be a non-commercial use 7.3.7 (1) Needs clarification. Most shipping contaik ers are sold with the logo etc of the former shipping company prominent. They are not attached or affixed. They are painted on. This is a loop -hole. Suggestions for clarifying this section. > Where possible, the narrow end of the container shall be visible from the sidewalk, roadway etc. Containers shall not be placed sideways on the Jot. > Containers shall be painted to match the building closest to the container. This is critical. Some containers are orange, pink , yellow etc. They look horrible. In many cases they arrive streaked with rust. The vendors of used containers all show pristine containers. They are not all like that. > There should be some restriction on the size of the container based on the size of the open area where it is proposed to be located. When containers were invented they were 20 ft long. Then they went to 40 ft, and now the standard is 53 ft. They were originally ft 6 in high. Now they are up to 9 ft 6 in high. Would we allow a 53 ft , 9'6°' container to be placed beside a building 20 ft long? would hope not > Setbacks....l am confused. If I have a HC lot that abuts a residential lot, 1 any required to have a vegetated; buffer 6 M deep, ( 7.3.6 (d)) If that abutment is a side yard, does this still apply. ? Now lets assume 1 put a container in the side yard. 7.3.7 (e) says 1 need a sideyard setback. of 3.5 M. What happened to the 6 M vegetated buffer? Too much conflicting information in 7.3.6 and 7.3.7 General comment -I am opposed to shipping containers anywhere in the village, including HC. They are an ugly eyesore, and most businesses are there to make money, not have pretty containers. Bringing back containers will cause problems. 3) Yard Sales The former LUB had section 4.5.13A. There appears to be no controls on yard sales on residential lots in the draft LUB. I think this is a mistake. If my neighbour sets up a yard sale every weekend for 3 months, that is a commercial operation on a residential lot, and should not be allowed. The operators of " permanent yard sales "° seldom put away their inventory . It can quickly become an eyesore. The reason for controls of yard sales is not to restrict the possible revenue for the seller, but to ensure there is the provision of controlling the appearance of the " inventory and to restrict commercial a€:t,ivitry in residential areas.. 4) Steel arch buildings The former LUB ( 4.6.1 (i) did not permit steal arch buildings over 20 sq M. within the Inner Architectural Control area. 1 do not see this worded that clearly in the draft LUB. Is it there? Con oiled some other way? I do not believe steel arch buildings of any size should core area. 5) Srna l l access° s be allowed in R1 , R2 and the LUB R1,. 5.2.5 and R2 5.3.5 Two are allowed in R1 but oinly one in R2. This makes no sense.. In both zones, two unit dwellings are permitted. I believe that each unit ire unit dwelling should be allowed a small accessory structure. 6) Signs LUB 9.5 (e) The first sentence of 9.5 reads " No projecting wall sign shall "... For a -d. that makes sense. But not for (e) It seems as if for (e that the wording should be All projecting wail signs sha and then (e) There is a " No " in 9.5 that 1 don`t think should apply to (e) 7) Height The max height in R1 R2 and CC . under DPP is 11 M. In R3 itis.10M. Is there a reason for this? If there is no valid reason, it should not be so. AY 8) Height As a general comment, I am opposed to any relaxing of the current height limit of 33 ft. / 10 M. During the time the current LUB was in place, the village saw tens of millions of dollars of new construction. Why would we want to change that.? The buildings constructed resulted in the type of low scale development the village residents wanted In most casesthe new buildings fit in with their surroundings so well that it is impossible to tell which structures are new and which are over 100 years old. This is what village residents want. I also note that the change to the average grade point for measurement would add up to a meter or more to the proposed height, If the average grade number is used, rather than the lowest point, the max height should be 10 M. Other cog munities have taken an approach that allows for certain height for new or renovated construction that reflects the height of existing structuresnext door / on the street/ etc. This allows for gradual changes. Increasing the height unilaterally will result in architectural styles that directly conflict with the SPS, section 1.2. It will result in very tall structures that do not embrace the neighbourhood. This will create a " big city infill look, where small bungalows are demolished and a " monster home " plunked into the neighbourhood. Chester residents do not want this. Page 3 of the undated " Built Form -Plan Review Background Report " shows this exact scenario as undesirable. Regards Ray Cambria Chester, NS Aug 7, 2023 Garth Sturtevant From: Pam Myra (shelher) Sent: Friday, August 11, 2023 12.05 PM To. Ray Cambria Cc; Garth Sturtevant; Chad Haughn Subject: RE: MODC Website Irnportart High Good afternoon, Thank you for your info. A am copying this email to the Planning Depart r t to follow i p to deterrrtine if there is a rriore user friendly way to get to the documents. Pam PAM MYRA Municipal Clerk Director of Hu an Resources 902-2.75-4109 902-277-x872 Consider the environment.. Do you really need to pant this trnail? Frorm Ray Cambria Sent: Friday, August 11, 20.2311:S3 AM To: Para Myra (she/her) <pr yra.c? chester.ca: Subject: TVIt DC Website :, EXTERNAL EMAIL** Please d not open attachments car click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Dear Ms. Myra; With the current review of the Village of Chester SPS and LUB underway, it increase the number of peoale who will want to read the documentation one passed by Council. likely IS It can be very difficult to find on the MODC website. There is an obvious click on the website far " Planning, Development and Approvals. "° Then it gets less obvious. The MPS and LUB and the Chester SPS and LUB are accessed by clicking on r° Planning and Approvals. " I doubt most people will click here, figuring they are not looking for an approval. I would suggest that the MPS and LUB and the Tillage SPS and LUB are important enough to be given their own '° title. '° and their own click. I had to call the planning department to fine on the website. Regards Ray Cambria 216 Central St Chester. out where the documentation was located 2 Garth Sturtevant From Ray Cambria Sent: Saturday, June 1U, au 1 AM To: Garth Sturtevant Subject. Village of Chester Planning Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 2* EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do root open attadhrnents Or click links from an unknown or suspicious org an. HI Garth; I wish to comment on Chester Village Planning and LUB , sec 4.6.1,(a) l ii) and why it dic not apply to the new duplex under construction immediately south of 199 Queen St. Based on 8 1/2 X 11 pages of my hard ropy of the LUB, I had always assumed that the Inner Architectural Control Area covered all of the residential areas south of North St, In my opinion, ALL zones with the word residential in them, LE_ LR, ER, WR, CVR, south of North Street , within the village planning area , should be within the Inner Architectural Control Area, It is now clear from the cladding which has been applied to this new duplex that there are some areas zoned residential , south of North St, that are not within the Inner Arch Control area. I do not believe this reflects the wishes o agree, Vi village residents. Not everyone may The situation as it now stands, is that properties zoned Central Commercial along Valley Rd are subject to the Inner Arch Controls, but properties zoned L only a few hundred yards away, are not_ ask that you bring this situation to the attention of VPAC. and ask for their recommendation on whether it should be reviewed / changed as part of plan review. I would be pleased to attend a meeting of the VPAC , and explain my perspective and concerns regarding this situation. Regards Ray Cambria Garth Stu eva rit. From: Ray Cambria Sent: Monday, line 12, 2023 2:23 PM To: Garth Sturtevant Subject LUB ! Roof Pitches Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed ** EXTERNAL EMAIL** Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Hi Garth; Please accept this comment on roof pitches as the village plan /review moves forward.. Please pass on to the VAC as needed_ As I watch new homes being built in the villages 1 suggest sol"9 e requirerrments in relation to roof pitches and design may be needed. There is a new home being built tnat has a pitch to the roof, and varied massing, but the pitch is only in one uniform direction. It has no " peak ° This is a flat -roof house, with a pitch. Sorn.e might view it as a large woodshed, would suggest that the Inner Architectural Control Area shoulc be worded so that a flat roof that is pitched must have a minimum of X amount ( 1/4. 1/3, 1/2 ) of the roof pitched in the opposite direction, Regards. Ray Cambria Chester, NS 1 Garth Sturtevant From: sent: To: Subject: Ray Cambria Wednesday, August 9, 2023 10:26 AM Garth Sturtevant Additional comments on draft SPS and LUB;. Follow Up Flag: Falloyv up Flag Status: Completed *'* I CTERNAL EMAIL** Please do not opera attachments or click link's from an unknown Of suspicious origin, Comments on Draft SPS and LUB From : Ray Cambria 1)..LUB, Sec 4.4 Page 51. Aggregate processing, Why is this even mentioned? Surely no one would accept a quarry in the village. How could you even fit a quarry in the village? 2) .LUB sec 4.13.2 Solar Collectors. °' May extend above the maximum permitted height of the structure by 2 M. '° This is unacceptable . Why would we allow this? There are houses etc all over the village and the province that are mounted on roofs and stop just short of the peak. This should be the requirement. What sort of ugly superstructure would be neecec to extend the panels another 2 M ? Anything like a solar panel stuck up that far in the air would need an ugly support system to prevent it from blowing away in storms. Where did this idea originate? Ridiculous. I ll!!! Regards Ray Cambria Chester Warden Webber and I' 'l'e Municipality of the Dlstri 151 King Street Chester NS B[tl 1!B bers of 'Council of Chester 34 Central Street Chester NS Poi IJO September 7, 2023 RE: VILLP,GE OF CHESTER. SECONDARY PLANNING STRATEGY Dear Warden Webber and Coun Thank. you for the courtesy you extended today in hearing comments as to the draft Planning Strategy. Clearly, there areconcerns in the community. It as more important to get the planning strategy right than to meet an administrative target of completion by December 31, 2023. Warden Webber clarified that the next step in the process is to receive a report from municipal staff as to comments made during the community, consultations, A significant issue is that there has been no effective community nsultationoThe reasons are articulated in the letter read at today's Council meeting. Without effective community consultation, little weight sho, be put un. the carrnments received to date, in my submission, Perhaps Co Co' Auld consider the following: Restart the process. Meaningful community consultation requires, effective notification to residents of Chester (by mail drop or other means); 2. Provide an overview document to residents which sets out: a. what is now contained Ti the Chester Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By -Law, b. what is proposed in Draft #1,. c. an explanation with a side -by -side comparison red -lined. or other) with the rationale for the changes; 3, That document should include a tie-in between Draft 1 and community resources, including water and sewer and other environmental issues to show that consideration has been gi►ren to these factors; 4. That document should also c:larifr whether Draft #1 requires aadherr standards in planning and permitting. That document ought to show how the strategy supports (affordab living and working within the area covered by the Draft. h+ .green - hose If citizens are engaged effectively, the final' document presented to Council will reflect consensus where possible and will outline the points of divergence for resolution by our elected Councillors,. Yours respectfully, Nancy 1, Murray Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject: mcdodds Monday, September 4,. 2023 2:1'l? PM Garth Sturtevant development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed ** EXTERNAL EMAIL ** Please do not open attachments or click links frcmrin en unknown or sus lchaus origin. Garth than you for meeting with me. I have below a draft letter re the zoning of the two commercial properties opposite here i live. My ideal would be for the whole of Union to become R! but in the meantime, i need to find a way to ensure these houses are not bought for commercial purposes... be it a hotel or apartment block, with thanks. please advise if you would if i am making rnyself clear. thanks Carol I would like to register a request please,. I discovered when talking with Garth that two properties on the whole stretch of Union Street are zoned R2 Commercial. This is a very worrisome situation as it .lends itself to these properties being developed under the R2 Commercial guidelines Into unsightly, busy commercial building or an apartment block of five or more under the proposed plans. I face directly onto both houses and therefore am requesting that they be changed to conform with the rest of Union street including all the horses on this bloc and down to the water, R.2 commercial under the current draft proposals means that a developer could corn e along and knock both houses down and build a 5 plus unit. R2 commercial's out of line with the rest of Union Street 1. This is a residential street so why should 2 only be desinated ial? 2. It is already a very busy street with parkingall week for the past office and weekends for the church not to mention visitors to Chester. 3, foot traffic is high., again weekdays for the post office and church and such at the weekends 4. I bought my house wanting to be in the centre of the village but not in a space that potentially could be turned into an apartment. block with little safe guards to the surrounding properties in terms of water, pedestrian safety, parkng and noise levels. 5. Buying in a commercial zone is one thing - but buying in a residential street and finding out two key homes opposite are commercial is frightening I therefore respectfully request that these two properties be designated residential. and not c©rnmerc`ial August 26th, 2023 Chester MunicipaI Council Chester, NS BOJ 1J0 Dear Councillors, Last year l sent a letter to you dated June 7th, 2022 highlighting concerns over the potential construction of a 27 -room hotel plus 4 tourist rental apartments on Valley Road:.. I would like to thank Warden Webber who responded to me with a letter dated July 19th, 2022. However, my concern with regards to the hotel development depleting the underground water supply was riot specifically answered. The Warden said that staff will be preparing a report regarding Municipal Water supply in Chester Village. As we know this is not the first time for the issue of installing a water system in the village. My questions and concerns were with regards to the demand the hotel will place on the underground water resources especially in the midst of climate change and extreme weather occurrences such as droughts. My letter addresses the amount of water withdrawal that the hotel may require and it is possible that this would be more than the 23,000 liters per day which requires a permit from the provincial department of Environment and. Climate Change. See - Guide to Surface Water Withdrawal Approvals My letter also includes information from the Environment Act addressing well construction. There has been a well known history of dry well occurrences in the village of Chester. Then we experienced the drought in 2016 which resulted: in many dry wells in Chester Village and in the municipality. This was followed with Council requesting a water study which was done by CBCL Limited - Preliminary Groundwater Supply Assessment Village of Chester Central Water System: Needs Assessment and Options Analysis in 2017. The results of the report warned that without a water system in Chester any development would be limited. The report identified the present lack of water resources and how would worsen due to climate change. The 2016 drought experience and the CBCL Limited report provided plenty of reasons for Council to update the 2013 Climate Change Action Plan to include adaptations that should have translated; into amendments to the land use by-laws. Since the CBCL Limited report said that development in the village of Chester would be limited until a water system was available the ability to build a major development like the hotel should have been denied: This would not have meant devel:opm.ent was not welcomed in Chester Village because what it would have meant was that Council and the Planning Division recognized the proper infrastructure needed to be created first like" expanding the capacity of the sewer system and to put in a water system.. This did not have to stop development but the size and the design of the development would be a factor: A hotel in our area is not a bad idea. The bad idea is where it is being built. Like the old saying says, "putting the cart before the horse.'" The infrastructure has to support the kind of developments you want to attract and support. Having a hotel is exciting for our area because of course it is good for other businesses and will create employment but the location is not appropriate. When a development causes adverse effectsfor neighboring properties along with financial burdens then that development is not a fit no matter how rmuch. Council and others wants it. The areas that a.re a better fist are in the cornrriunities just outside of Chester. Trunk #3 is one of these areas therefore that is where the water system should go first along with sidewalks to attract the developers,. Of course consultation with the residents is a must. These outlying areas are also best suited for affordable housing which we desperately need. The cost of land in the village of Chester prohibits any housing project to be affordable.. Therefore, why has the Planning Review been so focused OR increasing the density in the village? This will provide Council with an increase in the tax base but the atmosphere and quaint look of the village should not be compromised for more tax dollars_ With a proper vision and plan. the tax base will increase from more homes and development in the surrounding communities to Chester, l recognize my submission to Council is lengthy, However, 1 wanted to support my comments with data wind research. The first part, of my letter is to show that as far back as 2010 information was being made available to municipal councils on the importance, of recognizing climate change and how to incorporate climate change adaptations into policies and land use by-laws. There is an overwhelming amount of information, guidelines, and support systems to help municipalities to have updated Climate Change Action Plans and to incorporate those plans in land use bylaws. The second part of my letter highlights the work tt has been done by the Council although the work was kept in silos and not connected together to address, the necessary climate change adaptations that must be included into the planning of land use bylaws„ Part One and Part Two include questions to you and the Planning Division_ l believe for the well-being of our village for those for the development and those against it or have concerns the Planning; Review should hit pause until more discussions take place moving towards negotiations and resolutions followed by a strategic approach to additional public consultation opportunities. Thank you for reviewing my submission and l look forward to hearing from you. Kind Regards, Denise Peterson-Rafuse One example of this is with regards to the former Western Shore School when it was being closed by the provincial government. Public meetings were held to gather opinions from the community on what to do with the building. We were not. offered the same opportunity to provide community input into the adaptation of the Climate Change Action Plan. However, there were no amendments to the land use by-laws on water resources and development in Chester Village or opportunity for public discussion. My understanding In Western Shore the agreed upon public plan was to save the WesternShore School. A significant amount of money was invested in renovating the school when it was discovered there was not an appropriate sprinkler system after all the costly renovations: This was a mistake through Council and Public Works so they ,made a commitment to resolve the problem.More public consultation took place and the decision was made to demolish the school and build a playground and park area. In this incident the, Council and Public Works took the responsibility that they made a costly mistake and instead of saying nothing could be done they worked with community members and took the financial responsibility to fix the problem.. This is the attitude that we ask Council to take with the hotel development situation and the Planning Review process. We need the Council to work with residents to discuss options. I realize that there has been a significant amount of work that has been done to date on the Planning Review and because it is already late to be approved the mindset is that it must be adopted now. However,the amount of work does not translate to it being complete. Being incomplete is what I heard at the meeting I° attended. I do understand Council has received letters from community members expressing the need for more discussion on the hotel development and the Planning Review. What I heard was there are certainly gaps that need to be addressed. Telling residents that they had the opportunity to help fill those gaps by attending the public meetings does not reflect on the fact that the public outreach was not sufficient. We live in a much different world now after experiencing the horrors of the pandemic so the approach to public outreach is different now. Hosting meetings in the summer months and in the same week certainly is not the thing to do if we want people to participate, 20 Pert Resources Available To Assist l' iunicipaiities'kl ithl Climate Change including Land Use By -Laws There is a long list of organizations and levels of governments with support inforrrration climate change, planning land use by-laws, the role of municipalities and how to create action ,Tan.. Here are just a few; Natural Resource ''anada Canada -Nova Scotia Agreement on the Transfer of Fede Crown copyright, Province of Nova Scotia, 2011 Published by: Service Nova Scotia and Municipal relations Canada -Nava Scotia infrastructure Secretariat Published November 2011 Gas Tax Funds (Information from the Government of Canada guide named above) Canada's climate is changing rapidly. Although all levels of government have important roles to play to advance adaptation, action at the local level is particularly important because that is where many of the impacts of climate change will be felt most directly. Local governments in Canada can manage the risks and opportunities presented by climate through a variiety of practices, including adoption and enforcement of bylaws. Land use planning is one of the roost effective processes to facilitate local adaptation to climate change. n r1 Historically, local governments have used land use planning tools — official puns, zoning, development permits and others to minimize risks to communities from floods,. wildfires, ia,ndstides and other natural hazard's. As the ohm ate changes, so will the frequency and m..gnitude of climate -re -fated hazards, posing a challenge for community Planners. Some ways municipalities act. Planning and land use controls: zoning, official plans, development reviews, Forum for public dialogue and information: public awareness campaigns, deliberation an bylaws and programs, information on city or municipal services. This document describes tools in the land use planning sector that communities can use in preparing, to adapt to climate change, Inaddition, it provides information on decision -support tools, tools that provide information and resources to help planners and focal decision makers take effective adaptation action, Pia ing tools and climate change risk reduction, Generally speaking, planning tools can be used to reduce climate risks in four ways: • limiting development in hazard -prone areas. • ensuring that the built environment can, withstand a range of environmental stress, 2 • helping to preserve natural environments that protect communities against hazards (for example, duns that absorb coastal storm effects). ▪ educating stakeholders and decision makers about risks and opportunities and fostering dialogue about adaptation, Land use planning tools, This section describes seven of the most prominent land. use planning tools in use across Canada and explains how communities can use them to more effectively adapt to climate change. Land use planning refers to the processes and instruments employed to manage the use of land and the physical development of a community for the common interest. Clean Nova Scotia -titipWwr,,,J,clrean.ns,ca Ecology Action Centre - httr :ati+ru w, Gninwg ar t n Federation of Canadian Municipalities (infnraraation from the above Municipal Climate Action Inrtie iv e Resource Package 2020) 1. Climate Change in Nova Scotia Atlantic Canada will experience: • Increased temperatures Sea level rise • Changes in precipitation • Ocean acidification ▪ Increased rates of erosion, • Loss of biodiversity/'habitat rear anization • Frequency/severity of extreme weather events 2, Adaptation Techniques Adaptaiion: a response to reduce risk in a changing clirri,ate. Adaptation strategies may be long term plans and large scale projects or a reactive response after an issue has occurred .reacting to extreme weather events), Adaptation approaches can be different.: • Behavioral changes • Operational modifications - Technology intervention Planning changes - Revised investment practices - Regulations and legislation Relevant principles foradaptation in Nova Scot n ipalities and towns: 1. Public safety -Make sure the risks to human health and safety are reduced by being prepared for the potential risks from curate change such as road washouts, falling trees, storm surges, and power failures. In addition abundance of:safe drinkable water from dug and drilled wells) 2. Ensure Water °Quality and Quantity -Protect existing infrastructure•: (drinking water and waste water systems) and protective features (wetlands, recharge areas) to reduce to damage from intense rainfall and flooding, Municipal Government Act —Adopted 1998 (updated 2010): Municipal authority to develop Municipal Planning Strategies (MPS) and Zoning Bylaws — Under PART VIII, Section 220 of the act can regulate land use through an MPS and Zoning Bylaws.. o Municipalities have significant power in regulating what type of development is allowed within their jurisdiction. In order for municipalities to regulate and direct land use they must have a MPS and land use bylaw in place. o Coastlines in municipalities that do not have a municipal land use plan are only protected by province wide standards set out by provincial subdivision regulations, building codes, and provincial department acts, such as the Environmental Act. The fact that municipal governments 'in Nova Scotia have direct control over land use regulations for most land uses are both a blessing and a curse. There is power in the ability to regulate what type of development is allowed within their jurisdiction, However, th.e.s:e decisions require financial,. technical and .staff capacity to address that is often limited in Nova Scotia communities and municipalities, (Not the case for the municipality of the District of Chester). 2.2. Adaptation. Approaches, Public outreach around climate change impacts is often necessary to increase understanding on local situations and gain support for any adaptation 4 strategies the municipality decides to take ,part in. Social and educational strategies include. • Educational programs supporting outreach activities • Community engagerrrent sessaens • Creating local interest committees to :support community input in decision making Examples of adaptation approaches Federation of Canadian Municipalities Build sustainable and reliable servioes in your co unity while yo'u tackle climate change and. its effects, Municipalities have influence over roughly 50% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Canada. By adopting practices that reduce, remove or avoid GHG emissions and pursuing meaningful ways to adapt to changing climate realities, municipalities can improve their residents' quality of life while saving money in operating costs. The Municipalities for Climate Innovation. Program (MCIP) was a five-year $75 -million program, delivered by the Federation ofCanadian Municipalities and funded by the Government of Canada. From 2017,2022„ we helped more than 600 municipalities by providing funding, training and information sharing with the aim of encouraging municipalities to better prepare for and adapt to the new realities of climate change. Municipal assets and public services are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, placing local leaders at the frontlines of risk reduction and adaptation. However, it can be difficult for Municipalities and utilities to identify accurately their risk to climate change due to a lack of data, Does your municipality have water, wastewater and storm ate r it frastruoture that is vulnerable to temperature fluctuations, extreme precipitation and other extreme weather events associated with climate change? Are you interested in learning how to better use data to protect your community from risks related to climate change? You'll learn from the Municipalities for Climate: innovation Program; • How communities identified risks to climate -related damage, such as flooding. f The steps municipalities took to adapt their water, wastewater, s:tarnwater, and other municipal infrastructure to climate impacts. �. How using better data or filling in the gap by pooling diverse datasets can enhance yo community's efforts, How communities irnproved their data collection methods to letter support water infrastructure planning Strategies and approaches that can be applied to increase your municipality's system resilience to climate change. Part2 Chester ( lunicilal FocusOn Climate Chan ,e The Municipality's Climate Change Action Plan identifies • climate change issues and hazards; • affected locations; • affected facilities and infrastructure; and • who is affected, the economic implications, and environmental issues. After a great deal of work the Municipality of the District of Chester adopted the Municipal Climate Change Action Plan, a fifty page document, Within the document the increase in extrerne weather conditions frown droughts to f➢ood:s. is recognized as situations requiring actions. October 20'13.. From the Plan; To create a climate action plan a Municipal Climate Change Action Plan Adaptation Committee was created with the mandate to; 6 • Form arr Adaptation Committee; ., Identify climate change issues and hazards; . Identify affected locations; • Identify affected facilities and infrastructure; • Identify who is affected, the economic implications, and environmental issues; • Complete the greenhouse gas ernissions ter } late for municipal operations; Work together with Council to identify the priorities for adaptation; and • Submit a complete draft of the Clirnat,e Change Action Plan to Council for consultation and approval. Accountability The Adaptation Committee is accountable to Council for the completion of the Draft Municipal Climate Change Action Plan, The 1MMCCAP Team identified thirteen climate change issues and hazards that are focused on in the report. • Coastal flooding; • Inland flooding; • Hurricane; • Extreme weather event; Winter stormfblizzard; • Hot days/heat wave; • Forest fire; • Drought; • Animal disease; . , Pliant disease; ▪ Forest cover changes; • Agricultural crop changes; and • Sea temperature rise, acidification, and invasive species. HOT DAYS/ HEAT WAVE Hazards 7 Affected Areas, Facilities, and infrastructure A heat wave means there have been at least three consecutive days where temperatures have exceeded 30 degrees. Temperature extrernes such as this can be expected to occur more frequently and for longer periods in the future. Exposure to prolonged heat during hot days or a heat wave can be dangerous. Hot days are expected to occur more often,which means a drier, hotter summer. All areas in the Municipality are open to the effects of increasing hot days. Private and public infrastructure that could be affected are: • Electrical distribution system as people use more power; ▪ groundwater resources as use/need increases; • comfort stations as they establish themselves as "cooling centres': and ▪ public green spaces as maintenance becomes more difficult in hotter weather, The potential economic impact will affect a.tl sectors, but speoiticaily: • crops that like ararrr`ier terriperatures will thrive; • pressure will increase to change waste collection to weekly as well as to provide Chester a central water supply; • forestry because of woods travel closures; and • brownouts will occur caused by pressure on power supplies for air conditioning. DROUGHT Hazards Affected Areas, Facilities, and infrastructure Vuater resources are essential for irrigation and domestic use, just as more frequent and heavy rains can be expected, so too can we expect to see prolonged periods of abnormally dry weather_An extended drought can seriously deplete water sources,, The entire Municipality would be touched by draught. Specifically, parks and public spaces as maintenance would be limited; • wetlands, lakes and strearrys A drought indeed occurred in 2016 and negatively impacted dug wells and even some drilled welts leaving them dry for months at a time. The Village of Chester was impacted with 73 out of 317 wells going completely dry. Therefore dry wells should be a part of the drought list, DROUGHT Who can be Affected? Residents and busine drought could see: es experiencing a • a reduction in water supply to wells, especially to dug wells; • those in the core of Chester Village: • the potential for salt water %ntrusion along the coast; ▪ an impact on agricultural crops frorn lack of water. Residents and businesses experiencing a drought could see: a reduction in water supply to wells, especially to dug welts; • those in the care of Chester Village; • the potential for salt water intrusion along the coast; • an impact on agricuitural crops from lack of water. Drought viii have a potential economic impact on: • the Municipality as residents of Chester would increase pressure far a central water supply; • local businesses and small farms; and • the tourism industry with a possible increase in boating and outdoor recreation, Priorities Chester Municipality has established priorities for adaptation over the short term (0-5 years), medium term (5 to 20 years) and long term (over 20 years). they include priorities for nfaana9ing our infrastructure, our outreach requirements (how we work with the community), and policy and planning priorities, that is, how we update our planning and policy documents to meet the climate c'-iange challenge,. a The Chester Municipal Climate Change Action Plan is now 10 -years old. i cannot find anything an the municipality's website indicating any amendments over the years have been made to the plan, even when the Priorities clearly states the first review was planned after five years. The plan did identify the potential for a drought which actually occurred approximately 3 -years after the Climate Change Action Plan was released. At that time in 2016 with experiencing a drought and dry wells along with the results from the CBCL Limited, Preliminary Groundwater Supply Assessment, Village of Chester in 2017, the Climate Change Action Plan should have been updated to reflect the recommendation that without a water supply system, development in the village needed to be limited. The Priorities clearly state that planning and policy documents would be updated to meet the climate change challenges and based on public information sessions a full update but that did not happen. The lvluniicipal Planning Strategy/Environmental Safeguards, 2019 identifies environmental issues that need to be incorporated in the planning strategy. Water quality is mentioned however protecting water supply is not which is very concerning. in 2017 a Preliminary Groundwater Supply Assessrnent, Village of Chester Central Water System:Needs Assessment and Options Analysis was completed by CBCL. Limited Consulting Engineer_ Page 26, in the CBCL report highlights the water shortage history and the drought of 2016 causing dug and drilled wells to go dry in the Village of Chester. The Council and Planning Division received a warning - Shortages show that water resources are stressed in localized parts of the community, and that the potential for further development is. limited. The province experienced a drought in 2016 and dug and drilled wells in the Village ofChester were affected with dry wells for months at a time. The. CBCL Engineers 2017 report stated that further development in the village was limited. A safe, sufficient. water supply is critical to ensuring a sustainable economy and way of life. in the Municipality of Chester, which is why we, with the help of Coastal Action, are developing a Municipal Water Strategy for our communities. To get feedback from you, we mailed a survey to every household in the Municipality. The results of the survey (linked en the right) will help us develop a strategy that balances the needs of our residents, our businesses and communities, and the natural environment. Follow the progress of this project on Voices and Choices where you can also ask a question, propose an idea, and get updates. One of the Key Dates June 30 2020 Survey Results Data Analysis Coastal Action completes survey data analysis, Also considers data from the Village of Chester well survey completed in August 2017 and the Municipality's water shortageidry well rrr.apping data. Public perceptions and knowledge levels of personal water quality and quantity and the risks to them were generally high,. Underlying geology was identified as the top concern 12 to water quality, while clir rate change and drought were considered the top threats to water quantity. A safe, sufficient water supply is critical to ensuring a sustainable economy and way of life in the hvlunicipality of Chester, which is why we, with the heap of Coastal Action, are developing a Municipal Water Strategy for our communities. To get feedback from you, we mailed a survey to every household in the Municipality, The results of the survey (linked on the right) will help us develop a strategy that. balances the needs of our residents, our businesses and communities, and the natural environment. Foll rw the progress of this project on Voices and Choices where you can also ask a question, propose an idea, and get updates. One of the Key Dates June 30 2020 Survey Results Data Analysis Coastal Action completes survey data analysis_ Also considers data from the Village of Chester well survey completed in August 2017 and the ilu'lunicipality's water shortage/dry well mapping data, In total, 1,220 surveys were returned, both through the online platform, Voices and Choices, and the return of completed print copies, a return rate of 20%. The survey primarily captured the responses of long -terra (55 ) and full -tune ($7.4%) occupants from all seven Districts in the Municipality, 13 Public perceptions and knowledge levels of personal water quality and quantity and the risks to therm were generally high. Underlying geology was identified as the top concern to water quality, while climate change and drought were considered the top threats to water quantity. A great dI of effort was put in by the Council and Planning Division to make sure every resident in the municipality received the Water Strategy Survey. EACH MEETING WILL BEGIN WITH. A PRESENTATION, FOLLOWED BY TIN E FOR QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION HIGHLIGHTED TOPICS Short-term Rentals Regulations Accessory Dwelling Units and Gentle Density Highway 3 (North Street) Changes Architectural Controls Renamed & Revised Zone Boundaries Use of Development Agreements Waterfront 11191 Regulations And many more Topics and Issues! 14 From 2017 to 2022 when the hotel development received its building permit the Council and the Planning Division had 5 -years to amend planning by-laws to make sure water resources would not be depleted by any development which would adversely affect water resources and quality of other properties. In fact, the provincial Environment Act clearly states a well or well s on any property cannot cause or may cause an adverse effect. made under Sections 66 and HO of the Eii vir'o"1n ent Act S,N.S. 1994-95, c. 4. 0.1.C. 2007-483 (September 7, 2007), N.S. Reg. 382/2007 Interpretation Citation These regulations be cited as, the J °'e1! onslr-rrc pi Re aracx rs. Wells constructed to- prevent: adverse effects 20. A person must not construct a wel,i sa t% t iit ,ay cause an adverse effect. There is no question with all the information to date that the hotel project may or will cause an adverse effect on the water resources and quality of water of neighboring properties of the development. 15 Introduction Under the Environment Act, the Activities Designation Regulations (Division l; ADR) require that you obtain a water withdrawal approval if a surface water withdrawal exceeds 23,000 litres per day, subject to the exemptions outlined in the ADR ( The size of the Chester hotel means most likely the per day exceed 23,0100 litres per day.) ate withdrawal will To obtain a water withdrawal approval, the Approval and Notification Procedures Regulations require thatyou submit to Nova Scotia Environment (NSE) a completed application form and supporting documentation_ This guide describes the submission requirements, supporting documentation, and the criteria used by NSE to evaluate surface water withdrawal applications_ Applications for surface water withdrawals are classified into three (3) categories. This guide outlines the submission requirements for each. Although efforts have been made to make the guidance presented in this document applicable to as many potential applications as possible, final application requirements may deviate from the contents of this guice at the discretion of NSE staff. Approach to Surface Water Allocation A surface water withdrawal approval is one of the primary mechanisms used by the department to ensure that water resources are being developed in a sustainable way. As the provincial regulator, NSE seeks answers to the following questions when considering applications for approval: • Is the withdrawal sustainable? • Will the activity cause an adverse effect on the erMviranrnent'? • Will the activity impact other water users? • Has the applicant demonstrated a need for the water requested? Water allocation is based on the applicant's current water needs rather than potential future needs. The applicant cannot reserve water for future use beyond the expiry date of the approval. Water allocations are considered on a ';first -come, first -served" basis, 16 2. GUIDE TO SURFACE WATER WITHDRAWAL APPROVALS Definitions Drainage area — the area of land draining to the point along the watercourse where the proposed water withdrawal is to take place. Offline pond — a pond that is not connected to or receiving water from a stream, brook, river, wetland, lake, or another pond. A pond that is fed or potentially fed by groundwater would also be considered an offline pond if it meets the following size and separation criteria: • Less than 4 rn deep and greater than 30 m from the nearest stream, wetland. or off -site well less than 10 m deep; OR Greater than 4 m deep and greater than 60 m from the nearest stream, wetland, or off -site well less than 10 rn deep. Qualifiedperson — ari individual with hydrological knowledge, either having completed a degree in environmental science, with specialization in hydrology, aquatic ecology, limnology, biology, physical geography, and/or water resource management, or having equivalent education and experience. Qualified professional -- a professional engineer or professional geoscientistregistered to practice in the province of Nova Scotia. A qualified professionalmust possess sufficient knowledge to complete a hydrological assessment. Stream order — a method of classifying streams, determined by their location in the watershed. A stream located high in a watershed with no streams running into it is considered a lst order stream. A stream with two or more first order streams joining together is a 2nd order stream. A stream with two or more 2nd order streams joining together is a 3rd order stream, and so on (see Figure 1 on the following page). Stream ordering is to be based on the water courses identified on the provincial 1:10,000 scale water features map (interactive map found at novascotia.calnselsurface.water)- (There is a high possibility of the hotel using over 23,004 liters of water pe especially in the summer months as referenced in rny June 7th 2022 letter Council.) day 0 17 The drought occurred in 2016 and the Council and Planning Division had the CBCL Limited '''eport in 2017 reporting that the chances for future developmen limited because of the lack of water resources. "The 'Village of Chester has struggled with poor water quality and quantity for decades. Allen Webber, warden for the Municipality of the District of Chester, says the situation has needed to be addressed for a long time." Salty/ire, Heather Laura Clarke Content Solutions I Posted: Dec. 17, 2018,12:25 psn. I Updated: Dec. 17, 2018, 12:56 p.m.. 1 3 Min Read The Chester Municipal 10 -year old Climate Change Action Plan included drought as an issue, yet it was not updated after the 2016 drought or included in the present Planning Review. The Council and the Planning Division had sufficient information, elate and studies about the dry welts in Chester and the effects of climate change now and in the future on the shortage of groundwater supply. As the Warden said in 2018 the situation has needed to be addressed for a long time." Unfortunately the dry well issues are a long way from being addressed. The very fact that the Council and Planning Division did not update their own Climate Change Action Plan to include the 2016 drought and the 2017 CBCL Limited. Report is concerning. A Climate Change Action Plan cannot work on its own because it needs to be the framework for Council decisions. Planning and land use by-laws affect what our communities look like, our past and our future and the opportunities for economic growth. Climate change has to be an integral part of any Planning Review. It is the job of the Council with the assistance from the Planning Division to integrate studies, reports, and plans together and identify where they overlap to make sure all the information is translated into actionables. These actionables need to be addressed as they come up and not kept until a major policy or planning review takes place. The point is that the Council and Planning Division were aware of the 2013 Municipal', Climate Change Action Plan and its priorities. The plan highlighted the need for climate change adaptation and how to set priorities, and plans to meet the climate change challenge. This did not happen because if it did then the 2016 drought and 2017 CBCL Limited report would have become new Climate Change 18 Action Report adaptations. Amendments to the existing land use by-laws should have been based on limited development in Chester until a water system was available or other options like the use of cisterns. These amendments would have protected our water resources by requiring the developer to support the hotel's water needs in another manner than wells that will most likely drain the wells on neighboring properties. Planning Division staffs comments at the public meeting I attended informed those in attendance that there was nothing that could be done because the hotel development fit into the existing land use by-laws at the time the permit was issued. Council and the Planning Division need to take the responsibility for their decisions and not use the Tine, "it is too late now because the permit has already been issued. This will leave homeowner's near the hotel development with the financial burden because of a lack of well water resources and water quality issues and a reduction in the value of their home. Councils have statutory responsibilities to avoid or mitigate natural hazards and to have regard to the effects of climate change when making certain decisions They are also responsible for civil defence and emergency management, as well as improving community resilience through public education and local pl;anning_Aug 3, 2022 Councils have to deal with an overload of information and that is why divisions/ departments exist such as the Planning Division to make sure the Council is well educated and are presented with options in briefing notes. After the 2016 drought and the 2017 CBCL Limited report the Council should have recognized or should have been advised to amend the land -use by-laws for Chester Village. This would have prevented the developer of the hotel to build without providing a solution to the well known fact that water resources are limited and any major withdrawal of water will ,potentially cause an adverse effect on the availability of water for other village properties. Councils do not always make the rightdecisions and Chester Municipal Council has not been immune to making wrong decisions. The responsibility Council has is to explore every avenue to make a wrong a right. wish to remind the Council that they have a great deal of power in making decisions which affect our village, communities and the residents. These decisions often have a domino effect that last for decades and should never be made lightly. To be told at the public meeting by a business owner that it is the neighboring properties responsibility to put in their own cisterns because they had to put in cisterns for their business was not very insightful, The business owner was well aware of the lack of water supply to properly run their business when it was purchased so cisterns were a good option to collect enough water, The hotel project is totally different because it will be the actions taken by the developer that will leave surrounding properties with the adverse effects on another person's property. Council and the Planning Division are responsible for the actions of the developer by not amending and adapting the land use by-laws to reflect what climate change has already affected and that is the reduction in groundwater supplying dug and drilled wells in Chester Village. Also, anyone who disagrees with the present situation with the hotel development and the Planning Review should not be labeled as being against development. I know myself and speaking with others this is not the case, We are for development but it needs to be good development that fully incorporates the Municipal Climate Change Action Plan once it is updated and that the Planning Review process does the same. The decisions of Council or lack of timely action should not result in an inequitable situation because of the location of a person's property near a development that may drain the water from their well. One step forward would be for Council to hire an independent hydrologist to look at the level of possibility that the hotel would have an adverse effect on the water supply to nearby wells on neighboring properties. 21 Garth Sturtevant IFror n: nicdodds Sent: Mondays August 28, ZO23 1:36 PM To: Garth Sturtevant Subject: Secondary Planning Stratgey for land use bylavaw Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed " EXTERNAL EMAIL'"* Please do not open attaclirreentss or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin, Draft Seconcary Planning Strategy for land use by law lot" August, 2013 Carol Dodds Community of Chester, N.S. Thank you for taking my calls an corn mu nity. I will make this as brie required. 1. Zoning R2 Residential and Commercial or the meetings you have held in the possible for ease of reading but can expand if I am deeply concerned about this zoning and how ambiguous anc unclear it is leading to uncertainty, unrest and threatening the future of the village core. Residential: R2 in the residential core of the village should be changed to R1. There are so few actual guidelines in either zone to safeguard the integrity of the village and village core re what can and cannot be done.. roof pitch, siding and materials to be used do not go far enough to protect the village. So to retain the integrity of the village to adopt a pro active responsibly for its future, R1 should be on all village core areas outline in purple on you map). Why? 1. To stop inappropriate development where, no matter the narrative, the bottom line is profit. 2. To protect the water supply which is already in a very precarious balancing situation 3. To be mindful of the issues of parking and the trouble adding additional dwellings of 5 or more in the commercial area will cause... it is a safety issue that no one will want to take responsibility for. An accident waiting to happen lithe density of the village is increased. Zoning 2 residential has too, too many loop holes, large and small, that will lead to inappropriate development where profit to the developer is the only guiding criteria. Zoning 2 commercial- when read 5 or more in relation to dwellings i see an open invitation to inappropriate and devastating development that wily seriously challenge all our resources and the historical nature of a village known for its history and charm. I ask the questions, are developers or landlords interested in either of these factors, are they interested in maintaining standards re building materials, design or structure? Are they interested in the parking and water issues.? One has only to look at the two latest developments inChester on Victoria Road and Queen Street to see, first hand, that no regulations or by laws exist to safeguard the integrity of design and materials in Chester. As far as Queen street is concerned, waving the flag of "affordable housing" is laughable.. who can afford the rent. I am informed it is 3 000 per month. Safeguards and checks and balances are vital to good zoning and should underpin ANY decisions, bylaws need to be water tight and veryclearly representing rnaintaining the safety, integrity and water supplies in the village Zoning and appropriate bylaws are essential to the future of any municipality. Authorities across Canada and around the world including the UK have long ago woken up to the fact that, the long term preservation of form and design are vital to the community they serve and provide a historical backdrop for future generations. Chester Municipality and council are in a unique position to learn from others' mistakes, they can revisit and listen to the people in the village who have the village not the bank balance in mind. Zoning to R1 for all residential and an new comerial areass ro osed in the village will stop multi dwellings of 5 or more and also R2 residential with the proposed up to 2 residential areas. Then inappropriately buildings, the challenges of water (and ultimately the sewerage system) along with road safety will not be an issue. All R2 residential zoning should le. changed to R1 to maintain the integrity of a beautiful historic village making it a safe place to be proud of for its The new proposed hotel will no doubt contravene all i have said above re design, water supply and road safety. Of this many people have little doubt. To summarize: no more development in the core area of the village. There are many opportunities outside the village core for development where interested builders can invest in the infra structure of water and sewers themselves. Air B and B 1 know this is a challenging issue, i am surrounded on all sides, back and front with Air 8 and B so I feel I can speak with some authority. My first response mirrors the many concerns of others. However, thinking about it here are my thoughts. I see Air B and B's as providing accommodation and opportunities for the village. I see them being a far better alternative than hotels or multi level dwellings rented to folks who will have no vested interest in the preservation of the property and surrounds. 1 see them as a way of new folks corning to the village, supporting businesses and, for some, eventually buying here or in the area. Air B and B offers a much more environmentally conscious approach to encouraging visitors, why? 1e Accommodation: houses already exist and many in character and. keeping with the village, (air b &B evolved from the concept that folks rented out their homes when they were away). Water is already there and use of this resource would be happening anyway. 1 am estimating little more than if the owner was there. Parking already exists, so no extra congestion on the narrow streets In my experience many respect not only the homes they are renting but also the village and some, if they can, want to buy and return to the area. Exceptions can be given to the whole concept of respect and i venture to say many will relate to Chester Race Week when a lot of residents leave Chester because of the partying, increased traffic and line ups. How to manage Air B anlB Not everyone I know would agree with this but facing alternatives of hotels, motels etc in the core of the village they may re evaluate especially if there were essential checks and balances in place. They can be disruptive (and I know because having just gone through Chester Race Week many of us have heard the parties and music... but we also know this is one week out of 52 for most of us). 1 propose that Air B and B be regulated by strict bylaws in the following way: They are licensed by the municipality annually Determining the fee could be set by reviewing what other municipalities of a similar size charge. b. That strict guidelines re noise control, garbage etc are set down and are adhered to, the owners being held responsive for this along with the renters (via their contract and the license guidelines) That a process be in place whereby infractions are reported and depending on what is outlined in the contract, breaking these guidelines means that no license will be granted fora period of saylf 2 years. That the owner of the property be responsible for informing their guests about the license, the bylaws and the expectations that renting brings. That tle new bylaws governing the licensing would have the opportunity to address noise levels, restrictions on noise (a.m. and p,m) substances (marijuana smoking outside affecting adjoining properties etc) These things should be included in the agreement between renter and owner. That the annual license fee be used to help pay for a part time staff member to manage this system. . That a board be set up to help manage this process that will be clearly governed by the bylaws... infractions of say more than 5 per year would result in the loss of a license for a one/two year period. Being proactive with Air B&B is vital, controlling their affects on the village will certainly help for better relations whilst affording the village and surrounding areas the benefits visitors bring re revenue for businesses etc. The money raised from the granting of the license will contribute to the person doing this part time (if there is opposition to an existing staff member taking it on under their current work description). To help control the number of Air b&B you could issue the folks currently with air b&b and then, have an upper limit as to how many you want in the village. 1 am told there are approx 60 now...so the limit could be 60 plus whatever. If there are limited licenses this then gives a huge incentive to the owners and whomever they rent to, to make sure regulations and bylaws are upheld. I am more then prepared to expand on any of these points and to help in any way with the Air B &B process. Thank you for your time reading this Carol Dodds Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject: Pam Myra (sh her) Monday, August 28, 2023 12:51 PM Garth Sturtevant FW: New petition to you: Support our Open. Letter to Chester Council -2023 Village Plan Review! Follow Up Flag: Follow/1.4p Flag Status: Completed PAM Wilt& Munii:ciipal. Clerk/Director of Human Resurces "' 9+02-2.75-4109 902-'277-1872 1 Consider the ervmronment. Do you really need to print this email? From: Chester Coalition. of Common Sense Citizens via Change,org Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 9:38 PM To: Council < ouncil@chester ca> Subject: New petition to you: Support our Open Letter to Chester Council -2023 Village Plan Revi EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attachments or click (inks from an unknown or suspicious origin., &ta g rg Municipality of District of Chester Council: you've been listed as a decision ion maker Chester Coalition of Common Sense Citizens started a petition on Change.orq and listed you as a decision maker. Learn more about Chester Coalition of Common Sense Citizeris's petition and how you can respond: t Chester Coalition of Common Sense Citizens is petitioning Municipality of District of Chester Council (Municipality of District of Chester) Support our Open Letter to ChesterCouncil-2023 Village Plan Review! FOR EASIER READING CLICK ON OUR PDF VERSION HERE: Open Letter to Chester Council. AN OPEN LE 1 l ER TO COUNCIL: 24 August 2023 Dear Municipality of Chester Council. re. Village Planning Review We are writing to express our concerns with the... WHAT YOU CAN DO 1. View the petition: Learn shout the petition and its supporters. You will receive updates as new supporters sign the petition so you can see who is signing and why. 2. Respond to the petition: Post a res rpnse to let the petition supporters know you're listening, say whether you agree with their call to action, or ask them for more information. 2 3. Continue the dialogue:' Read the comments posted by petition supporters and continue the dialogue so that ethers can see you're an engaged leader who is willing to participate in open discussion_ CI ANGE.ORG FOR DECISION MAKERS n Ch n euors decision makers like you connect directly with people around the world to resolve issues. Learn amore,. This neti rcat.ior was writ to co rn it c' ,chester.ca, the as .a decision maker. Th on -time notification to the emelt address listed above., You will i?ve any further notifications regarding this petition from us,. Privacy policy We'd love to hear from you! Cont through our help centre, Chan e.crg , 548 Marker St #299 3, San Francisco. CA 94104-5401, USA ted Garth Sturtevant From: Sent; To: Subject: Sarah Dennis Friday, August 2 ,. 2023 4:40 PM Planning Chester Planning changes EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attachments orcliickc kin unknown orsuspkeious right.. Hello, am concerned and contused about the change in lot size far the Estate or R1area_ t kore tit to needed to review this and understand the implications, Thank you, Sarah .Dennis Anthony T Enders New Yore,., r Y 10028 August 24, 2 Coma unitsr Development Department 156 Central. Street, I'D Bx 369 Chester, NS, Canada BOJ 1JC Dear Sirs, Through a chance encounter with a former neighbor earlier this 1 I w as surprised to learn of the proposed amendments to the land use by-laws with a comment period ending very soon. Since these by laws .affect all property owners, might i suggest a way be found -- email or ail —, to inform us of. important changes like these? Many of us, permanent residents and residents, dorr't cortslllt the Chester websites frequently but our addresses are on ipaiity. My grandfather Charles H, Talcott pu chased 9 Queen St in 1915, antd except for the pandemic years 2020 and 2021 my immediate family has spent portions ofeves,, summer here since 1989. I first came in 1948 and have watched the evolution of the v°illagee - the closing of some of its traditional businesses, the incteasing mass of its newer houses - with a mixture of sadness and concern. l think that the "Chester Look.", which the by-laws are intended to promote, is not only architecturai but includes the trees, shrubs. hedges and bushes along all its streets. I have particular concern with the implications of the Corner Vision Triangle by-law 4.10.1 on future village aesthetes. I assume this by-law is intended to make driving the village streets safer. Frankly, one of Chester's charms 15 that there are many blind corners formed by both buildings and vegetation, and people drive carefully 310W because of these narrow streets and blind corners. Since there is tno ranndfatherinzg provision in this by-law, 1 assume that if it were enforced, all current corner lots with vegetation will have to have it cut down to about 2 1 feet high within an area 19 'A feet along each street from the corner and 14 feet back from the corner in the middle, My survey of 142 corners in the village core below rte. 3 found that 26 % currently conform to the new ° by-law; 20% have a building within the Corner Vision Triangle, and 54% have hedges, fences, bushes, or trees within the'Triangle (1 missed the corners at: Tremont and Granite Streets. If the intent really is to make driving safer in. the village, the buildings should go along with the vegetation, but that is nonsensical. Implementing and enforcing 4.10.1 i,l have a major impact on the charm ofth village and also adversely affect the privacy y f then: lots. by-law altogether. 1 am also concerned that Bylaw 4.6 differentiates between building under 1500 sq. ft, and those over 1500 ft. sq in terms of facade treatment. Any new development of'whatever size should + se traditional materials on its facade to reinforce the "Chester Look to raradf ther nd consider eliminating this the final concern is the absence of a provision addressing flat roofs. This is p rtieWady important for the comet rcial development on Rte 3. As l think it is now drafted, there quid. be a. series of flat roofed blocks of apartments of up to 8 units 40 feet high set back no more than 1.0 feet which would give the feel of entering a tunnel. when driving or walking along rte, 3 and Which would be the antithesis of the "Chester Look". Byelaw 4..6J c rnay address this concern but I think it ,could be clearer. Thank you for the opportunity to express these concerns °biclr 1: Pe' you, llco Ga th Stu srt v From: Caro Creighton Sent Friday, August 25, 2023 To: Planning Cc: Tins Wilde Subject. Creighton/Wilde proper` :56 PM owners ater Lane " * EXTER NAL EMAIL Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown orsuspicious r rigin. To whom it may concern, We are not aware of all details at present' d hereby request another meeting and ,u her details on all issues at hand.. Many thanks,. Caro Creighton and Tim Wilde Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To:. Subject: Friday, August 25, 2023 3:40 P Planning Creighton property owners 15 water Lane EXTERNAL EMAIL** Please do not open attachrnents or dick links from an unknown or srspicious origins ire not aware of all details at present and hereby request another meeting and further detail on all on tissues at hand; David and M ry Creighton Municipality of Chester Council and others: I am writing to express my concerns with the Village of Chester Planning Document currently under review.. live on Prince Street . During my working years I served in Crown Corporations involved in Economic Development, attracting global capital to Canada, and taking equity positions in innovative cornpanies. I feel I have a good sense of what attracts companies, and people, to a community and what makes, in the long term, for a strong vibrant community, Competent, trustworthy and reliable local government that plans for the future, and is in touch with its citizens is top of the list. Any plan for the Village of Chester that its citizens would accept rn.0 contain the following 3 critical elements: 1. RESPECT FOR AND PRESERVATION OF Chester's beautiful streetscapes, heritage buildings and natural beauty. Chester is famous for this, and this is part of what we admire daily, of what has attracted the movie industry to work here over the years, and what brings so many tourists. 2. PROTECTION OF OUR PRECIOUS AND SCARCE WATER RESOURCES. We are well known for our water problems. Council and municipal staff know this is an issue better than anyone. 3. TRUE PLAN CONSULTATION AND B UY IN W[T IO UT BIAS. Any planning process must be open. All sides must feel it is a fair and open process, and have valued input. This proposed plan shows little consideration for these three components.. In fact it appears to openly ignore them while promoting opposing values: Rather than protecting our heritage look and feel, it proposes to reduce the standards for building materials, to divide peninsula lots in 4 and add multi unit buildings in the core areas. "Accessory dwellings" will become a new drain on water. Does the municipality have the capacity and resolve needed to police the new builds to ensure we are not just adding more to an already abundant AIRBNB stock? These proposed changes will ease the rules for developers but do nothing to protect what we treasure. Municipal planners have told us they have notconsidered how any new units of housing the new plan could produce. Planning processes can only be complete when objectives, goals and outcomes are professionally formed and then clearly stated Watr is the life blood of any community and Chester has a very clearly documented problem documented by the council itself in various water supply studies, and obvious from its history of shortages. This plan simply proposes, without even a mention of a viable plan for increasing supply, to take water resources away from current residents and offer them to promoters and builders for the purpose of development. The consultation process to this point feels, to many of us, to have been. disingenuous, confrontational and dismissive. Repeatedly, the planner and councillor Wells said the public meetings were not the place to raise critical. issues of water supply, sewer capacity and traffic. Municipal staff and councillor Wells have clearly shown their bias for the plan. and have been very open in their urgency to get this plan through, as soon as possible. Peopleare preoccupied with summer, back to school, oh and. .....hurricanes. It's hard to imagine the proposed ph or promoter had actually written it.. Who will, benefit from the proposed plan? Who takes the obvious risks and possible loses? What will Chester look like in zo years? Will it be peppered with duplexes covered in fake brick and vinyl? Will the well intentioned granny suites actually be AIR Bs? Will the Peninsula as we knovvt disappear and become a series of duplexes? What willthe result be if a developer finds two adjoined peninsula properties to purchase and develop? I ask council to please reflect now and consider putting this review on hold while residents learn more about it, and issues like water and sewer can be addressed. A short delay now can avoid years of you dealing with confusion and legal issues. We can reset using the many good things in the planas a base, and build a plan we all support to move Chester to its next chapter. I,v uid be much different if developer From Peter Fitch, Chester, NS To who t may concern: After attendingLa public meeting, August 3rd 2023, at the.Anglican Church Hall, ‘,vhich devolved into a two and a haft hour protest about an rrelevart, alrea.dymapproved building (hotel on Valley road) and water supply-iss re dominated the discussion, I finally left in frustration. To the discussion of the proposed changes and concerns of the effect they aotentially may have going forward on the Village physical character and other related issues NO TIME was given. This is an attempt to remedy that problem, The daunting task of reading' and understanding this proposed collection of numerous changes is much more in the realm of lawyers and planning experts, of which I am neither. I will try to persevereJn somewhat of a rational manner with'the items that 1 believe to be most significant, To that end I note the following concerns. P rpose and scope: page 10 :°1.: (builds a strong economy section) : providing cost effective and efficient:services to support growth," Fostering an economic environment thatsupports GOOD JOBS ". I am curious what a catch phrase like this is for other than window dressing' What pray tell are considered good jobs or conversely bad jobs? Page 11 states: " the character of the Village Area shall be maintained and PROTECTED by requiring that new developmentrespect and enhance surrounding structures and°;:streetscapes_" No mention of the waterfront is perhaps an over site but should be included as it is the single most importantrf attire that originally drew the interest of wealthy American visitors and subsequently rnost of the visitors and homeowners of Chester. On page 12 "without overly burdening new development with unnecessary:cost. and REGULATION." This is beginning to sound much more like a radical shift to open access for developers as opposed to what the original bylaws, which were not. progressive, and purposely so were predicated on. Having been involved almost from the genesis of the zoning bylaws period l would suggest that it is not by happenstance that. Chester exists as it does today but rather deliberate and at times acrimonious adoption of RESTRICTIVE and DELIBERATELY PROHIBITIVE rules to protect and preserve the true Character of "the village ". We do not look like Mahone Bay because we chose not to. G- .:Architectural controls refers to 4.6 (page 51 second section) w=hich seems to have been written by a mathematician and no mention of traditional or heritage relevant design standards which begs the question,. why? Again the rules seem to favour the unfettered promotion of the least amount of control as to promote development without outlining what is and what; is not acceptable in design from an historical perspective in, terrnslof outward appearances,. Page 52 EI.4.6.1.d seems to allow the use of vinyl siding and cinder block on buildings of 1500 sq. ft. or less and up to 25% of the facade of larger b�,rilclir�gs why accept any amount of these non traditional building materials ..;.. Page 51 €„mentions under 4.4 aggregate processing.;.,,, This is what is known as crushing gravel in the common man's vernacular or a. quarry, it has NO place in this document, have the planners just lifted regulations from some ot'ner jurisdictions bylaws? k the intent: to create space for such a venture, 1 find it puzzling:at best and troubling in every respect. 4.1 3.1 and 2 Solar and wind devices should include a section on "keeping in good repair' and not be allowed to become unsightly as well as -removal at the end of their usefulness. To mention these new forms of energy capture without any regulation whatsoever is at best an error in judgement, and at worst, willfu neglect. Again, 1 pose the question: are wind towers the look that Chester is willing to accomrnodatei' Tanks of solar collectors up to 6 foot 6 inches above rooflines are accepta.hle? Where is the planner's vision of Chester? I would suggest that a day trip to Bridgewater, N.S., to enjoy what the vision of unplanned and uncontrolled development looks like in real time, and if that is appealing, perhaps apply there for a planning career. R-1 The section on the new R-1 (estate residential) zone is for qui e troubling_ The idea of splitting these lots into 4, or 2, or any other number, is just short-sighted and wrong-headed at best. It is my belief that many who visit here come to see the beautiful homes and estates and are not drawn to see the ocean alone, as there are numerous places with better ocean views to enjoy.. The moderator suggested that denser population will make providing services more cost effective by the sheer weight of numbers. This might be true if the properties are inhabited for 12 months a year but they are rarely occupied for more than 20 percent of that. The amount of land that they occupy would be insignificant in terms of the overall planning area but currently command exceedingly high evaluations and pay more than their fair share of municipal taxes especially considering that the vast rnajority are occupied for 70 days a year oriess annually. Perhaps a mathematical exercise on the cost per bag of garbage for a2,m1 0 million dollar property, occupied for 8 weeks versus a more modest 5250,000 horne, occupied for 52 weeks, could' bring clarity to this issue? It puts the density argument to the test, and 1 believe, leaves the premise desperately wanting. This also would apply to sewer services on a per flush basis; Hopefully, you get the point? The truth is that the summer residences subsidize many less fortunate rate payers for the services they require_ They have, for the most part, been excellent -stewards of the waterfront views and the green spaces that they keep in excellent' repair. Try to envision Nauss Point, the Peninsula, the homes that view the approaches to the Back Harbour, as all being increased by a factor of 2,3,4. Everyone loses; those who see Chester from the water, anc those who see the waterfront from the land. The natural beauty of Chester is legendary and does not require enhancements from developers to augment it. It is my belief that the wealthy can leave Chester at any moment as the world is a vast place, with much competition, andthe group in question can, and will, pick up stakes at a moments notice, never to be seen again_ Be careful that you do not "kill the golden goose" as an unintended consequence of enhancing density as somehow a good or positive thing. Remenber,7people do not only come to Chester to see the ocean. There are many better places to do that. They come to see the water, and the islands, but mostly to see the beautiful houses and their properties. R 2 if you live here you getto know the local population, which, unlike Tokyo, is not overly dense and the walks throughout the village are almost a religious experience as well appointed homes and gardens break up the urban look. 1 have yet to hear anyone suggest that we should go and view the beautiful duplexes before our round of golf. The cry for more density as some sort of elixir for a prosperous village, does not, and should not, apply here. The basic nature and draw of the area is not the density but just the opposite. The massive tax base is a result of people being attracted to what exists and not speculation on how muci better we will all be when the population doubles. This begins, to smack of some type of wishful thinking by the tax authorities to continue to find even more tax dollars to remove from the local populace without any reasonable reason for encouraging this type of activity. Do we have plans to find employment opportunities for "good jobs "in the off season? Please elaborateas I am fascinated to be schooled about how this works. Signs 9.3n Political signs are mandated to be taken down within a week of the end of an election. Real Estate signs can be lefts up for ages after a property closes, this should be a term of 2 weeks max, with a fine being levied on a daily basis, until found in compliance. l also believe that business "sniping "' with rain gutters, roofing, pressure washing etc signs should be told to rernihve their signs i`f[rid contact # on sign) and that they may face fines V they do not want to comply. In closing 1 wish to note that in several areas your document seems to be in conflict with itself. It seems to smack heavily of the need to open the doors to developers who, by design, are profit motivated and a[most never can be trusted or reliedipon to"dorwhat is best for an area_ If density{ is driving this change perhaps the council should look to extending theE:sewer lines to the Commons area, Stanford Lake area and the north end of Pigloop Road which have ample room for housing and were left out of the central sewer design 50 years ago due to the fact that the residents there could not afford to pay for such a service. That has changed, and it is high time that some unspoken agreement about these areas now. NEEDS to be spoen about. [t was my understanding that the planners are supposed to be guardians of the Village and not purveyors of progressive change. WE LOVE CHESTER FOR WHAT IT IS and any agenda that threatens to upend this is going to he rnet with fierce resistance. believe from the numerous people that. C have been in contact with that this NEW PLAN is now viewed with suspicion and mistrust. Unfortunately this is something that you have brought upon yourselves. : - Peter Fitch Chester Dear Sirs,g After attending the Villa Planning Review community meeting on August 3rd, l walked away with a mountain of questions, but my biggest query was "Why?" EI Why is the planning department proposing these unwanted changes to the bylaws? What: is the impetus? To increase the tax base by increasing density? This may be the want of MCC but it is not the want of the villagers, Your plan should reflect what WE want,° Did a group of developers corne into the M0DC building and hold a gun to your head? That's what this plan looks like, It looks like you are being held hostage by developers, It looks like you are not thinking of your neighbours or the community you have been elected to represent.{) In your plan our peninsulas could increase four fold in: density. O People are drawn to Chester to see the beautiful estate homes, to walk along the quiet roads and admire the carefully tended gardens of the estate residential zones, That would all be destroyed by increasing the number of lots available.. That would kill the golden goose that makes Chester stand out and shine among all other communities in the province. l hear it every day at my breakfast table; "This is by far the prettiest town we have seen in, our travels here in Nova Scotia." 0 have been told by residents, of the Peninsula that: none of them are looking to subdivide their property and I can assuredly say they don't want their neighbours to do it either_° There are plenty of areas outside the village core for gentle increases in density as well as the possibility for more aUordable housing.0 To increase density is to increase water usage and we clearly don't have water. 0 The LunenburgCounty District Planning Commission Discussion Paper on the village of Chester LUB, dated June 2000, page 12, section 5.2 discussed groundwater availability, The report concluded "It is logical to limit new development and overall development density in the village to a level that can be sustained by the existing groundwater supply." p The engineering firm which was commissioned by MODC in 2017 stated that with regard to groundwater supply assessment 'Shortages show that water resources are stressed in localized parts of the community, and that the potential for further development or increased densitywithin existing dwellings is limited.'g Council has repeatedly stated they have NO intention of creating a village water system. Their bandaid attempt to mask this issue is to hand out coupons for plastic jugs of water that end up in the land fill. This does not solve the water problem.° The fires and floods this year have highlighted many things for insurance companies and planners - egress. Despite this, you are planning to increase the density on the peninsulas with no egress, limited water and roads that cannot accommodate two-way ttad c. Insurance companies consider risk, the higher the risk, the higher the premiums. 0 Its only a matter of time before the village residents will be facing increasing premiums due to the lack of water and increasing density. Next issue: Sewer_ More density means more sewer_ We have always been bushed o0 with the vague reply 'there is room for 500 more hookups," If thatis the case why is the Public Works truck always pumping sewage out of a man hole on Pig Loop road?g The flooding this past month has proved the sewer system cannot service even the existing residents,° All those studies and meetings financed by our tax dollars to identify and preserve the "Chester Look" seems to have fallen by the wayside. Villagers came out in droves to say what they wanted Chester homes' architecture to look like.. It appears to have been wasted time.i Your plan is to lower the bar to almost 'manything goes" with regard to architectural design to allow for more aEordiable housing. Really? 'AClordable° and 'Chester' is an oxymoron. No one buys land in Chester for aUordable housing_ If they can Cordi to build a home in Chester they can afford to clad it with ha rizo ta/ wooden siding or wood shingles.C1 Those two new builds on north Queen St are a disgrace and an embarrassment to the village.g What about demolition guidelines? The recent example in the back harbour is an historic home being razed to be replaced with a monstrosity that has no regard for the surrounding architecture. This never should have been allowed to happen. If you are not preserving the historic homes in the village you have no regard for what gives Chester it's unique style that is repeatedly raved abort in glossy publications,CJ In the August issue of the Municipal Insight' Warden Webber wrote: 'This is important work that will impact those who live in the Village of Chester. It is important that we hear from, you as the final outcome is meant to reflect your vision of the community moving forward." 0 This document, as it stands, reflects the desire of developers and not the people in the vil;cage. I urge the planners and Council to go back to the drawing board and make a plan that works for the village of Chester within the constraints of the existing infrastructure. Please respect our history and the beauty of the germ we call home.00 Suzan FraserU 78 Queen Street g Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject; Claire Farley Friday, August 25, 2023 1110 PM Planning Proposed changes to Vil:large of Chester Byaws EXTERNAL. EMAIL " Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin,. I was very st `prrsed to learn of the proposed changes to the Estate Lots (to be called R1 in the future) My fancily owns two borne -son the peninsula_ We were attracted to them because of the large lots and the restrictions that prevented subdividing and dense building.. Allowing 4 lots per acre would dramatically diminish the beauty of the peninsula and herrn the eco-system. really don't understand what we are trying to achieve with subdividing the lots on the peninsula. Shouldn't it be driven by what the property owners want? Everyone that l have spoken to on Fredas Point and Pews and Peninsula Road are against it. Granted 1 haven't spoken to all owvriers, but the nineteen property owners to whom. I did speak are vehemently opposed .and that would represent an overwhelming majority. Thank you far considering my concerns. C:liaire Farley Letter to the VOC Planning Advisory Corny ittee and the MODC Planning/Development Department August 22", 2023 To Who it May Concern, I have attended a couple of the recent public lfillage of Chester Planning Meetings and am writing to submit a suggested :new guideline. In relation to the current collective resident concern about proposed changes, to the VOC Development/ Building Codes and RJR's, I would like, to suggest that part of the issue and upset is a seeming lack of public awareness regarding the provisions mapped out. in the presented new planning:document And while the MODC has been adhering to their current required public awareness/notification. guidelines, given the nature of the local population demographic {e.g. seasonal, not social media users, lack of local: news outlets etc), 1 would like to propose that new `Neighbour Notification' requirements are included as part of the proposed updated VOC planning rules. and regulatlons, such are as in use in other communities. Suggested new provisions for Neighbour Notification of Applications for Planning/Development/Building Permits would like suggest that guidelines are created so that the Development/Planning Department of the MODC serves notification to neighbours of land: that share a common boundary with an application site, or within 20 metres of the land of proposed development The for of this notification should be undertaken by both council and the permit applicant. From the council, the notification would be by letter after the application is validated, The notice would include: date of the notice the name of the applicant/name and address of the agent the application reference number the address or description of the Iocation of the application site description of the development details of how and where the plans, drawings etc. can be inspected how and when comments and representations may be made a location plan showing, the application site and neighbouring land Members of the public would have the opportunity to make representations to council in support of, or against, a planning application, and the necessary steps for any representations would be mapped out. From the owner performing the work, they would be required to undertake the folio 'n, notification steps: Required Posting: A notice of the filing of a permit application be posted on the premises upon which thie permit application seeks authorization to perform work.. Notice is posted for a contirmuous period of at least 30 days. Notice is posted on a form approved by the code official, and should be legible from the public way that provides the main entrance to the premises.. The form should be at least 11"x17" in size. The posted notice should be promptly replaced if the notice is destroyed, damaged, or removed during the posting period. Submit photographic evidence of the required posting to the code official in order to have the associated permit(s) issued. Required written notice: Before submitting a permit application seeking authorization to perform work, the applicant must provide written notice on an approved form to the owner or owners of the neighboring premise. The form should be sent by CDN postal service registered or certified mail or an approved private delivery service (such as Federal Express, Purolator etc.) Acceptable evidence of delivery of written notice shall consist of: (1) proof of proper use of registered or certified mail (registered or certified mail sender's receipt); or (2) proof of proper use of an approved private delivery service. Copies of the evidence of delivery may be requested by the code official, prior to permit issuance. The notice must be sent to the address of the neighboring owner as maintained in the Property Tax Database maintained by the MODC. have used as a template, guidelines that are in use in other communities, and suggest these adopted or a version of these. This alerts all potential concerned parties a good and fair opportunity to query, question ar possibly oppose any requested development, and would lay to rest at the very least any sense of surprise. Cordially yours, Nicola Boyd Garth Stur°teva. t From: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: Aileen Heisler Wednesday, September 27, 2023 112:OB PM Planning Development on Marine Industrial Property - Heisler's Coat Yard High *" EXTERNAL EMAIL " Please'do not open attach ents or click (inks from an unknown or suspicious o As discussed, in order to supplement income for a Boat Yard, we would like to expand the use on our property to include short term rentals, including a separate building for laundry and possibly a storage building. We have enough property to possibly build at least 3 to 4 units, single or double, This would also increase tourism in the Village of Chester with spin offs for Focal business establishments. Please advise ASAP on this matter. Thanks, Aileen M. Heisler, , BSSc.Psych, South Shore Insurance Agency Inc. Insurance Broker.. Financial Advisor HS A P Garth S nt+ vant From: Peter Haslett Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 9:46 AM To: Communications; dwells chesterlaw.ca; Derek Wells Garth Sturtevant;Matthew Blair (he/him); Pam: Myra (she/her) Cc: barkhousemla@gmail,corn; Subject: Chester LUB & Waste Water Facility expansion Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed " EXTERNAL EMARL Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Dear Municipality of Chester Council, Mr Sturtevant (Senior Planner) and Mr, Blair (Director of Infrastructure and Operations) We (Peter and Suzanne Haslett of 47 Nauss point Road, Chester) are writing with concerns about the ar'oposed Secondary Planning Strategy, LLiBs and Waste Water Plant expansion on Nauss Point Road. To be clear, we agree strongly that Chester's current character and heritage (the feel and aesthetic of Chester viewed from within the village and from the ocean) i5 it's primary asset ... for residents and visitors alike. We are concerned and agree with many other residents (e.g. supporters of Peter Fitch's letter, The Chester Coalition, etc etc), that as drafted, the proposed Strategy and LLJBs threatens to erode this asset with the focus on density and commercial interests AND desperately lacking a thoroughly considered water strategy. We, along with the stated objectives of the MODC and Provincial and Federal governments when they announced the joint investment of more than $8,3 million to upgrade Chester's Waste Water, also feel strongly that we must strive for greener, healthier solutions as we consider population growth and prepare for climate change. This upgrade to the currentwaste water facility is once in a generation unique opportunity. The existing plant is situated in a low-lying area that is very close to the ocean (water tables, ocean health,harbour vie;w/Village aesthetic), and is adjacent to many full- time residential homes (property value). So, as you might imagine, the status quo is already of concern to us with regards to: 1, climate change plarriing a Tow Tying facility and transfer stations being impacted by flooding 2, pumping treated waste water into our Front Harbour. This is not an industrial harbour, where waste water is delivered into deep water. Rather, the Village of Chester's waste water is currently pumped into 3' of water at. low tide. And, Chester's front harbour is a very public harbour used recreationally for fishing and by boaters, paddle -boarders, kayakers, swimmers, etc in addition to fishing for and storing lobster for corrhmnercial use (a food source). 3. 'industrial traffic' on small road. Nauss Point Road is a small fragile residential frequented by sight-seeing. pedestrian traffic_ 4. noise from machinery (and industrial road traffic) in a residential area. With the planned expansion, we would expect the MODC to take this unique opportunity to maximise improvements on the status quo by considering and addressing each of the above. At the moment, discussions we have had with the Municipality have not shown this to be the case_ For example: the new infrastructure n ving closer to Naauss. Point Road (toward the ocean and on lower ground). i there has been no consideration on the impact of increased outflow into the shallow waters of our front harbour there has beer' no consideration on increased capacity increasing industrial traffic and noise on our Front Harbour (Nauss Paint Road} We are also concerned about the footprint of this industrial property zoning expanding further into what was, until January 2023, a full-time residential property (34 Harbour View Lane PIDtt 6D092$16), See image below, Why? What is the practical need? Of note, 2 vacant lots are available directly to the east of the current infrastructure. This land would appear to provide much more practical opportunities for any expansion as it is higher ground, further from the ocean, and offers enhanced accessibility to the property (from both Nauss Pont Road and Wilson Road)_ See image below. As Peter Fitch eloquently stated, it is also our understanding that the planners and fvMODC are supposed to be guardians of the Village and not purveyors of progressive change for the sake of changer. WE ALSO LOVE CHESTER FOR WHAT IT IS. We truly hope you will demonstrate your intention to serve and fight for the protection of our Village, our Village residents, and our ocean health. Sincerely, Peter and Suzanne Ftaslett 47 Nauss Point Road, Chester 2 Gh Stu From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good morning, See below public input fro ten T Jennifer Webber (she /her) Tuesday, September 26, 202.3 9,t AM Council Garth Sturtevant FW: Public Input for Council/COW Meeting mas Murphy that i l l be read at the upcoming. Council. meeting. 7ENNXFER WEBBER Communications Officer 't 902-275-4107 902.-277-1169 * Con.sider the Outreach Coordinator nrnent. Do you really need to print this email? From: Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 1:17 AM To: Communications <comrnunications@cheSter',ca> Subject: Public Input for CouncilfCOW Meeting ** EXTERNAL EMAIL** Please do not open attachrrn nts or click links from an unknown or suspiciot s origin. Please relay the following to Councilors during the Public Input Session at their next meeting: Regarding the recently proposed bylaw changes that would significantly impact Chester; It does not require an exhaustive analysis of this Trojan Horse of proposed changes that are in and of themselves so poorly written and intentionally opaque to understand that the only motive must be to confuse the population , pass them as new bylaws , and hope the true intent does not become apparent until it is much , much too late. And add to the tax base of Chester residents. Progressive ideologies are much the vogue now and carving up the properties in Chester as part of a massive tax grab must have the redistributionists salivating. Why have one iconic and historic Chester property when a developer can put four on the same land footprint, sheath them in vinyl siding and peddle them as charming and authentic Chester cottages. There is absolutely no popular demand to change the essential nature of Chester now existing as the petition garnering over 600 signatures attests to,. So why have we reached this point? Who is driving it? Who will profit if these proposals are made into law? Certainly not the current residents, hypothetical new residents? or unnamed developers booking to " enhance surrounding structures and landscapes" (p 11 on the planning document). cant believe someone actually wrote that or had the audacity to utter it in a public forum_ While you are enhancing Chester let's put some condos on Quaker , great views no trees to cut down and a couple beaches to boot_! 200 years of Chester history is going to be enhanced, truly unbelievable, The fallacies upon which these proposals are predicated are misleading , frankly deceptive and need to be revealed as such. Chester does not need the guidance of developers to improve the essential beauty and character of the village and you honorable elected representatives of the population need to follow the clear directives enunciated by your constituents over the past months. Thomas Murphy tFredas Point Chester. Garth Sturtevant From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flab Status: Nancy Hatch Thursday, Septet ber 21, 2 23 1:.31; Phi Garth Sturtevant Village Planning Concerns Screenshot 2023.09-21 at 12.47.43 PM png:, INIG_27D4jpeg Follow up Completed ** EXTERNAL EMAIL ** Please do not open attachrnents orcTick links from an unknown or suspicious or gkn. Hi Garth, Two individuals have approached me with concerns regarding 1) side yard setbacks and 2) the usurpation of the road allowance for private use and/or °'beautification,". The first irnage is a poor -quality aerial view of two residences on Regent St at the corner of Victoria. It is an example of a narrow side yard setback (1.5 metres) as proposed in the CVR/R2 zone. While we all know more housing is needed in the province, what we do not know whether people in the CVR zone want houses to be as close to each other as these two buildings are. Another issue with the close proximity of buildings is the issue of fire. We all saw the ir°npact the Playhouse fire had on two other buildings, that 1 know of, in the downtown core. Then of course, there is the concern regarding the supply of potable water that comes with an increase of density... an ongoing issue. The second image is one example of a property owner 'claiming ownership of the road allowance for access to his wharf. How much access does an individual need; are the No Parking signs legitimate; and are the traffic cones necessary as well? 1s this a case of legal riparian rights or iiliegal selfish behaviour? The Village of Chester has precious little parking as it is without the addition. of No Parking signa.ge, planters, and boulders on the road allowance preventing parking and possibly impeding emergency vehicles from getting to where they need to be.. Thanks for listening, Garth, Nancy Date: October 3, 2023 Date: October 4, 2023 Date: October 17, 2023 E E REPORT T EETI G ATE: DEPARTMENT SU JECT: RIGI Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: T For Council's discussion and direction. C T IT TI Council ctober 26, 2023 Infrastructure perations Sustainable Services Growth Fund Infrastructure Grant Funding Jonathan Meakin, Manager, Sustainability & Asset Management Matthew Blair, Director of Infrastructure and Operations Tara Maguire, CAO On March 31, 2023, the Municipality received $672,021 in provincial funding through the Sustainable Services Growth Fund (SSGF). The Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing (DMAH) provided an overview of eligible uses for the fund, leaving the Municipality to determine specific, eligible projects. However, no further project planning was undertaken at that time. DMAH has now requested a Project Status Report as part of its grant management processes for the SSGF monies. Since this Project Status Report requires a list of all planned projects to be funded by our SSGF grant —including brief project descriptions, estimated project costs, and project outcome indicators —the Municipality must now define those projects and commit to them. Although there are several projects that could readily be advanced with SSGF, staff seek Council's direction to ensure the allocation of SSGF support is applied to projects that align with Council's strategic priorities. Following Council's direction, staff will complete the Project Status Report along with required progress reports and a project close-out report following the March 31, 2025 program end date. Eligible Projects DMAH states that projects eligible for SSGF must support Nova Scotia's growing population by investing in renewal or increased capacity of assets or services for housing development, seniors and long-term care, accessibility, and active transportation. Examples of eligible projects include: ■ Expansion or renewal of wastewater treatment systems, ■ Expansion or renewal of water storage and distribution systems ■ Solid waste management infrastructure ■ Active transportation trails and sidewalks Request for Direction Page 12 Accessibility retrofits to municipal buildings The SSGF Project Status Report identifies outcome indicators that help provide further guidance in defining projects eligible for SSGF. The indicators for each eligible project category are: WATER Length of water pipe installed (m) Number of households with access to municipal water system Number of households that will have improved fire protection Number of households that will be equipped with residential water meters WASTEWATER Length of wastewater pipe installed (m) Number of households with access to municipal wastewater system Increased capacity to collect and/or treat wastewater (m^3 per year) SOLID WASTE Number of households with access to improved solid waste services ACCESSIBILITY RETROFITS Number and type of assets that have received accessibility retrofits ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Type of asset receiving investment (multi -use trails, bike paths, sidewalks, pedestrian and cycling bridges, etc.) Length of asset receiving investment (kms) Integration to existing Active Transportation/Public Transit infrastructure established Integration to NS Blue Route established Available Funding As noted, the Municipality received $672,021 in SSGF funding. This amount is being held as deferred revenue in the operating reserve. Interest accrued on this SSGF amount must also be used for eligible projects. As of October 3, 2023, the SSGF grant has generated $17,104 in interest. VA SC'` > TINS T ; ,w EASIJ ' ., E Request for Direction Page 13 Important to note: 1. Eligible expenditures include planning, designing, constructing, or renovating a tangible capital asset in any of the project category areas. 2. Eligible expenditures may also include Municipal contributions/commitments towards existing cost -shared projects that meet SSGF eligibility and the program period. 3. Any SSGF funds not spent by March 31, 2025 must be returned along with any accrued interest on the amount remaining. Reporting The Project Status Report is part of a sequence of progress and evaluation reports required during the two-year SSGF program period. A Program Closeout Report that confirms completion of projects, achieved project outcomes, and eligible expenditures is required with 60 days of any SSGF-supported project completion date or the SSGF program end date. C S The following are possible projects that could be advanced by SSGF along with relevant outcome indicators. Possible Project Total Estimated Cost Outcome Indicators Accessibility ■ additional built environment standards for Wild Rose Park $300K approx Number and type of assets that have received accessibility retrofits (such as paths, benches, tables, beach access) Wastewater ■ ICIP Village of Chester wastewater collection system expansion (construction) More than the SSGF grant Length of wastewater pipe installed (m) Number of households with access to municipal wastewater system Wastewater ■ ICIP Village of Chester wastewater treatment upgrades/renewal (construction) More than the SSGF grant Increased capacity to collect and/or treat wastewater (m^3 per year) Wastewater ■ Otter Point Wastewater System Renewal Project (construction) More than the SSGF grant Increased capacity to collect and/or treat wastewater (m^3 per year) Request for Direction Page 14 Active Transportation ■ Phase 2 of ICIP active transportation project - sidewalks in Hubbards, Western Shore, and New Ross (construction) More than the SSGF grant Type of asset receiving investment (multi -use trails, bike paths, sidewalks, pedestrian and cycling bridges, etc.) ■ Sidewalks Length of asset receiving investment (kms) Option A — Direct staff to allocate the SSGF grant to specific project option(s) outlined above. Council could decide to allocate the SSGF grant to more than project or devote the entire grant to one project if the estimated costs warrant it. Option B — Direct staff to allocate the SSGF grant to other projects not outlined above, providing those projects meet SSGF eligibility criteria and will advance at least one SSGF outcome indicator. IC T By-Law/Policy N/A Financial/budgetary The $672,021 SSGF funding, along with interest accrued, is being held as deferred revenue in the operating reserve. Environmental N/A Strategic Priorities The Sustainable Services Growth Fund grant will assist the Municipality in advancing the following Priority Outcomes of the 2021-24 Strategic Priorities Framework: Priority Outcomes: Healthy & Vibrant Communities 1. Ensure residents have access to facilities, natural assets, programs, and services that enrich a quality of life and provide safe communities for residents and visitors alike. 3. Determine a municipal role in terms of protecting and increasing a broad range of housing stock to meet community needs. Priority Outcomes: Infrastructure & Service Delivery 1. Develop and implement evidence -based plans for future infrastructure and service needs, along with related funding models, to accommodate sustainable growth and levels of service. Request for Direction Page 15 2. Create efficiencies through innovative service delivery, and proactive maintenance and operations of existing infrastructure. Work Program Implications Specific projects will be implemented by departments as appropriate, whether as existing or new initiatives. Grant management of the SSGF monies (including expense tracking, reporting, etc.) will be conducted by the Manager, Sustainability & Asset Management and Financial Analyst. Has Legal review been completed? Yes No _X_ N/A T N/A (1 TE E T Date: October 16, 2023 Date: October 16, 2023 Date: October 17, 2023 REPRT T EETI G DATE: DEPART E T: SUBJECT: ORIGI Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: C iii E T Council October 26, 2023 Infrastructure Operations J -Class Road 2024 SDP Submission Council bequest Tammie Bezanson, CET Matthew Blair, Director of Infrastructure & Operations Tara Maguire, CAO It is recommended to Council, by Infrastructure & Operations, that Council review and approve the top ten (10) roads from either Table A or Table B, for submission to Nova Scotia Department of Public Works (NSDPW) for consideration into the J -Class Road 50/50 cost share program for the 2023 construction season. Normally, NSDPW allocates $1.0 million in funding (province -wide) to the paving program. NSDPW is responsible for the maintenance of all J -Class Roads. MODC has approximately 35kms. This represents 2.1% of the provincial J -Class roads. MODC Staff have prioritized the J -Class Road paving based on the surface condition only as per council direction. S To qualify for this program, MODC is required to submit a candidate list to NSDPW by October 31°, 2023 for work to be completed during the 2024/25 fiscal year. NSDPW will determine which roads, if any, are accepted into the program. TABLE A — ASPHALT SURFACE ONLY RANK ROAD NAME LOCATION MODC DISTRICT LENGTH (M) ESTIMATED MODC SHARE (2023) 1 Stevens Rd East Chester 1 400 $218,400 2 Freda's Hill Chester 3 180 $98,280 3 Forest Village Rd Simms Sett. 2 800 $436,800 4 Chester Downs East Chester 1 1,020 $556,920 5 Vaughan Rd W. Shore 5 470 $256,620 6 Walker Rd Chester 3 1,277 $697,078 7 Main St Chester 3 440 $240,240 8 Queen St Chester 3 1,080 $589,680 9 Central St Chester 3 1,030 $562,380 10 Victoria St Chester 3 340 $622,440 Request for Decision Page 12 TABLE B — ASPHALT & GRAVEL SURFACE RANK ROAD NAME LOCATION MODC DISTRICT LENGTH (M) ESTIMATED MODC SHARE (2023) 1 Stevens Rd East Chester 1 400 $218,400 2 Young Rd W. Shore 5 400 $218,400 3 George Dorey W. Shore 5 220 $120,120 4 Valerie Ave Chester Basin 4 160 $87,360 5 Freda's Hill Chester 3 180 $98,280 6 Forest Village Rd Simms Sett. 2 800 $436,800 7 Chester Downs East Chester 1 1,020 $556,920 8 Vaughan Rd W. Shore 5 470 $256,620 9 Swinimer Rd W. Shore 5 330 $180,180 10 Stanford Lake Robinson's 3&7 1,653 $902,265 T Option A — Direct staff to submit the asphalt surface only J -Class Road list (TABLE A) to NSDPW for consideration into the J -Class Road 50/50 cost share program for the 2023 construction season. Option B — Direct staff to submit the asphalt and gravel surface J -Class Road list (TABLE B) to NSDPW for consideration into the J -Class Road 50/50 cost share program for the 2023 construction season. Option C — Direct staff to not submit either list. T By-Law/Policy Not Applicable Financial/budgetary Funding allocation for the J -Class paving is from Gas Tax reserves. There are sufficient funds in the gas tax reserve to fund this work. Environmental Not Applicable Strategic Priorities 1. Maintain a high level of fiscal responsibility 2. Continually improve public satisfaction with municipal services 3. Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses 4. Promote conditions conductive to fostering economic prosperity. Request for Decision Page 13 Priority Outcomes: Governance & Engagement 1. Ensure municipal service delivery is efficient and effective, communicated, and accessible. 2. Continue to develop an asset management system that will inform decisions about infrastructure, development, levels of service, risk assessment, and associated financing. Priority Outcomes: Infrastructure & Service Delivery 1. Develop and implement evidence -based plans for future infrastructure and service needs, along with related funding models, to accommodate sustainable growth and levels of service. 2. Create efficiencies through innovative service delivery, and proactive maintenance and operations of existing infrastructure. Work Program Implications Not applicable Has Legal review been completed? _ Yes_ No X N/A C C TI SCI TE L T L No communication needs are anticipated at this stage of the project. TT C T 1. NONE Date: October 18, 2023 Date: October 20, 2023 Date: October 20, 2023 REPRT T unicipal Council EETI G DATE: ctober 26, 2023 DEPART E T: Solid aste, IAO SUBJECT: Kaizer eadow Landfill Phase 2 LTP Upgrades ORIGI : otion 2022-452 Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: C i i E Yr ST Christa Rafuse, P.Eng., Director of Solid Waste Matthew Blair, Director of Infrastructure & Operations Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO It is recommended that the Municipality of Chester award the construction of the Phase 2 Leachate Treatment Plant (LTP) upgrades to Mid Valley Construction (1997) Ltd., in the amount of $3,288,100 (net HST included). C T SIT T The Municipality completed the design and tender with CBCL Ltd for the construction services related to Phase 2 LTP Upgrades. Design and construction phase services were approved by Council, November 10, 2022 (Motion 2022-452). The final budget for the construction was unknown prior to the 2023/24 budget approval process. An estimate of $2,000,000 was brought forward from the original concept estimate to complete the Phase 2 LTP Upgrades project from years prior. On November 10, 2022, council approved the design and construction phase services of phase 2 of the LTP upgrades to CBCL at an estimated cost of $100,000 (2022/23 Capital Budget). The work included the detailed design, tendering, and technical/construction support for the project. The tender was prepared, posted, and closed on October 12, 2023. Three companies bid on the project. A bid evaluation was conducted which consisted of examining mathematical results of each bid and confirming evidence of the presence of various required submission documents such as bid security requirements, acknowledgement of addenda, and proposed contract time as set forth in the tender documents. BIDDER AMOUNT (not including HST) Mid Valley (1997) Ltd $3,152,950 Bidder B $3,377,000 Bibber C $5,287,000 S The Municipality's operating permit approval requires the Municipality to operate the leachate treatment plant as part of the landfill approval permit. Most recently Cell 3B was constructed and Cell 4A was filled to its maximum capacity. Resources had been re -focused on the new cell construction which included a revision to the previous concept plan for the location of the additional lagoon. The upgrades to the LTP are designed to treat Request for Decision Page 12 the increased flows due to both increasing tonnages and additional cells. It will also allow additional capacity to the anticipated approval for future expansion to the landfill footprint. The upgrades will include a second equalization lagoon, upgraded aeration for the existing equalization and retention lagoons and work to the ageing lift station. Staff are moving ahead with the permit process for landfill development beyond the initial four cells, as approved by council (date April 27, 2023, Motion 2023-184). The design work for the upgrade has included adequate capacity for the next landfill footprint (four cells) and during the post closure period. The award of this project to be completed will maintain our Nova Scotia Environment approvals for the Kaizer Meadow Landfill. T 1. Approve the award recommendation for Mid Valley Construction (1997) Ltd. 2. Council can provide alternate direction and/or request additional information. LIC TI S By-Law/Policy MODC Procurement Policy P-04 Financial/budgetary The capital budget was prepared in 2022, prior to detailed design work being completed. Phase 2 of the LTP project was estimated at $2,000,000, source of funds from borrowing (Capital 2023/24). Final design was awarded in November 2022 and completed summer 2023, and a new Class B estimate prepared by CBCL (July 12, 2023) at $3,082,233 excl HST. The bidder price is $3,288,100 (net HST). The additional source of funds is recommended to be taken from borrowing ($1,288,100, incl net HST). Environmental The LTP upgrade will allow Kaizer Meadow landfill the capacity to maintain treatment of leachate as per the Municipality's operating permit approved by NSE. Strategic Priorities The upgrade of the LTP is one of council's strategic priorities. Work Program Implications This work will be managed by the Director of Solid Waste and our consultant CBCL Ltd. Has Legal review been completed? _ Yes _No X N/A Date: October 17, 2023 Date: Date: E REPORT TO: EETI G ATE: DEPART E T: SUBJECT: IG Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: T For council discussion and decision. C , T IT TI unicipal Council October 26, 2023 Corporate Strategic anage ent East River Point Property PID 60628468 Consideration of Land Sale Letter of ffer to purchase PI 6062 468 Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO Council received a letter of offer to purchase PID 60628468 which resulted in Council considering the sale of this surplus municipally owned land. The Municipality acquired PID 60628468 via the subdivision process; therefore, the following excerpt from the Municipal Government Act applies to any future sale of the land. PART IX SUBDIVISION, Section 273 (13) of the Municipal Government Act states: Where council determines that any land transferred pursuant to this Section might no longer be needed for parks, playgrounds or similar public purposes, the council may sell the land, after notifying the owners of lots in the subdivision with respect to which the land was conveyed to the municipality, by notice published in a newspaper circulating in the municipality at least fourteen days prior to the council meeting at which a decision to sell will be made, and the proceeds shall be used for parks, playgrounds and similar public purposes. 1998, c. 18, s. 273; 2003, c. 9, s. 72; 2004, c. 7, s. 19; 2006, c. 40, s. 11. The provision in the MGA is a notice requirement only but must be followed before Council can make a decision on whether to sell the land or not. Staff mailed a notice to 20 owners of lots in the subdivision on September 21, 2023 (see Attachment 1). This notice was also advertised in the newspaper. In response to this notice, Staff received correspondence from residents opposing the sale of the land which are included as Attachment 2 for Council's review and consideration. Staff are looking for a decision on whether Council would like to sell PID 60628468. PID 60628468 is a treed, un-serviced vacant lot that is 3 acres in size. It came under municipal ownership through the subdivision bylaw. The Director of Community Development and Recreation has indicated that this property is not slated for recreational use and based on the location is not suitable for anything the department has in mind for the community. The Director has deemed this as surplus land. Request for Decision Page 12 C S If Council chooses to sell the property, there is likely going to be more than one party interested in acquiring it and fairness would dictate more than one person be given an opportunity to acquire it. A fair and transparent way to conduct the sale would be to advise of a date upon which anybody could submit an offer and the offers would have to remain open for long enough for Council to consider them. The offers would be brought to Council as an in -camera item, in the form of a request for decision. The actual decision to accept a particular offer would need to be made in public session and then the successful party advised. If sold, the Property would be sold in an "as is" condition. The Municipality will not pay realtor fees on surplus land sales. The property would be subject to the Municipality of Chester Deed Transfer Tax of 1.5% of the purchase price of the lot. This tax, which is not included in the purchase price, is to be paid at the time of closing. All land sold is subject to the Harmonized Goods and Service Tax of fifteen percent (15%). If Council chooses not to sell the property, the property would no longer be considered surplus land and staff would not accept or consider any future offers on the property. T 1. Direct staff to initiate the process to sell PID 60628468. 2. Do not sell PID 60628468 and direct staff to not accept any future offers on the property. 3. Other direction to staff IC T By-Law/Policy The Municipal Government Act (Sections 50 & 51) allows the Municipality to sell land at market value when it is no longer required for municipal purposes. Financial/budgetary For PID 60628468, this property was deeded to us as part of the subdivision bylaw; any proceeds received from the sale of this Municipal property would be deposited into the recreation reserve to be used for parks, playgrounds and similar public purposes. Environmental There are no known environmental issues with these lots. TT C TS 1. Notice 2. Correspondence THE MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER LAND SALE In the matter of the Municipal Government Act and the Municipality of the District of Chester TAKE NOTICE THAT on Thursday, October 26, 2023, Chester Municipal Council will decide whether or not to put property PID #60628468 on the market for sale. Council gives notice to you as a resident of the subdivision, under Section 273 (13) of the Municipal Government Act that it intends to consider putting property PID #60628468 on the market for sale. Council intends to make this decision during the Thursday, October 26, 2023, Council meeting in Municipal Council Chambers located at 151 King Street, Chester. Residents can give their opinions on whether or not Council should put this land up for sale by registering to speak at the Council meeting on October 26, 2023 or by sending written comments to: Pamela Myra, Municipal Clerk, PO Box 369, Chester, NS BOJ 1J0 or pmyra@chester.ca. Written comments must be received before 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 10th, 2023. If you have questions please contact Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO at 902-275-4138 or elowe@chester.ca. Pam Myra (she/her) From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Erin Lowe (she/her) October 5, 2023 9:02 AM Olivia Corkum (she/her); Pam Myra (she/her); Heather Archibald RE: Sale of lot 60628468 Of course, that is not a problem. Your name will be redacted ERIN LOWE e t 902-275-4138 ! 992.27'71'174 Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 7:43 AM To: Erin Lowe (she/her) <elowe@chester.ca> Cc: Olivia Corkum (she/her) <ocorkum@chester.ca>; Pam Myra (she/her) <pmyra@chester.ca>; Heather Archibald <harchibald@chester.ca> Subject: RE: Sale of lot 60628468 ** EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attachmentsor click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Thanks, Erin. You are welcome to make my email content public with the exception of my name Thanks and please confirm. 1111111 On 10/04/23 15:32, "Erin Lowe (she/her)" <elowe@chester.ca> wrote: Thank you — your emails will be included for council's consideration at the October 26th Council meeting. From: Heather Archibald <harchibald@chester.ca> Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 3:22 PM To: — Cc: Erin Lowe (she/her) <elowe@chester.ca>; Olivia Corkum (she/her) <ocorkum@chester.ca> Subject: RE: Sale of lot 60628468 Hi You are more than welcome. I appreciate you reaching out. I am cc'ing our Deputy CAO and Economic Development Officer to this email so they have your comments as well. Kindly, Heather HEATHER ARCHIBALD e for Pevelo emit filcer 902-275-4131 902-277-2223 Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 10:22 AM To: Heather Archibald <harchibald@chester.ca> Subject: RE: Sale of lot 60628468 ** EXTERNAL EMAIL **' Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Hi Heather. Thanks very much indeed for taking the time to send such a good reply. I expect the neighbours will openly oppose the sale of the lot, as it would likely be bought by the yard and end up further degrading the neighbourhood. Please consider this email to be confirmation of my opposition to the sale of the lot. I realize the municipality may want to turn it into cash but the degraded values of the nearby properties would probably result in less overall revenue for Chester over time compared to the one time influx of cash following a sale. Thanks again. 2 On 10/03/23 10:06, Heather Archibald <harchibald@chester.ca> wrote: Opps missed a page in the images I sent below. Heather Archibald Senior Development Officer Community Development & Recreation Municipality of Chester PO Box 369 186 Central Street, Chester, NS, BOJ 1J0 Office: 902-275-4131 General Inquiries : 902-275-2599 Cell: 902-277-2223 Web: www.chester.ca Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the intended recipients in communication with the Municipality of Chester. If you are not an intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error -free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e- mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard -copy version. From: Heather Archibald Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 10:06 AM To: Subject: RE: Sale of lot 60628468 Good Morning PID 60628468 is zoned General Basic. Marinas and storage facilities and boat repair are permitted uses in this zone. Depending on how the development is proposed to be expanded will determine what process is used. Marinas are allowed "as of right" with a development permit issued and 5 m setbacks. This process does not involve any further public consultation, requirements for tree retention or vegetative buffers. A marina is defined under the land use by-law to mean a building, structure or lot, containing docking facilities, where boats are stored, serviced, repaired or kept for sale or rent, and may include other services such as but not limited to the sale, repair or storage of boat accessories, marine fuels and lubricants. 3 An accessory use to the marina is also possible under the above scope, for example a restaurant, a retail outlet, or any other common additional use. Accessory uses are defined as a use subordinate to, normally incidental to and located on the same lot as the main land use. It would also be possible for a separate unrelated commercial or light industrial use to occur here. The PID you submitted goes to a parcel of land where the marina is not currently operating as it is not on the same parcel as the existing marina. That being said, if the owner submitted a subdivision to consolidate the lot with the existing marina lot, that may open this parcel to be able to proceed as a marina under as of right options. This is a very long answer to essentially say, this zone is the most wide open zone we have in the Municipality and it comes with a lot of different possible options for development. What the development proposed and how it is proposed will determine the path for approval and whether that involves public consultation. At the moment I do not have any applications for this lot. Our online zoning map is available here: Municipal Zoning Map You can search by PID, address or Assessment Account Number. Our land use by-laws are available on our website here: https://chester.ca/planning-development/building-and- development-permits Below is a clip from the by-law for what is permitted under the General Basic zone: Kindly, Heather From: Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 9:34 AM To: Heather Archibald <harchibald@chester.ca> Subject: Sale of lot 60628468 The e-mail below is fror or suspicious origin. an external source. Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown EXTERNAL EMAIL', Please do not open attachments or click links from an unkno Hi Heather n or suspicious origin. 4 I have been sent to you by Pamela Myra. Please can you send me the zoning map or tell me what the zoning is for the lot in question. Like all other local residents we are concerned about further expansion of the ship yard and the negative impacts on the quality of our community and the value of our properties. I searched without luck on the Chester website for this information. Also, if it's easy, can you tell me what is allowed in the zoning bylaw for this property. If it's restrictive and would as a result be of no interest to the ship yard then this is a moot point. Thank you. 5 Pam Myra (she/her) From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attach Meade Family October 9, 2023 12:54 PM Pam Myra (she/her) Janice Zinck Notice of intent to consider land sale Pamela Myra Municipal Clerk Municipality of the District of Chester pmyraPchester.ca an unknow suspicious origin. Dear Pamela Myra, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to Council's intention of selling PID #60628468, located in East River Point. We urge Council not to sell this parcel of land for the following reasons. Loss ofgreenspace. A significant amount of forest has been lost in the East River Point area adjacent to the East River Shipyard. This has severely impacted the area, specifically the wildlife and residents of the area. Based on these recent activities it is likely that this PID, which is currently forested, will also be cleared of flora and fauna (see photo attached). Furthermore, Nova Scotia in general, as a result of wildfires and storm damage, has experienced heavy deforestation. Inconsistent with Nova Scotia's Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act. According to the Nova Scotia Government the climate change crisis and biodiversity crisis are connected, and they are hurting the health of Nova Scotians and people globally. The sale of this PID and forthcoming deforestation would contribute to the loss of tree canopy, carbon sinks, and the biodiversity in the area. This parcel of land should be protected as a buffer to this development and also provides additional space for the displacement of wildlife. If you live in or closer to a larger metropolitan centre you can enjoy many treed parks, however we pay high municipal taxes in the rural area and do not receive these municipal amenities. Chester's Municipal Climate Change Action Plan identifies East River as an area for potential inland flooding as a result of extreme climate events. As noted in the recent event, July 2023, East River and East River Point experienced infrastructure impacts due to surface water run- off. Nature areas such as PID #60628468 act as sinks for stormwater, while built areas tend to have greater run-off and extreme weather impacts. In addition, the loss of forested areas can result in greater wind impacts. We strongly urge the Council of Municipality of the District of Chester to vote against selling PID #60628468. Sincerely, Glen Meade and Janice Zinck East River Point 2 Pam Myra (she/her) From: Sent: To: Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attachments or c suzanne marineau October 10, 2023 9:52 AM Pam Myra (she/her) Notice of intent to consider land sale - East River Point Dear Pamela Myra: unknown or suspicious origin. In response to Council's intention of selling PID #60628468 located in East River Point. I am opposed to the sale of this parcel of land. The area has already seen the disappearance of forested space impacting wildlife. Removing more forest area will eliminate space for water run-off potentially washing out roads and flooding homes. People in this area choose to live here (and pay high taxes) for its "rural nature". I request the Council vote against selling PID #60628468. Thank you for taking the time to read my note and your consideration. Sincerely, Suzanne Marineau Full-time resident of East River Point Pam Myra (she/her) From: Garth Sturtevant Sent: October 10, 2023 9:51 AM To: Tara Maguire Cc: Erin Lowe (she/her); Chad Haughn; Pam Myra (she/her) Subject: FW: Consultation with Coastal Property Owners Hi Tara, You may well have seen this through another list serv, but I was wondering if this should go to Council as correspondence and to help spread the word on the consultation? We have sent it to Jen who is going to share through social media, but wondered if it would also be appropriate to raise briefly with Council? If you think that is a good idea, I can plan to attend (not that I have much to add) and be on hand. Thanks, Garth GARTH STURTEVANT etni r larntner 901...7/5-44.35 R- Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: Smith, Gordon T <Gordon.Smith@novascotia.ca> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 10:42 AM To: Andrew Jones <ajones@edpc.ca> Subject: Consultation with Coastal Property Owners Hello, Mr. Jones I am sending you this email based on your role as president of MDOANS. Today, the Province is launching consultation with coastal property owners on how to plan and adapt development along the coastline, in response to climate change. You can find the press release here. Property owners will be mailed a postcard with information about the consultation and how they can share their input: - - online at https://novascotia.ca/coastal-property - - by email to CoastalConsultation@novascotia,ca - - by mail to Nova Scotia Environment and Climate Change, ATTN: Climate Change Division, P.O. Box 442, Halifax, N.S., B3J 2P8. This will be the first time the Province is contacting coastal property owners directly to ask for their input on how to protect coastal structures and ecosystems, and keep people safe. The deadline for submissions is November 7. While we're targeting feedback from coastal property owners, we would welcome input from all Nova Scotians. We encourage you to share this opportunity for coastal property owners to provide input. Thank you and if you have any questions, please reach out to me at the email address above. Best regards, Gordon En onvi Tlent ate Chang Gordon Smith, FCSLA, CIP Strategic Lead, Coastal Protection Act * 1903 Barrington St., 2nd Floor, Barrington Place, Halifax PO Box 442, Halifax, NS, B3J 2P84 (902) 717-2045 Gordon.Smith@novascotia.ca Pronouns: Him / His 2 News release Province Consulting Coastal Property Owners Environment and Climate Change (../search?dept=182) September 29, 2023 - 9:46 AM The Province is contacting people who own coastal property in Nova Scotia and inviting them to provide their input on how to plan and adapt development along the coastline in response to climate change. "Climate change is impacting our coastline; the impacts are concerning and put structures, ecosystems and people at risk," said Environment and Climate Change Minister v YouTube Timothy Halman. "Together, we need to rethink how we (https://www.youtube.com/user/ns develop along our coast to protect each other, our homes and communities, and natural areas. This consultation delivers on our government's commitment to reach out directly to coastal property owners so that they can take part in the critical conversation on the path forward." Follow us This will be the first time the Province is contacting coastal property owners directly to ask for their input on how to protect coastal structures and ecosystems, and keep people safe. Property owners will be mailed a postcard with information about the consultation and how they can share their input: • online at https://novascotia.ca/climate-change-coastal- protection-consultation/ (https://novascotia.ca/climate- change-coastal-protection-consultation/) • by email to coastalconsultation@novascotia.ca (mailto:coastalconsultation@novascotia.ca) • by mail to Nova Scotia Environment and Climate Change, ATTN: Climate Change Division, P.O. Box 442, Halifax, N.S., B3J 2P8. Twitter (https://twitter.com/nsgov) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/nsgovi 0 All government social media accounts (/connect/) Related information • Search news releases (/news/) • Archive: news releases from 1995-97 (/news/archive.asp) The deadline for submissions is November 7. Quick Facts: • Nova Scotia has 13,000 kilometres of coastline that is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change such as flooding, erosion and rising sea levels • in 2019, the legislature passed the Coastal Protection Act, which aims to protect Nova Scotia's coastline by placing restrictions on coastal property owners; the act has not been proclaimed • in December, the government released its climate change action plan, Our Climate, Our Future: Nova Scotia's Climate Change Plan for Clean Growth, which has 68 actions to proactively respond to climate change and mitigate its impacts, including actions to protect the environment and ecosystems • also in December, Nova Scotia released updated climate change projections and a risk assessment which present a clear picture of the current impact of climate change and what Nova Scotians can expect over the next 80 years if further action is not taken Additional Resources: Our Climate, Our Future: Nova Scotia's Climate Change Plan for Clean Growth: https://climatechange.novascotia.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/ns- climate-change-plan.pdf (https://climatechange.novascotia.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/ns- climate-change-plan.pdf). Weathering What's Ahead: Climate Change Risk and Nova Scotia's Well-being: https://climatechange.novascotia.ca/climate-impacts (https://climatechange.novascotia.ca/climate-impacts) Coastal Protection Act: https://nslegislature.ca/legc/bills/63rd 2nd/3rd read/b106.htm (https://nslegislature.ca/legc/bills/63rd 2nd/3rd read/b106.htm) From: Katie Hirtle < Date: October 19, 2023 at 9:54:37 AM ADT To: "Tina Connors (she/her)" <tconnors@chester.ca> Cc: "Pam Myra (she/her)" <pmyra@chester.ca> Subject: Re: Agenda Item, Council Meeting (4H) ** EXTERNAL EMAIL Please do not open attachr Good Morning! nts or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Thank you, Tina for the reminder! LOL I am writing on behalf of the Handy Hands 4H Club in New Ross. We are currently the only 4H Club in the Chester Municipality and provide programming to youth ages 7-21! We are a small but mighty group of enthusiastic members and leaders who want to share with the Council that November is National 4H Month in Canada! With November 1st being National Show Your 4H Colors Day. The 4-H program provides positive experiences designed to support the development of resilient and healthy youth through fostering positive self- identity, self-esteem, responsibility, and a sense of achievement, by incorporating values -based programming in four areas of skills development: • Community Engagement and Communications • The Environment and Healthy Living • Science and Technology • Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security Show Your 4-H Colours Day is an exciting annual event that allows 4-H'ers of all ages to come together and celebrate the values and achievements of the 4-H movement in Canada. This year, Show Your 4-H Colours Day falls on Wednesday, November 1, which is also Global 4-H Day. Making the day even more special, we will be taking the day to mark the 110th anniversary of 4-H in Canada. Many landmarks around the country will be lit up in GREEN to celebrate our 4Hers (including the CN Tower and Niagara Falls!!)! We would like to ask (if possible) that our Municipality light up your office/flags and wear green on November 1st to celebrate this wonderful program acknowledging the dedicated members and leaders who are always using the 4H Motto "Learn to do by Doing!". Please let me know if/how we can be of assistance Yours in 4H � Katie Hirtle General Leader (Handy Hands 4H Club) Director 4H Nova Scotia Dear CAO, It has been more than 25 years since any government has even offered a substantive review and renegotiation of the MOU between the Province and the municipalities. As you know, the Province worked with the NSFM negotiating team for more than a year to get it right. As a result of these discussions and 29.5 hours of consultation with municipalities, we introduced Bill 340. I don’t know if you’ve been following what’s been happening in the Legislature with this Bill. But, it would be a shame for this opportunity for municipalities to receive more to be missed at this stage in the process. I am hopeful we can get this Bill across the line and deliver on the more than $50 million this Bill will provide to municipalities across the Province. The voices opposing the Bill coming out of both Opposition parties and the CBRM have been loud and persistent. The Opposition are filibustering the Bill and have held it up, grounding the Legislature to a halt for the past three days. They tell us this will continue. As a result, no business is moving forward. Since CBRM has consistently asked for its own Charter, we believed that was something they wanted. We wrote to them on September 15 advising them of the option to (a) be a part of the same agreement that 47 other municipalities support; or (b) exempt themselves from this arrangement, in which case the Province would work collaboratively with them to start the process of finally negotiating a CBRM Charter. Our only ask of them was that whatever decision they make - option (a) or (b) - be supported by a vote of Council. We felt this was a reasonable ask - to ensure the decision represented the will of the majority of the Council - particularly given CBRM’s recent history of division. We didn’t actually receive a response. Their silence is hard to reconcile in the face of being offered exactly what they had asked for. With a looming deadline of the Legislature fast approaching, we wrote to them again on September 21. Still, they did not communicate any decision, nor did they put the options to Council for a vote. As a government, we can’t in good conscience allow the residents of CBRM to be disadvantaged simply because their own council wouldn’t make a decision. As such, CBRM will be a part of the MOU. An arrangement that will see more than $4 million dollars flowing to and staying in CBRM. The current Bill representing additional money that CBRM will have for their residents is a good thing. Not only does it give them the control over how they spend this extra money, it gives them more funding to fix roads, provide important services like transit, water and garbage and recycling and, most importantly, support their residents. This negotiation process was tough but fair. It means more money for municipalities. It’s something that municipalities have been calling for and we are proud to have had the courage to work with you to get it done. However, given the amount of opposition to this Bill and the asserti ons of the Liberal Party that it is more than CBRM that is discontent with this agreement, we are listening carefully. If it appears that this Bill is in fact not the will of the municipalities, then letting the current MOU continue, un-amended, is an option. This week will guide us. We only want to do what is right for the residents of our municipalities. If we got it wrong and this Bill is not the wish of the municipalities, then we will admit we got it wrong and let the status quo stand. However, if you feel it is important that this Bill pass, perhaps you could contact your colleagues in the CBRM and help them understand what value you see in the Bill and encourage them to make the decision noted above that has been on offer for over a month. Bill 340 will go before the Law Amendments Committee later this week. Law Amendments Committee is the opportunity for any Nova Scotia to appear before a group of MLAs and share their thoughts (good or bad) on any Bill. Finally, if you support this Bill, it may help tone down the negative rhetoric if you contact Opposition MLAs and explain the value of the Bill to your municipality. Yours truly, Minister John Lohr Date: October 17, 2023 Date: Date: October 17, 2023 REPORT TO: EETI G ATE: DEPART s'+E T: SU JECT: G Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: Council October 26, 2023 Corporate Strategic anage ent Economic develop ent Sponsorships Update Sponsorship Policy, P-87 Erin Lowe, Deputy CAO Tara Maguire, Chief Administrative Officer ET T T For the 2023-24 fiscal year, Council has an Economic Development Sponsorship fund to sponsor events, advertising opportunities, or other initiatives that provide financial or public relations value to the municipality that are designed to help achieve Council priorities and generate local economic development benefit in one or more of the following areas: • Supporting business growth and employment. • Increasing visitor attraction. • Promoting the municipality to residents and visitors. This Sponsorship is a form of marketing in which organizations pay to be associated with certain events or other advertising opportunities. Additionally, sponsorship provides community relations benefits by increasing visibility and recognition as a good community partner. Organizations are recognized as good community citizens when they support initiatives that assist groups that benefit or improve the quality of life and/or programing in their community. Sponsor opportunities are evaluated by the following criteria: • • • IC Relevance to the community. The Municipal logo must be displayed on some marketing of the event. The audience should be significant in size or targeted. T The following sponsorships were issued by the Deputy CAO as of October 17, 2023: Budget 2023-24 $6,000.00 Recent Sponsorships Golf 4 Charity $100.00 Our Health Centre Foundation Legacy Golf Tournament $1,000.00 Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Induction Ceremony* $300.00 Balance $4,600.00 *This comes with 2 tickets to the ceremony Request for Decision Page 12 TT T Request for Sponsorship 2023 Inductees From: To: Subject: Date: Greg Flinn Erin Lowe (she/herl Re: Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society upcoming induction ceremony October 13, 2023 5:12:43 PM * * EXTERNAL EMAIL ** Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin.. Hi Erin, apologies for not including that vital piece of info. It's $300. Thanks Greg Sent from my iPhone On Oct 13, 2023, at 5:10 PM, Erin Lowe (she/her) <elowe@chester.ca> wrote: r Deputy CAO Corporate & Strategic Management 151 King Street, Chester, NS, BOJ 1J0 Office: 902-275-4138 General Inquiries: 902-275-3554 Cell: 902-277-1174 Web: www.chester.ca Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? Hello Greg, How much are you requesting from the municipality for the sponsorship? From: Greg Flinn <gregoryflinn22Pgmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 1:08 PM To: Communications <communicationsPchester.ca> Subject: Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society upcoming induction ceremony **'!EXTERNAL EMAIL ** Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin.. To whom it may concern, I'm reaching out as the Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society is preparing for our 5th annual induction ceremony, scheduled for Nov 5th at the LCLC. This year we are recognizing 6 worthy candidates from our community by permanently inducting them on our Wall of Fame. The Municipality of Chester has supported this effort every year. We are hopeful you will support us again this year by purchasing an ad in our program. Please find attached a pdf containing a copy of last year's program . You will find the Municipality's ad on page 13. If you wish to purchase an ad and are happy using the same ad as last year, please just let me know. If you would like to change the ad, could you possibly have the artwork to me by Oct 16th? Please let me know if you have questions. Thank you for your consideration, Best regards, Greg Flinn Gregory C Flinn' Senior Wealth Advisor 1 CIBC Wood Gundy 1 CIBC Private Wealth 140 North St, Bridgewater, NS B4V 2V6 1 Direct: 902 527-4055 Office: 902 543-9882 gregory.flinn@cibc.ca <image005.jpg> Our purpose: To help make your ambition a reality Bruce J Flinn 1 Assiciate Wealth Advisor 1 Direct: 902-527-4053 I Bruce.Flinn(a�cibc.com Laurene Davis Client Associate I Direct: 902 527-40571 LaurAne.Davis(. a a%c.corn Brit Flinn I Client Associate I Direct: 902 527-4056 I Robert Charles Grace ATHLETE (BOXING) • BRIDGEWATER Inducted into Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Wall of Fame - 2023 "Bob Grace established himself as one of the ring's finest boxers of his time and during this boxing era that was not a small accomplishment" -Wilf McCluskey The Maritimes produced many boxers during its heyday of the 1940's, 50's and 60's but very few of the quality of boxer that Robert Charles Grace was. He was consistently near the top of his weight class. After fighting only a handful of Amateur fights, Grace made the jump to the Pros when he was only 19 years of age Fought over 50 fights both amateur and professional with a record of 50 wins and only 6 losses, 1948-1966 Reached the pinnacle of the Welterweight Class winning the Maritime Welterweight title in the mid 1950's ILUNEIN 16WIR(n COUNTY( "A fight in a packed Halifax Forum against a potential Canadian Champion, was in my opinion too close to call" - C.W. Young "Bob would work out in a makeshift gym at his service station and could skip rope for a half-hour non-stop." - Matthew Grace Bob fought in every weight division from featherweight to middleweight and he punched it out with such men as Don (Duck) Trainor, Reg (Tiger) Warrington, Todd (Kid) Cormier, Billy Nickerson, Monk (K.O.) Connard, Bob Gammon, Jackie Hayden, Keith Paris, Emery Boudreau, Bob Whelan, Harold (Red) Graham and Lloyd (Kid) Carr. John (Jack) Murphy BUILDER (BASKETBALL) • CONQUERALL MILLS Inducted into Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Wall of Fame — 2023 "In my time in school sport, Jack Murphy was one of the most influential leaders in basketball in our province" - Ron O'Flaherty Coached basketball for 35+ years in Lunenburg County Co-founder of New Year's Classic Basketball Tournament, 1972 President of Basketball Nova Scotia, 1978 Provincial "AA" Boys Basketball Champions Bridgewater High, 1981 & 1983 Co-founder of Park View Panther Fever Weekend Basketball Tournament, 1985 LUNEIN IBV.➢RG COUNTY; Provincial "AAA" Boys Basketball Champions PVEC, 1990 Coach of Nova Scotia Canada Games Junior Men's Basketball Program and team, 1991-1993 Nova Scotia School Athletic Association "Hugh A. Noble" Distinguished Service Award, 2013-2014 Basketball Nova Scotia "Frank Baldwin" Award Recipient for "dedication to building the sport of basketball", 2017 HERITAGE J SOCIETY Frederick Morris Colin Bruhm 1916-1947 ATHLETE (ROAD RUNNING, TRACK AND FIELD) BLOCKHOUSE Inducted into Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Wall of Fame — 2023 "Fred was a trail blazer; a pioneer athlete who set an example for others to follow." - Bob Sayer Fred was an outstanding all-round athlete in many sports including road running, track & field, boxing, cycling, hockey, skiing, logrolling and canoe tilting. Competed at the front of the pack in the renowned annual Halifax Herald Modified Marathon and in numerous road races across the province, including a first -place finish in the 1942 Dartmouth Natal Day 6 -Mile Road. Received top honors in annual Canadian Army meets in the mid -1940's, winning the 3 -mile, 1 -mile, 880 -yard and standing long jump events. IL'UNENBURG COUNTY Finished 15th overall in the 1943 Boston Marathon in a time of 2:52:23, ahead of two former Boston Champs. He was the year's top Atlantic Canadian, second overall Canadian. No Nova Scotian has finished higher in the Open Male Category in the years since then. "Fred was always consistent, and although never a big winner, he was always a threat and that consistent drive often drove his competitors to greater victories and new records"- The Chronicle Herald, 1947 HERITAGE ,,2 :v0ClETY Gary Linthorne 1947-2021 BUILDER (FOOTBALL) •WEST LaHAVE Inducted into Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Wall of Fame — 2023 "Without Gary's tireless effort and dedication to the Seahawks Minor Football Club and all the persons it entails, this program would never had gained the traction to become a place where 100+ kids a year are getting the opportunity to play a great sport" - James Dickens Offensive Guard for Acadia University and drafted to the Canadian Football League by the Montreal Alouettes, late 1960's Chef de Mission of the Nova Scotia Canada Games, 2001 Nova Scotia Football Official of the Year, 2009 Honored by the TSN Grey Cup 100 Tour "The Grass Roots" showcasing Gary, his history and his dedication in the creation of the Seahawks Minor Football Club and the effect his involvement had on players, coaches, parents and the community, 2012 ILUNIENEURG COUNTY; Gary's achievements in developing football in Luneburg County included the introduction of organized flag football, the creation of a Midget program for high school aged youth, and a Mites program for younger kids. Town of Bridgewater "Volunteer of the Year", 2013 President of Football Nova Scotia, 2016-2021 The inaugural recipient of the Football Canada Diamond Award "presented to an individual with at least six decades of participation in football who as demonstrated a significant contribution to the development of the amateur game at any level", posthumously 2021 HERITAGE 1g84 Lunenburg Lasers TEAM (WOMEN'S SOCCER) LUNENBURG Inducted into Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Wall of Fame — 2023 "Lasers blaze soccer trail in 1980's - a provincial powerhouse and contender on the national stage... amazing for a small town that relied primarily on local talent." - Carl Fleming Women's Provincial, League Champions Cup, Metro Women's League, President's Cup and Maritime Champions, 1984 Represented the Maritimes in the 1984 National Club Championships winning a Bronze Medal, defeating both Ontario and Quebec -only goal differential kept them from playing for gold, 1984 Five (5) 1984 Laser players were later chosen to play for the Maritime All -Star team at a national tourney in Winnipeg: the start of the National Women's Team Program, 1986 ILUNEIN IBURG COUNTY( Soccer Nova Scotia 25th Anniversary Outstanding Achievement Award 2002, for the 1984 team being seeded top team in Eastern Canada Soccer Nova Scotia Women's Team of the Year, 1984 (4th time in 5 years!) 1984 Team members: Bob Sayer (coach), Warren Mosher (manager), Kim Ashford, Rachel Bachman (co -captains), Susan Collicutt, Denyse Cook (co -captains), Carolyn Covey, Janis Croft, Nicolette De Vries, Aletha Hardiman, Sharon Knickle, Diane Levandier, Yvonne Lohnes, Krista McCafferty, Shelly Mosher, Carolyn Naugler, Karen Naugler, Kathy Naugler, June Saunders, Chriss Thornhill HERITAGE >MTV Terry Atherton BUILDER (TRACK AND FIELD, HOCKEY & CURLING) CHESTER Inducted into Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society Wall of Fame — 2023 "Terry's coaching brought about lasting, positive transformation, by helping individuals explore their values, beliefs and fears, in order to unlock potential" - R. Jeff MacLean Coached various sports for 50+ years in Chester Co -coached the Chester Junior B Ravens hockey team, 1972-1977 Coach of multiple track and field, hockey and curling provincial champions 0 Served on both the Nova Scotia Track and Field Association Executive and the Nova Scotia Curling Association's Junior Committee Served as President, Junior Chair and Ice Maker at the Chester Curling Club over a thirty year span, 1990's through 2021 LUNIEN13URG COUNTY(' During tenure as curling Chair, helped guide Chester Juniors to twenty-five (25) Nova Scotia Championships Recipient of a NSSAF Special award in recognition and appreciation of contributions to school sport, 2002 Provincial Volunteer Award representing Chester, 2008 Terry Atherton's contributions were essential to the success of the restoration of Eleanor Pew Memorial Sports Complex in Chester, 2007-2011. Served as a Trustee with Church Memorial Park for more than two decades. HERITAGE SOCIETY 1 HF ett Date: October 17, 2023 Date: October 17, 2023 Date: October 17, 2023 EC REPORT TO: EETI G ATE: EPART E T: SUBJECT: ORIGIN: Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorized by: E T unicipal Council ctoer 26, 2023 Community Development : Recreation Dept. ew Road ame Assignment New Private Road a e Request Sylvia Dixon, Development & Planning Technician Chad Haughn, Director of CDRD Tara Maguire, CAO It is recommended that the Municipal Council approve the proposed private road name of Bear Ridge. C T SIT TI A private right-of-way accessed off of Appletree Drive in the community of Windsor Road (map attached) that will provide access for the future development of three or more addressable structures requires a name. The landowners have proposed the road names of Bear Ridge. C When there are three or more addressable structures using an unnamed shared right-of-way/driveway, the Nova Scotia Civic Address Users Guide states that this point of access must be named. According to Municipal Policy P-44, the road name is suggested following a majority agreement (66%) from the landowners that are served by the shared right-of-way. In this instance, the one property owner has proposed Bear Ridge as their first choice, Crescent Ridge, as their second choice, and Bear Crescent as their third choice. ISC SSI The proposed new road names would be unique road names in the Municipality of Chester and unique within Nova Scotia. It is of note that the proposed new road names are only slightly similar to the following: Bear Lane, Beaver Bank, Halifax Regional Municipality, Halifax County Bear Trap Road, Broad Cove, Municipality of the District of Lunenburg, Lunenburg County Black Bear Road, East River, Municipality of the District of Chester, Lunenburg County Comments received for proposed road names: District 7 — Councillor Sharon Church: no objections to the proposed road name Municipal Public Works — Fred Whynot: no objections to the proposed road name, Bear Ridge Chester Fire Dept. — Fire Chief: no objections to the proposed new private road name T 1. Municipal Council can approve the one of the proposed road names. Request for Decision Page 12 2. Municipal Council can decide not to approve the name and direct staff to assign a name of Council's choosing. T By-Law/Policy Policy P-44 — New Road Names and Road Name Changes. Financial/budgetary A new road sign (with accessory materials) will be purchased and posted by the Infrastructure & Operations Department. Environmental N/A Strategic Priorities N/A Work Program Implications N/A Has Legal review been completed? N/A C T SI T LET N/A TS 1. Petitions Received 2. Location Map Community: Windsor Road PID: 60712965, 60729191 AAN: 10755670, 11054358 Fire Dept: Chester Area Fire Dept. Description: New private road name required for access to future development with three or more civic addresses. Subdivision Reference No.: CM -S2022-059 New Private Road Name Proposed: Bear Ridge eprintenIatim,,aatnrriai,aai, Seale, 1:12,50tl,000 Seale: 1:2,500 50 25 0 50 Metres Legend • New Civic Address Civic Address Road Driveway/Trail Building Footprint Property Boundary * * Property boundaries shown in location map do not yet reflect the lot created with subdivision #CM -S2022-059 Rev_ Description: Date: New Private Road Naming 23/10/17 MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER New Private Road Name Requirement From Date: N/A To Date: N/A Date Printed: 23/10/17 Status: Exists Project ID: N/A Classification 0: N/A Digital Folders Entry ID: 1408007 MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER ^' DISTRICT GRANT APPLICATION ^' Deadline to Apply: No deadline Name of Organization Together We Can Community Society Contact Person Gina Green Position with Organization Organization Mailing Address Box 135 Western Shore NS BOJ 3M0 Phone: Cell: Email: twccs2018@gmail.com Date: October 18, 2023 Signature of Signing Officer and position with Organization: Name: Gina Green Position: Chair Endorsement (check box) I declare I am a member of the organization and have authority to submit this application. Note: Feel free to attach additional supporting documents if the space provided is not sufficient. AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ $1 800 MUNICIPAL DISTRICT # 5 1) Please provide a brief description of your project or event. Wreaths are a shared cost between WSDFD & WSAIA for Wildrose Park Halloween and Xmas events are entirely funded by the committee - no fee required for participation. Page 1 of 2 2) How do you plan on spending your District grant funds? • Pumpkin Carving Event $750 o 150 pumpkins o Treats, snacks & drinks • Halloween Trick or Treating (200+ kids) $550 • Tree Decorating & Santa Visit (treats, snacks & drinks) $500 3) Please describe the positive effects your project will have on the community and how it supports the Municipal Strategic Priorities Framework (to view the Priorities document click the attached link or copy and paste it in your browser.) https://portal.laserfiche.ca/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=1236847&repo=r-0O01f4a08362 or Google `Municipality of Chester Strategic Priorities'. These events directly supports Healthy & Vibrant Communities priority in the following ways: Our events bring members of our community and their guests together to enjoy fun activities and spending time with family and friends. There is no cost to attend so those less fortunate are not excluded. The park is designed to be fully accessible for people with mobility issues. 4) If you have previously received any grants from the Municipality, have you submitted the Final Report? Yes ✓ No If No, please submit your Final Report as soon as possible. 5) Who should the cheque be made payable to and what address should we send it to if different from Page 1? Together We Can Community Society Please email a pdf version of your application to: recreation@chester.ca OR mail a hard copy to: Recreation & Parks Services Municipality of the District of Chester 186 Central Street, PO Box 369 Chester NS BOJ 1J0 If you have any questions, please call us at 902-275-3490. Page 2 of 2 Requested Approved Date Approved District 1 Community Centre: Parking Lot Repairs $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 July 13, 2023 FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 Parish of Blandford: Community Garden Box & Soil $ 200.00 $ 200.00 September 14, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 3,500.00 $ 6,500.00 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 Hubbards & Area Business Association: Community Garden $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 June 8, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 1,300.00 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING $ 8,700.00 Chester Seaside Artisans & Farmers Market: Tents & Tables $ 2,000.00 $ 500.00 September 14, 2023 Chester Playhouse Society: Reopening Celebrations $ 2,000.00 $ 1,000.00 June 8, 2023 Church Memorial Park: Beer Garden $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 August 3, 2023 FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 2,800.00 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING $ 7,200.00 FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 Gray Grant Society: Forestry Management $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 September 28, 2023 Royal Canadian Legion, Br. 88, Chester Basin: Operating Costs due to flood $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 September 14, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 5,300M0 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING $ 4,700M0 FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 Royal Canadian Legion, Western Shore: 4 special events $ 2,500.00 $ 1,850.00 May 18, 2023 Royal Canadian Legion, Western Shore: Flower Pots at Wild Rose Park $ 660.00 $ 660.00 June 29, 2023 Together We Can Community Society: Flower Pots & Wreaths at Wild Rose Park $ 660.00 $ 660.00 June 29, 2023 Together We Can Community Society:Halloween, Xmas, Wreaths $ 1,000.00 Western Shore & Area Improvement Association: Flower Pots at WRP $ 2,420.00 $ 2,420.00 June 29, 2023 Western Shore & District Fire Dept.: Flower Pots, Wreaths & Garden Party $ 2,420.00 $ 2,420.00 June 29, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 8,310.00 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING $ 1,690.00 Charing Cross Garden Club: 70th Anniversary &Flower Show $ 500.00 $ 500.00 June 29, 2023 Forties Community Centre: Oktoherfest $ 500.00 $ 500.00 Aprrl 13, 2023 FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 New Ross Community Care Centre: Community Engaagement Initiatives $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 June 29, 2023 Royal Canadian Legion, Br. 79, New Ross: Canada Day & Remembranc Day $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 June 29, 2023 RoyalCanadian i 79, New Ross: Roof Project $ 2,000.00 2,000.00 September 14, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 6 300 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING $ 3,700.00 Bonny Lea Farm: 50th Anniversary BBQ at PIP 500.00 500.00 August 3, 2023 Chester Seaside Artisans & Farmers Market: 'rents & Tables $ 2,000.00 $ 500.00 September 14, 2023 Chester Playhouse Society: Reopening Celebrations $ 2,000.00 $ 1,000.00 June 8, 2023 FHCS Prom Committee $ 300.00 $ 300.00 April 27, 2023 TOTAL FUNDS APPROVED $ 2,300.00 TOTAL FUNDS REMAINING $ 7,700.00 Total Funds Approved $ 29,810.00 District Grant Budget 2023-2024 $ 70,000.00 Remaining Funds $ 40,190.00