Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2015-12-17_Council_Public Agenda Package_Special MeetingMUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER CHESTER MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, December 17, 2015 AGENDA 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER. 2. MATTERS ARISING: 2.1 Animal Control Services Contract - One (1) month Extension 3. COMMITTEE REPORT: 3.1 Citizens Planning Advisory Committee -December 14, 2015. Recommendation and Staff Report from Shawn Gillis, Planner regarding Rezoning and Plan Amendment (52- 58 Duke St. and 37 Water St.) Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central Commercial (CC) - First Reading. 1. Citizens Planning Advisory Committee - December 14, 2015 - Motion to be approved by Council. 2. Amendments to LUS and SPS. 3. PowerPoint Presentation 4. Staff Report S. Village Area Advisory Committee - December 8,201S - DRAFT Minutes - For information. 4. NEW BUSINESS. S. ADJOURNMENT. NOTE: Grant Program Workshop following Special Meeting of Council Page 1 of 1 REPORT TO: SUBMITTED BY DATE: SUBJECT: ORIGIN: CURRENT SITUATION: MUNICIPALITY OF THE 2.1 DISTRICT OF CHESTER REQUEST FOR DECISION Municipal Council Tara Maguire, Community Development Director December 9, 2015 Extension of Animal Control Contract and Inter -municipal Agreement Animal Control Contract MODC has issued an RFP for Animal Control Services that closes on December 18, 2015. It is anticipated that a vendor will be chosen from the submissions and a new contract will be presented to Council for consideration at the January 14, 2016 Council meeting. In addition, MODC has an inter -municipal agreement with the Municipality of the District of Lunenburg (MODL) to provide animal control services that expires at the same time as the existing contract with Oceanmark, December 31, 2015. In order to provide animal control services to the residents of the municipality, and to MODL, it is proposed that Council extend the existing terms of the contract until January 31, 2016. This will allow time for preparation of a new contract and inter -municipal, council approval and execution of the contracts. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the extension of the existing terms of the contract between Oceanmark and MODC for animal control services until January 31, 2016; Further, it is recommended that Council approve the extension of the existing terms of the inter- municipal agreement for animal control services until January 31, 2016; and Further, to authorize the Clerk and Warden to sign the extension as presented in draft format; BACKGROUND: Staff has provided a draft of an extension agreement to Brain Truelove, the proprietor of Oceanmark and he has agreed to extend the terms of the original contract and the inter -municipal agreement, as they exist, until January 31, 2016. MODL council has also approved the extension of the inter -municipal agreement pending approval MODC's Council. Under the terms of the inter -municipal agreement, MODC pays the same monthly rate, $2500, for animal control services as MODC. As the host Municipality, MODC also charges MODL an additional 10 percent administrative fee for a total of $2750 per month plus HST. DISCUSSION: MODL staff has expressed their intention to continue working with Oceanmark and MODC pending the outcome of the call for proposals. If Council chooses not to extend the terms of the contract, our existing Inter -municipal service agreement with MODL would expire December 31. Both MODL and MODC would need to make alternate arrangements, either jointly or separately, to provide animal control services until a new contract with a chosen provider was in place. IMPLICATIONS: 1 Policy: 2 Financial/Budgetary: The current budget anticipates continuation on animal control services via contract and has funds to cover the costs of this service. 3 Environmental: 4 Strategic Plan: Maintain a high level of fiscal responsibility Continually improve public satisfaction with municipal services; 5 Work Program Implications ATTACHMENTS: OPTIONS: 1. Approve the extension of the existing terms of the animal control contract and the inter -municipal agreement for animal control services until January 31, 2016. Further to authorize the Clerk and the Warden to execute the extension agreement. 2. Direct staff to inform MODL and Oceanmark that Municipal Council does not wish to extend the term of the original animal control contract or the inter -municipal agreement. Prepared BY Tara Maguire Date 12/9/2015 Reviewed BY Date Authorized BY Tammy Wilso Date 12/11/2015 n v3sm THIS EXTENSION AGREEMENT dated the day of � 2015 MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER, one of th* Municipalities under the laws of the Province of Nova Scotia; (hereinafter referred to as "MODC") OF THE FIRST PART 9 W-41 10 W91 El 11111 � � � I ''! 111,111 111 Ulm !a I 11 1''11 � I : offf i IMF 11 Me irii-iiiuip,aiiLirsp-,Yicter-Liie il"S'll"T fF0'T111(;V V1 i'11VTU YVW1;L11" (hereinafter referred to as "MODL") OF THE SECOND PART Erg OCEANMARK K-9 RESORT INC. a body corporate with Head Office at Chester Basin, in the County of Lunenburg and Province of Nova Scotia; (hereinafter referred to as "OCEANMARK") Kwo 881 a I as I M Diva "A WHEREAS MODC and OCEANMARK have an existing Agreement that provides for Animal Control Services within MODC that expires on December 2015; BMW December 3 V, 2015 to January 3 1 ", 2016; One Dollar ($ 1.00) and other good and valuable consideration (the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged) the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: THAT the existing Animal Control Service Agreement dated January 25 th 2011 between MODL and OCEANMARK be and is hereby extended from 11:59 p.m. on the 3 1 st day of December, 2015 to 11:59 p.m. on the 3 1 st day of January, 2016; 2. THAT paragraph #3 of the existing Animal Control Services Agreement between MODC AND MODL dated October 31 ", 2012 be and is hereby amended to read as follows: fans NW -401 411111MR-1111HO W411 ISM 13 herein. This Agreement is entered into primarily in the spirit of mutual co- operation and goodwill.". This amendment shall replace the existing Extension Agreement between MODC AND MOCL AND OCEANMARK dated the 7 th day of April, 2015. C1. THAT in all other respects, the parties hereby acknowledge and agree that the existing Agreements remain in full force and effect and OCEANMARK joins in this Agreement to indicate its consent to the amended term. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVEREX in the presence of : Witness a ml - MOM= MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER )Per: ALLEN B. WEBBER - Warden PAMELA MYRA- Municipal Clerk MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF LUNENBURG in the presence of: Witness DONALD DOWNE, Mayor Witness SHERRY CONRAD Acting - Municipal Clerk in the presence of: OCEANMARK K-9 RESORT INC. Per: Witness BRIAN TRUELOVE 3.1 1) Citizens Planning Advisory Committee Monday, December 14, 2015 Motions 52 — 58 Duke Street - Land Use Sy -law and Secondary Planning Strategy Mapping amendments to allow a proposed inn 2015-508 MOVED by Mary Ellen Clancy, SECONDED by Trevor Hume that the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee make a recommendation to Municipal Council supporting the application to amend the Land Use By-law and Secondary Planning Strategy, from Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central Commercial (CC), for the subject sites at 52-58 Duke Street, identified as PID 60091691 and PID 60391638; and That Citizens Planning Advisory Committee make a recommendation to Municipal Council to give First Reading and set a Public Hearing date for the proposed Land Use By-law and Secondary Planning Strategy amendments. There were two other motions recommended by VAAC, but the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee instead voted to receive the recommendations because they are already considering affordable housing and the use of Development Agreements as part of the Plan Review. Affordable Housing Options for Plan Review That the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee receive the recommendation from the Village Area Advisory Committee that the matter of Affordable Housing be referred to the Plan Review. Development Agreements in Chester Village for Plan Review That the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee receive the recommendation from the Village Area Advisory Committee that the matter of the use of Development Agreements be considered through the Plan Review. 3.1 2) Municipality of the District of Chester Amendments to LUB and SPS A By-law Amending the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy and the Chester Village Land Use By-law of the Municipality of the District of Chester Be it enacted by the Council of the Municipality of the District of Chester as follows: That the Land Use By-law and Secondary Planning Strategy be amended from Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central Commercial (CC), for the subject sites at 52-58 Duke Street, identified as PID 60091691 and PID 60391638. Chester Village Area Secondary Planning Strategy - Mapping Amendments Map 4 - Future Land Use (Planning Area Boundaries and Future Land Use) is repealed and substituted with Map 4 hereto attached. Map 5 - Future Land Use is repealed and substituted with Map 4 hereto attached. Chester Village Area Land Use By-law - Mapping Amendments Schedule "A(1)" Zoning Map is repealed and substituted with Schedule "A(1)" hereto attached. Schedule "A(2)" Zoning Map is repealed and substituted with Schedule "A(2)" hereto attached. Clerk's Annotation for Official By-law Book Date of First Reading: December 17, 2015 Date of Advertisement - Notice of Intention: Date of Second Reading: Date of Advertisement of By-law Passage: Certification and Seal: Municipality of the District of Chester Chester Village Area Secondary Planning Strategy — Mapping Amendments Current SPS na'k„ r Proposed SPSDesignal an ..D€si} r„ t yy p r e owimtr� c vuw�e / N.IF N. LL'df ff! k exu uaV ter„nau A 'A.I YeY .I4 ((' �A 1..tAN: 8 f� � AItt Chestal'UhIge Area 01r.nF1..... ..... Umloosl Secotenfu4qkrBrnl9dwog SLraaug;pr. t 17uture I.and use map tl,'.exvmre� � r,. rxwYrt/tW 1 A':revrvrcrc � 4 w�rr'drrer'ANIrJ 1 I I tIMaRJ ItlM�) i m �V RN unr Plq,�gynq sl 0MbMW9m Y'roriR^r�urm I PPg.s"st bMFVPmo, I Hwx wnrrrtxG p(':4mP.1 � u'f:bwJ Y! + u IST UcT or CIII-STER rtr n¢e:al �bLM tJr Leri Js=r sw1 (uvuY'f zrx 1 r. It v�c..nwxual rrrt.',i Municipality of the District of Chester Chester Village Area Land Use Sy -law — Mapping Amendments Current Zoning Configuration Pleasant Proposed Zoning Changes e a��lar ebo a e�l�ar 1cl wua,Ta cR InstlNP bnal R tlnPal � 1 I .... Union St .,.... N .... Ivcli m I Union st i 0 St cResltlenlbale � (cvR) � 5 pleasant St reesltlennalle lam � reesntlennal til (c vR) Proposed Zoning Changes Chester Village Area Land Use By-law Onaea MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER Re .o gands PDan Amendment: Centnt Vitta ge Restldervria8 (CVR) so Cervtrat Cammemtlat [cC) ebo a e�l�ar 1cl cR aae In.sYwtfbnal nr llan[FaY � t��A+r I Union st 0 ntab[baA pleasant St reesltlennalle 1 (c vR) y c Res[tlenP al r�r Chester Village Area Land Use By-law Onaea MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER Re .o gands PDan Amendment: Centnt Vitta ge Restldervria8 (CVR) so Cervtrat Cammemtlat [cC) 3.1 3) PowerPoint Presentation Rezoning and Plan Amendment' r, 52, 54 and 58 Duke St. / 37 Water St. Municipal Council - December 17th, 2015 r � y - . -•.a - gra.. _ ��� - -� f :i: Land Use By-law Amendment (Rezoning) and Secondary Planning Strategy Amendment (Plan Amendment) Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central Commercial (C) PIM Completed, Nov. 18 Public Info. Meeting V Staff Report Analysis and Recommendation V VAAC Village Area Advisory Comm. V C PAC Citizens Planning Advisory Comm. V Council rirsi Keaaing V Council — Public Hearing V V Approved Denied Provincial Review No UARB Appeal Completed Completed, Dec. 8 Completed, Dec. 14, 2015 Today, Dec. I /, 2015 Jan. 2016 CVR [101101041#5111 Subject Properties - UFre Q Q'I U 58 Duke St 54 Duke St -a- -,E ro os hnVo !a LJ e m a DUKE STREET —3 24f 25'.W 16.9' ii lot LOT NO, 64- CO RED PARKING IO\ -------- - ---- WATER STREET 20.6' 20,3' SHORE ROAD OR WATER STREET n L/ V n D n n V -r II— di m— Water St Elevation Duke St Elevation 13 3 His kl31vm 80 UVOU j 3"OH9 '2oz 9 Oz 133HiS U31VM Ars ON 101 133HiS 3ma _� _ -n- _ _-' __ _. ann-, c o n a a SPS Policy 2.2.1 The existing character of Chester - regarded as a high quality, predominantly residential living environment of traditional architectural character and urban form with small enclaves of modern residential, commercial, institutional and light industrial development - is regarded as the primary point of reference and model for future development. SPS Policy 2.2.2 It is the intention of Council to protect the existing character of Chester from inappropriate development and to require that new development shall fit in with and enhance existing character. D V -n-en-, 0 -c-5 %-Ing ann-, o n a a SPS Policy 2.2.3 This Planning Strategy provides a framework and a process to accommodate change in development and land use in Chester Village and the surrounding area. SPS Policy 2.2.4 It is the intention of Council to control land use and development in a manner that will minimize conflicts between land uses ... IN IN I, - f A na IN A D IND i -O D Section 4.3: ... businesses are mixed with residences ... this form of mixed use development has been a part of the Village character since it was settled ..." Existing Building New Wing U D 0. 0-- V 3 k" Central Commercial (C) Zone permitted uses include: Retail & Personal Services Restaurants, Hotels, Taverns Banks, Offices and Services Health Care & Services But also include: Automobile Sales and Repair (excluding Body Shops) Bakeshops Laundry and Dry Cleaning Depots Funeral Homes Parking Lots Council and Committees shall consider the following: Secondary Plan Intent On-site Servicing Traffic and Parking Storm Drainage Sewer Capacity Proximity to Services Fire Protection Suitable Site: slopes, soils, flooding, etc. Existing Building New Wing Council and Committees shall consider the following: Height Bulk & Scale Roof Shape Materials Windows and Doors Details Architectural Controls require: Horizontal Siding Varied Massing No Internally Lit Signs (--- __ __ Staff feels that the application, as proposed, meets the intent of the Secondary Planning Strategy. A small inn and restaurant on the site will be able to meet the relevant standards in the Land Use By-law. _ -_ = ._ _ on That Municipal Council give First Reading and set a Public Hearing date for the proposed Land Use By-law and Secondary Planning Strategy amendments. 3.1 4) III" -i III c III p a I III t yo , f t IIS -i e D III s t IIA° III c t of r"i e s t e lir Corn°rirTILFrniity II: even Ilairneirn.t II::.: ellaar''tryneirn.t Prepared For: Village Area Advisory Committee/ Citizens Planning Advisory Committee Submitted By: Sean Gillis, Planner Date: November 20, 2015 Subject: Rezoning and Plan Amendment (52- 58 Duke St. and 37 Water St.) Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central Commercial (CC) Recommendation .Ph a t Che e V li II II a g ...A it v li s cb it y C Ilan irn•i li t t e e irn•l a Ik e a it e c cb ii°n•r ii-rl e irn d a t i cb ii°i to Che e C:Atizeirns IPlainirniirng Advisoiry C: irn'nirn'nittee sLailppoii..tiirng dhe allallallicatli in to airn'neind y .... y Strategy .(i�,. o irrr , Central Village �t ��� ��. IL... a irn c' �� ...n �:�. IE:� � law � Secondary ,.. �. , and 8 �:: � �� i� � � �� i� I� �:� irn irn ii irn �: � it �:� t .. Resideirntiiall CVR to C:eirrtirall C ii�iii-Tieirciiall C°C ect elites at ���,.. (CVR) ' � ; � . c� it Che e s jai �.� -, . �' .... S Duke t it e e t, ii d e in t ii .(li e d as IP ]I: IC`s 6009.169.1 a in d IP ]I: IC`s 6039.1638. Background The Municipality has received an application from Tim Harris, of Tradewinds Realty, to allow commercial uses at three properties on Duke St. and Water St. An investor, represented by Mr. Harris, plans to build a small inn. The early concept includes renovating the existing 6 -unit apartment building at 58 Duke St. and including it as part of the new inn. Three buildings — 54 Duke, 52 Duke and 37 Water St. - on the neighbouring lots would be torn down to make way for the new inn. The three lots would be consolidated into one lot of about 20,000 ft2, orjust under half an acre. Amendments to the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Land -Use bylaw to rezone 58 Duke (PID 60091691) and a portion of the adjacent property (PID 60391368) from Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central Commercial (CC) are needed to allow the proposed inn. Subject Properties This proposal involves three properties: PID 60091691 is the northern property. This property is zoned Central Village Residential (CVR). The current use is a six unit apartment building at 58 Duke St. PID 60391638 is the middle property. This property is now split -zoned. The northern half of this lot is zoned Central Village Residential (CVR) and the southern half is zoned Central Commercial (CC). Two buildings — 54 Duke St. and 37 Water St. - sit on the property line between PID 60391638 (middle property) and PID 60091683 (southern property). PID 60091683 is the southern property. The property is now zoned Central Commercial (CC). The current use is an apartment building at 52 Duke Street. The four buildings now on the site a re: 58 Duke St. is a 6 unit apartment building 54 Duke St. is a vacant 2 unit apartment building (to be demolished) 52 Duke St. is a 6 unit apartment building (to be demolished) 37 Water St. is a 3 unit apartment building (to be demolished) Photos of the site are in Appendix A. IIS a ii it ring Properti The site is now split -zoned residential and commercial. A commercial property — the Rope Loft — is across Water St. from the site. Across Duke St. are small businesses, including Light my Fire Studio, Luna Salon and Boutique and Chez Glass Lass. These properties are zoned Central Commercial (CC), a zone that covers the west side of Duke Street between Pleasant St. and Union St. The local Legion Branch is on the corner of Duke and Union Street, about one block from the site. The Central Commercial (CC) Zone also extends along parts of Pleasant St. and Queen St. For most of its length the other side of Duke Street has a sidewalk, which connects to the village core. Properties to the north and south of the site are now zoned Central Village Residential (CVR). Most nearby homes are typical of the Village core — one or two storeys on modest sized lots. Homes are usually set back from the street and neighbours to provide a small lawn or gardens. The existing apartment buildings on-site at 58 and 54 Duke St. are uncommon, as they are residential buildings with no front setback. This is similar to the commercial buildings on the other side of Duke St. IDevellopment Proposal The proposal is still very preliminary, and the layout may change. The core of the proposal is to build a small two-storey inn with eight units and a 50 seat restaurant. This inn would take up most of the site's width. If the rezoning is approved, the current intention is that the building at 58 Duke Street (the Gillis House) would be renovated and become part of the new inn. The other buildings on site would be torn down and the new inn built in their place. The new building would have several sections or wings, which would break up its mass or bulk as viewed from Duke Street. The preliminary drawings show several two-storey projecting bays, as well as gabled dormers. The second floor is within a high, steeply pitched roof. Drawings and a site plan are shown in Appendix B. The site plan shows ten parking spaces in a surface lot placed in front of the building, off of Duke St. Five more parking spaces would be in a covered garage facing Water St. mall„ ii Plan amendments and rezonings should adhere to the policies and intent of the Secondary Planning Strategy (SPS). The major SPS policies are reviewed in this report; staff has commented on how they apply to this application. A full review of all relevant policies is found in Appendix C. The policy intent of the SPS, relevant to this application, are found in these policies Policy 2.2.1: The existing character of Chester — regarded as a high quality, predominantly residential living environment of traditional architectural character and urban form ... is regarded as the primary point of reference and model for future development. [emphasis added] Policy 2.2.2:... protect the existing character of Chester from inappropriate development and to require that new development shall fit in with and enhance existing character. Policy 2.2.4:... to control land use and development in a manner that will minimize conflicts between land uses ... Policy 2.2.5:... to preserve, enhance and protect the natural environment and living environment of the planning area. In addition, Policy 6.0.7 and Policy 6.0.9 have criteria to consider for all re -zonings. The most important consideration under this Policy is whether the proposal conforms to the intentions of the Secondary Planning Strategy, which are shown above. Staff believes this proposal meets these broad policy intentions because: • the size, massing, proportions and architectural style would fit in the Village; • the inn and restaurant would be modestly sized and would not be disruptive to nearby residential properties; Duke St. and Water St. both have existing commercial properties, and the application is near the Village's commercial core. Section 4.3 of the SPS recognizes that commercial developments in this area are part of the Village character Permitted Policy 6.0.9 directs Council to consider the other uses that the rezoning could allow. The full list of permitted uses and standards for the Central Commercial Zone are included as Appendix D. In addition to the proposed inn, the allowed uses in the Central Commercial (CC) Zone would include: • General retail uses • Offices, professional clinics and business services (e.g. printing, banking) • Restaurants and beverage rooms • Residential units • Studios, galleries and skilled trades The above uses are fully compatible with other uses on Duke St., as there is already a mix of small shops. Some uses allowed in the Central Commercial Zone, such as auto sales, parking lots and taxi stations, may not fit as well in this area. These uses could currently be built — without input from Council — on the commercially zoned portions of the site, or on the commercial properties across Duke St. Potential uses that may cause concern, however, are allowed in all commercial zones, and are already a possibility in the area due to the existing Central Commercial zoning. Overall, Central Commercial is the most appropriate zone for the proposed inn. It is an appropriate commercial zone for this area, given the small scale of nearby commercial uses and the nearby residential uses. On- Oin °°° Site r li li n Policy 6.0.7 c) iii directs that the suitability for on-site servicing be considered. The applicant states that the existing on-site wells have provided sufficient water for eighteen residential units over the last thirty years. They expect to have enough water for their restaurant and inn needs. The Land Use By-law and SPS do not require staff to ask for more detailed information on water consumption or well capacity. The applicant is confident that the needs of the proposed inn can be met, based on previous experience. Staff feels this assumption is reasonable; however, we have no way to quantify this prediction, nor can we say with certainty how the inn's water usage may affect neighbouring wells. The on-site wells appear adequate, but we don't have information ensuring they are adequate. Architectural Control The subject site is in the Inner Architectural Control Area. Policy 4.10.6 directs that, for rezonings, developments should be compatible with surroundings, in terms of the following elements: • Building height; • Bulk and scale; • Roof shape; • Materials; • Relationship of windows and doors; and • Architectural details. Staff feels the preliminary drawings show the applicant intends to design a building that will fit well in the Village. The planned use of traditional materials and detailing, the roof shape and the proportions of windows and doors are all appropriate. Staff does note that after rezonings are approved, developers are not required to build the project as submitted; they are required to meet the standards for the zone. If the rezoning is approved, this proposal will go through the regular review process. In the Architectural Control Area, this includes a review of the site plan by the Development Officer and notification of nearby property owners by mail. Neither Council nor any Council Committees would be involved in site plan or development permit approvals. The standards for the Architectural Control Area are provided in full as Appendix E. In short, the developer would be required to use horizontal siding and to vary the massing (the bulk) of their building. Internally lit signs are not permitted. As proposed, the application would more than meet the minimum architectural standards. The development will need to meet minimum parking standards in the Land Use By-law before any permits are issued. The preliminary plan shows 15 off-street parking spaces, five of which would be off Water St. in a covered structure. The By-law requires a total of 19 spaces for an 8 room inn (1.1 space per room for a total of 9 spaces) and a 50 seat restaurant (1 space for every 5 seats for a total of 10 parking spaces). This requirement would need to be met before any permits could be issued; there appears to be room on-site for more parking. Discussions with the applicant's representatives indicate that there is room for additional parking if required. In addition, Policy 6.0.7 and Policy 3.2.3 direct that parking, traffic and potential hazards are considered. On -street parking spaces are currently found on the opposite side of Duke, and cars are often parked on both sides of the street. As the inn and restaurant will be busiest in the evening, these spaces will likely not be used by the current businesses. If, however, the inn and restaurant cause too many cars parked on Duke St., the Municipality could request that parking be restricted on one or both sides of Duke Street. The Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal (TIR) owns the street and would have to agree to this request. Additionally, driveway approvals are under TIR jurisdiction. Staff feels there is ample space to meet the parking requirements. In addition, parking is available on Duke Street. Should 'overflow' parking become an issue on Village streets, there are options to address any safety concerns that arise. NUMMIMI, Staff feels the application, as proposed, meets the intent of the Secondary Planning Strategy. A small inn and restaurant on the site will also be able to meet the relevant standards in the Land Use By-law. Appendix Site Above: 52 Duke St. is on the left, and 37 Water St. is on the right. Viewed from Water St. Below: 54 Duke St. viewed from Duke Street. Above: 58 Duke St (Old Gillis House) viewed from Duke St. Appendix IB .......... Site Plain and Ellevations � F-- -- -- 25' DUKE STREET WATER STREET LOT NO, 1 1 20.6' 20.3' SHORE I ROAD OR I WATER STREET Above: A site plan for proposed inn and restaurant. Top: An elevation showing the Duke Street fagade. Bottom: An elevation showing the covered parking structure off of Water St. Appendix .......... lPollicy Ainallysis 2.2.1 -The existing character of Chester - regarded as a high quality, predominantly residential living environment of traditional architectural character and urban form with small enclaves of modern residential, commercial, institutional and light industrial development - is regarded as the primary point of reference and model for future development. 2.2.2 - It is the intention of Council to protect the existing character of Chester from inappropriate development and to require that new development shall fit in with and enhance existing character. 2.2.4 - It is the intention of Council to control land use and development in a manner that will minimize conflicts between land uses and in a manner that is compatible with Municipal services. 2.2.5 - It is the intention of Council to control land use and development in a manner that will preserve, enhance, and protect the natural environment and the living environment of the planning area. 4.10.6 - Within the Inner Architectural Control Area, to ensure that when considering development agreements, site plan approvals, variances under Policy 6.0.5, and Zoning Map amendments to accommodate specific developments, the architectural character of any proposed new building, or addition to or alteration of an existing building will be compatible with the established architectural character of other buildings in the area in terms of relationships of height, bulk, scale, roof shape, materials, The proposed inn and restaurant takes its design philosophy from the existing traditional building at 58 Duke St, which is planned to be incorporated into the design. Commercial uses are appropriate in the area and any developments will have to meet the standards for the Inner Architectural Control Area, which provide some assurance that developments will fit with the intended appearance of Chester Village. Staff believes the proposal is in keeping with character of Chester Village and the character of Duke and Water Streets. The Central Commercial Zone is the most appropriate zone to ensure appropriately scaled and designed buildings in the Village core. The proposed inn is a modest sized commercial use, compatible with nearby commercial and residential uses. Duke Street is a major road in the Village, and the site is near the Village commercial core. The site is already developed, with limited natural features. New development is unlikely to impact the site's 'natural' features. The proposal, and other potential CC Zone developments, are compatible with the area's living environment. Although the proposal is preliminary, the buildings would take their design cues from an existing traditional building on site. The proposed design is compatible with the character of the area. Any uses on site would be subject to the same architectural controls, regardless of the zoning. All developments would be required to meet these architectural controls. relationships of windows and doors and architectural details. 6.0.7 - That when considering amendments to the Land Use By-law, considering appeals on site plan approvals, and in considering development agreements in addition to all other criteria as set out in the various policies of this Planning Strategy, Council shall be satisfied that: a) the proposal conforms to the intent of the Planning Strategy; b) the proposal conforms to the applicable requirements of all Municipal By-laws; except where the application is for a development agreement in which case the Land Use By-law requirements need not be satisfied. C) the proposal is not premature or inappropriate due to: a) The proposed use and design, and other uses allowed under the CC Zone, meet the intent of the Chester Village SPS. b) The proposal appears able to meet all applicable regulations. Development permits will not be issued until the Development Officer is satisfied that all requirements have been met. i) financial ability of the i) Not applicable Municipality to absorb costs related to the development; ii) adequacy of Municipal ii) There is adequate municipal sewer capacity. services; iii) the adequacy of physical site conditions for on-site services; iv) creation or worsening of a pollution problem including soil erosion and siltation; V) adequacy of storm drainage and effects of alteration to drainage pattern including potential for creation of a flooding problem; iii) The on-site wells appear adequate to meet water needs. The applicant is considering using a cistern. iv) The site is already developed. v) The current site plan does not show how drainage will be handled. As more detailed plans become available, this issue can be more fully addressed. vi) adequacy and proximity of school, recreation, emergency services, and other community facilities; vii) adequacy of street networks and site access regarding congestion, traffic hazards, pedestrian safety, and emergency access. viii) adequacy of fire vehicle access and fire protection measures on site such as water supply. d) the development site is suitable regarding grades, soils, geological conditions, location of watercourses, flooding, marshes, bogs, swamps, and susceptibility to natural or man- made hazards as determined by a qualified person. e) all other matters of planning concern have been addressed. 6.0.9 - That where any development requires amendment to the Land Use By-law, no amendment shall be adopted by Council unless the application is for a specific development proposal which conforms to the requirements of the Land Use By-law. Notwithstanding the proposed use, Council shall give consideration to the impact of other permitted uses in the zone. Section 4.3 Preamble - In the Village Centre and Valley Road commercial areas, businesses are mixed with residences, and frequently both a commercial use and a residential use occupy the same building. This form of mixed use vi) The site is located on a major road near schools, businesses and the local Legion branch. vii) Duke Street is a major Village street, and the proposed use is modest in size and expected travel impacts. viii) The main building is accessible from Duke Street, a major road. The site is close to the Chester Volunteer Fire Department. d) The site has some slopes, but these challenges can be mitigated through thoughtful site planning. Potential uses that may cause concern, however, are allowed in all commercial zones, and are already a possibility in the area due to the existing Central Commercial zoning. Central Commercial is the most appropriate zone for the proposed inn. It is an appropriate commercial zone for this area, given the small scale of nearby commercial uses and the nearby residential uses. The Village SPS recognizes the mixing of small scale commercial and residential uses near the site as being integral to the Village character. development has been a part of the Village character since it was settled in the mid 1700's. 4.11.1 Where not otherwise regulated in accordance with this Planning Strategy, that the Land Use By-law shall restrict alteration of land levels, where the alteration is in connection with a development, within the minimum yards required in any given zone. 3.2.3 Not to approve any Land Use By-law amendment or development agreement, until Council is satisfied that the development proposal will not create undue traffic hazards, result in undue traffic congestion, or unduly interfere with pedestrian movement on Public Streets. Land alterations on site — for any development — will be regulated and restricted. As more detailed plans become available, this issue can be more fully addressed. On -street parking spaces are currently found on the opposite side of Duke, and cars are often parked on both sides of the street. As the inn and restaurant will be busiest in the evening, these spaces will likely not be used by the current businesses. If, however, the inn and restaurant cause too many cars parked on Duke St., the Municipality could request that parking be restricted on one or both sides of Duke Street. The Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal (TIR) owns the street and would have to agree to this request. Additionally, driveway approvals are under TIR jurisdiction. Staff feels there is ample space to meet the parking requirements. In addition, parking is available on Duke Street. Should 'overflow' parking become an issue on Village streets, there are options to address any safety concerns that arise. Appendix ICentral. a r i l Zoine Standards 6.2.1 Permitted Developments a) Developments Permitted Subject to Commercial Zone Standards Automobile Sales and Repair (excluding Body Shops) Bakeshops Banks and Financial Institutions Beverage Rooms subject to Section 6.2.7 Craft Workshops Day Care Centres Dressmaking and Tailoring Existing Mobile Homes as listed on Schedule "C" Existing Multi -Unit Dwellings as identified on Schedule "C" Existing Beverage Rooms and Lounges identified on Schedule "C" Funeral Homes Hotels Laundry and Dry Cleaning Depots Lounges subject to Section 6.2.7 Existing Marinas as listed on Schedule "C" Medical Clinics Office Buildings and office uses Parking Lots Parks and Recreation Uses Personal Service Shops Printing Establishments Places of entertainment, recreation and assembly, within wholly enclosed buildings Rental Depots Repair Shops Residential units in the same building as a Commercial use to a maximum of four units Restaurants and Take -Out Restaurants Retail and Wholesale Sales Schools Skilled Trades Shops Studios for the practice or instruction of fine arts or crafts Taxi and Bus Stations Existing warehouses and enclosed distribution centres as listed in Schedule "C". b) Developments Permitted Subject to other Requirements of this by-law i) Single unit dwellings, two -unit dwellings, and group homes subject to the requirements of Subsection 5.2.2, but excluding mobile homes and mini -homes; ii) Residential Conversions containing a maximum four (4) dwelling units, subject to the requirements of Subsection 4.4.14; iii) Institutional Developments listed in and subject to the requirements of Section 8.2. 6.2.2 C Zone Standards Minimum Front Yard NIL Minimum Rear Yard 3.5 m. (12 ft.) Minimum Side Yard One Side Other Side 3.5 m. 12 ft.) 1.5 M. (5 ft.) Minimum Flankage Side Yard NIL Maximum Height of Structures 10 m. (33 ft.) Minimum Distance between Main Buildings on Adjacent Lots 3 M. (10 ft.) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units per Lot (by conversion under 6.2.1(b)(ii) 4 6.2.6 Parking Exemption — Existing Buildings Where permitted uses locate in existing buildings in the Central Commercial Zone, there shall be no parking required for the initial 92 sq. metres (1,000 sq. ft.) of floor area devoted to the use, except for residential uses, guest houses, hotels and inns. Appendix IEArchitectural Control Airea 4.6.1 Inner Architectural Control Area (a) Appearance of Structures Within the Inner Architectural Control Area designated on Planning Strategy Map 7, Architectural Control Areas: (i) Steel arch buildings over 20 sq.m. (216 sq.ft.) in floor area are not permitted. (ii) the public facades of structures over 20 sq. m. (216 sq. ft.) in floor area shall be chiefly clad in materials with a horizontal orientation, such as shingles, clapboards or similar siding, brick or stone so that vertical siding or roofing materials do not dominate. (iii) any new building with a footprint (ground floor area) greater than 140 sq.m. (1500 sq.ft.) shall have varied massing comprised of a main building form with added wings, ells, porches, etc., joined to the main building form under varied roof lines. The composition of these features shall have the effect of breaking up the overall visual mass of the building into smaller components, reducing apparent bulk, adding visual interest, and creating an intimate scale. (iv) In addition to all other requirements, alterations to a public facade of any existing structure of more than 20 sq. metres (216 sq. ft.) in total floor area shall either be similar to the existing character of the structure with respect to roof pitch, wall and roof cladding materials, and massing, or shall conform with the requirements of Clauses (i to iii) above. (v) Internally lit signs are not permitted. (b) Accessory Structures (i) Any new accessory structure shall not exceed 65% of the footprint (ground floor area) of the principal structure on a lot; and (ii) No accessory structure shall exceed 6 metres (19.68 feet) in height (iii) Accessory structures shall satisfy the requirements of Subsection 4.6.1 (a) above. (c) Two -unit Dwellings Any two -unit dwelling shall: i) meet the requirements of clause (a), regardless of its footprint area; and ii) have the entrances to each dwelling unit located in separate masses so that the entrances appear to be in different sections of the building. (d) Mobile Homes and Mini -Homes (i) Mobile Homes and Mini -homes are not permitted.