HomeMy Public PortalAbout2016-01-20_Agenda_Public Hearing_58 Duke StreetMUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARING
To amend 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.
20 January 2015, 7:00 p.m.
Chester Municipal Council Chambers
1) CALL TO ORDER (CHAIRMAN)
a) The Agenda
b) General Rules of Conduct
c) Council's decision governed by Chester Municipal Planning Strategy
2) REPORT OF THE CLERK
a) Applicant, application date, and nature of application
b) Meetings: Planning Advisory Committee, Council, Public Participation Program
c) Documentation: Reports, advertisements, fees paid
d) Written submissions received
3) COMMENTS BY SOLICITOR
4) OVERVIEW BY PLANNER
a) Location and nature of proposal
b) Municipal Planning Strategy
c) Outstanding concerns
d) Recommendations
5) PRESENTATION BY DEVELOPER
6) COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC ON THE PROPOSAL
a) Those in favour
b) Those opposed
c) Any other comments
7) CLOSING REMARKS (CHAIRMAN)
a) Next step: decision by Council
8) DECISION OF COUNCIL / DEFERMENT OF DECISION
0
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
R E P O R T
REPORT TO: Tammy Wilson, CAO
SUBMITTED BY: Pam Myra, Municipal Clerk
DATE: 14 January 2016
SUBJECT: 52-58 Duke Street
PID 60091691 and PID 60391638
2015-446: Council motion to refer to Village Area Advisory
Committee
(A) DETAILS OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Request from: Tim Harris, Tradewinds Realty, representing the developer, with permission of current
property owner
Request date: 22 October 2015, by letter, supported by presentation to Council 29 October 2015
Nature of amendments: 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.
Intended purpose: To permit a hotel use, in the form of a small inn, on the subject property.
(B) MEETING DATES
■ 18 November 2015: Public Information Meeting #1
■ 8 December 2015: Village Area Advisory Committee
■ 14 December 2015: Citizens Planning Advisory Committee
■ 17 December 2015: Council (special meeting) 17 December 2015 (First Reading)
■ 12 January 2016: Public Information Meeting #2
(C) DOCUMENTATION
■ 18 November 2015: Summary of Public Information Meeting #1
■ 20 November 2015: Staff Report for consideration by Advisory Committees
■ 12 January 2016: Summary of Public Information Meeting #2
Advertisements (Progress Bulletin)
■ 11 November 2015: notice of Public Information Meeting 41
■ 18 November 2015: notice of Village Area Advisory Committee meeting (this meeting not held due to
lack of quorum)
■ 2 December 2015: notice of Village Area Advisory Committee meeting
■ 9 December 2015: notice of Citizens Planning Advisory Committee meeting
■ 9 December 2015: notice of Special Council Meeting
■ 30 December 2015: Notice 41 of Public Hearing and Public Information Meeting #2
■ 6 January 2015: Notice #2 of Public Hearing and Public Information Meeting #2
Other notification of Village Area Advisory Committee
■ 19 November 2015: Posters placed at Village Post Office, Fo'c'sle, Kiwi Cafe, Scotiabank, all with
permission.
Other notification of Public Information Meeting #1
■ 9 November 2015: Property owners within 30 metres of subject properties, by letter
■ 9 November 2015: Village Commission, by letter
■ Signs posted at MODC offices
Other notification of Public Hearing (including second Public Information Meeting):
■ 24 December 2015: Property owners within 30 metres of subject properties, by letter
■ 24 December 2015: Village Commission, by copy of property owner letter
■ Signs posted on property by applicant, and by MODC with permission of applicant
■ Signs posted at MODC offices
Fees paid: 6 November 2015
(D) WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED
In support:
■ 16 November 2015 (Chester Municipal Chamber of Commerce)
■ 8 January 2016 (Olaf Peterson)
Pam Myra
2b
Public Information Meeting Summary— November 18, 2015
58 Duke Street Rezoning and Plan Amendment — Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central
Commercial (CC)
The Public Information Meeting was held on November 18, 2015. The meeting was held in Council
Chambers and started at 7:03 pm. Around twenty-five residents attended the meeting. Tim Harris of
Tradewinds Realty and Phillip Mitchell of Phillip Mitchell Design represented the applicant. Tara Maguire
and Sean Gillis represented the Community Development Department.
Staff presented an overview of the Land Use By-law and Secondary Planning Strategy Amendments,
including the standards and uses for the proposed Central Commercial Zone. The applicant's
representatives presented the proposal for an eight unit inn and fifty seat restaurant.
Questions below are from the public. Answers are from the applicant's representatives, or where noted
from Community Development staff. These are notes, not a verbatim record.
Question: What about people being moved out of existing apartment buildings?
Answer: There are currently several vacant units. Finding new housing is beyond the responsibilities of
the developer.
Q: Do we track vacancy in rental units?
A: (Staff) No, it is difficult data to come by for small places.
Q: Where will the restaurant be located?
A: Possibly in 58 Duke Street or in the south wing of the inn. The developer is trying to bring something
new to the community. The plan is to a full time operation, brining off-season jobs and services.
This is the biggest the building will be and still fit the character and atmosphere of the village. The size
could change as the proposal changes, but it would get smaller.
Q: What about the water supply?
A: Currently supplies 18 units — we are proposing 8. Considering using a cistern for peak water usage
Q: This is great—fill your boots.
Q: Will the height work with the slope and our existing by-law?
A: Yes. I (Phillip Mitchell) am a big proponent of the existing rules. Hope to keep the massing down by
re -using the building at 58 Duke.
Q: The elevation suggests the roof ridge on the new inn is the same height as the existing building. Are
you building up?
A: We are looking at stepping the new portions down from the existing building and from Duke Street.
This should be more acceptable to the community.
Q: Would the Gillis House (58 Duke) move up or down?
A: No. The main structure stays put, and would continue to be a bit lower than Duke Street (around 3 —
5 feet). Idea is to step down the lot towards Water St.
Q: Will there be stairwells from Duke St. down to the Inn?
A: Yes.
Q: Will the strip near the road on Duke St. be a sidewalk?
A: Looking to landscape, but we don't own this land (owned by NS Transportation and Infrastructure
Renewal). All the cars currently parked just off the road wouldn't be there.
Q: Love the plan, but what about eliminating parking lot off Duke St. and putting parking underground.
A: Possibility, but there are existing wells to work around. Also costly. The restaurant size will dictate the
parking needs — could be less.
Q: Is this year round? In the summer is where you might have issues with crowding.
A: Yes, this is year round.
Q: What about decks? There is a nice view of the Harbour.
A: The idea is more of an inn style experience, without big decks.
Q: What about views down to the Ocean from Duke St.? Can't see the water with this proposal. More
generally concerned about fences, trees and buildings blocking what were good views.
A: There are currently a number of existing buildings on-site that block the water view. We can take this
into consideration.
Q: Highway 3 requires sidewalks for new developments. What about here? Lots of traffic.
A: (Staff) There is nothing in the Village Land Use By-law that gives us a mechanism to require sidewalks.
Q: Maybe the Municipality should step-up with sidewalks. Good time with construction.
Q: Are the dormers on the covered parking decorative?
A: Yes, to give it some curb appeal. The attic could be storage space.
Q: How far is the garage from Water St.?
A: More than the buildings that are there now. More than required [under the By-law].
Q: Is this developer someone local?
A: Can't say the details. It is a Nova Scotian, passionate about the aesthetics of the Village.
This proposal creates an opportunity for development that is really needed. Makes the property viable.
A: One property alone is not large enough to meet the setbacks and do commercial.
Q: Have you talked to the economic development officer?
A: No, very preliminary. [Staff note: the Economic Development Officer is aware of the proposal]
Q: Is there water access from the Gillis property?
A: There is an agreement to purchase a wharf on the front harbour, to give water access to the front
harbour.
Public Information Meeting Summary—January 12, 2016
58 Duke Street Rezoning and Plan Amendment — Central Village Residential (CVR) to Central
Commercial (CC)
A second Public Information Meeting was held on January 12, 2016. The meeting was held in Council
Chambers and started at 7:01 pm. There were about 10 residents in attendance. Derek Wells
represented the applicant. Tara Maguire represented the Community Development Department.
Staff presented an overview of the Land Use By-law and Secondary Planning Strategy Amendments,
including the standards and uses for the proposed Central Commercial Zone. A short presentation was
given outlining the process for amendments and where the application was in the process. The subject
site was identified on a map, photos of the existing buildings were provided, as was the proposed site
plan and drawings of the Duke and Water Street Elevations. Copies of the staff report were provided to
those in attendance but a detailed overview of the policy analysis was not provided.
Follow the brief presentation, an informal question and answer session was held.
A question was asked if there is water access included. A member of the public replied that there was no
water access included in the deal (staff did not have a comment on this question). The issues raised
concerned the amount of parking required and whether it was adequate for all the staff. Some members
of the public felt that staff would be adding to the existing issues with parking in the village and would
need to have some where to park. A similar concerned was raised about the parking for workers during
construction. It was suggested that a parking plan for construction be developed and that options for
renting spaces for construction workers at the legion be explored.
There was some concern about the traffic along Duke and Water Streets and the impact that this would
have, especially if staff were to park on the side of the road.
A question was raised regarding water supply. It was explained that there are three wells on the
property and that the property would be serviced with the three existing wells.
IM uiii „i iii ,,,w iii iii t y o , f t IIS --i e D iii s t iir iii „w ,t„ uf„ ,. ,--i e s t e iiia,
::oirn"nirn"nLP-niit. IC:.: eveIIoIpnrneirnt. II: eIl,.)airtirn"neirnt.
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
TIhat tIhe ViIIIIag e A ir e a A d v i _ C :bnnirnitt ee nnaIke a itec:onAn°nrrneindatioin t :b tIhe
t"::litizeins IPIIaininiing Advin: oiry Cornirnittee sjaiII::)Ilw.noirtiiing Che nnII::)II::)IIica lioin to an-neind
Village
t �� �:� II.... and c' �..� �n �:� Iht y .... n.� �:� irn �. Secondary IPa n� irn i irn f� Strategy i�.. �:� irn�n , t�:: �n irn t it a 1/ i n.� ...
C
..e s n c:t sites at !!::n2....!!::.
n�n t li IPto : n°�t: its::: :� n°r� n°r��:. it :: n a ::: :::.� n.. Che s n..ai :n.
D n..ai Ik gi=n S t it e gi=n t: , li d e i n t i f i e d as IP ]I: ID 60091691 a in d I1:11D 60:i301638.
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 a6unit
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.
INeighlbouiring Properties
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 Servicing
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.
N"MMMMI,
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 Photos
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 1118,"llevations
DUKE STREET
25'
m
EKED PARKING
WATER STREET
Above: A site plan for proposed inn and restaurant.
11
0O(
LOT Na.
64
5HORIE � ROAD OR � WATUn STRr CT
Top: An elevation showing the Duke Street fa4ade.
Bottom: An elevation showing the covered parking
structure off of Water St.
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.
AppendixI Central Il i i r ii Il 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
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.
Minimum Front Yard
NIL
Minimum Rear Yard
3.5 m. (12 ft.)
Minimum Side Yard
One Side
3.5 m. 12 ft.)
Other Side
1.5 m. (5 ft.)
Minimum Flankage Side Yard
NIL
Maximum Height of Structures
10 m. (33 ft.)
Minimum Distance between Main Buildings
3 m. (10 ft.)
on Adjacent Lots
Maximum Number of Dwelling Units per Lot
4
(by conversion under 6.2.1(b)(ii)
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 it IIAirea
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.
a
MuniciP Ylit of the District of Chester
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 S2 -S8 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 Designation
Proposed SPS Designa9:i�on
I1",gter Village Area
Scr:n��gM >ry Mnni:ng. 4w"Wgy
Fut"10 Lmf U.- M.ap
...................................................................................
C=1
UNICIPALI9"Y OF-11IF
I1159'Ri rof0410:599?9I
kY �.�xvlaken x' n i
R v:n'iT6tvl f if X ! (,G�' Flyer:
Municipality of the District of Chester
Chester Village Area Land Use Sy -law — Mapping Amendments
Current Zoning Configuration
Plcasanf;
oposed Zoning Changes
4 \
Chester Village Area
Land Use By-law
O==
1MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
Rexoa;n4 and Plan Amendment:
Cervtmfl VitLge R ... den W [CVR) to
CemtmO Commeecial [CC)