HomeMy Public PortalAbout2017-10-12_Council_Public_Agenda PackagePage 1 of 2
Municipal COUNCIL
AGENDA
Thursday,October 12, 2017 at 8:45 a.m.
Chester Municipal Council Chambers
151 King Street, Chester, NS
1.MEETING CALLED TO ORDER.
2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA/ORDER OF BUSINESS.
3.PUBLIC INPUT SESSION (8:45 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.)
4.MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:
4.1 Council –September 28, 2017
5.COMMITTEE REPORTS:
5.1 Committee of the Whole –October 5, 2017 –Warden Webber
(approval of motions)
5.2 Nominating Committee –October 5,2017 –Councillor Barkhouse
(approval of motion)
5.3 Citizens Planning Advisory Committee –September 18, 2017 –Warden Webber
(receive minutes only)
5.4 Any other Committees.
6.MATTERS ARISING:
6.1 By-Law #74 –Amendment –Second and Final Reading -Tax Exemption for
Charitable, Non-Profit Organizations, Municipal Water Utilities and Licensed Day
Cares By-Law –Addition of Our Health Centre to Schedule A.
7.CORRESPONDENCE:
6.2 Letter from South Shore Housing Action Coalition dated October 6, 2017
regarding request for an update/actions identified by Staff from the presentation
made to Council earlier in the year and to explore how SSHAC may be of further
assistance.
Page 2 of 2
7.1 Email from Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities (UNSM)dated October 6,2017
regarding Cannabis Update and Information Request –Action required:
Feedback Requested by Wednesday,October 18,2017.
8.NEW BUSINESS:
8.1 Request for Decision prepared by CAO dated October 4, 2017 regarding Biomass
Comfit –Feasibility Study for Wet Anaerobic Digestion.
8.2 Canada 150 Grant –New Ross Regional Development Society.
8.3 Council Grant Request -Fire Inspectors Association of Nova Scotia.
8.4 Request for Decision prepared by Community Development Department
regarding Shipping Containers.
9.IN CAMERA:
9.1 Contract Negotiations –Inter-Municipal Services.
10.ADJOURNMENT.
MOTIONS REQUIRING APPROVAL OF COUNCIL FROM
OCTOBER 5, 2017 NOMINATING COMMITTEE MEETING
2017-527 APPROVAL OF AGENDA
2017-528 APPROVAL OF AUGUST 3, 2017 NOMINATING COMMITTEE MINUTES
2017-529 APPOINTMENT OF SHERBROOKE PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
MOVED by Warden Webber, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford that the Nominating
Committee recommend to Council the following people be appointed to the Sherbrooke Lake
Park Advisory Committee:
•Hugh Harper
•Heather Dyment
CARRIED.
2017-530 ADJOURNMENT
1
Cindy Hannaford
Subject:FW: CANNABIS UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUEST--Action required: FeedbackRequested
Begin forwarded message:
From:UNSM Info <Info@unsm.ca>
Date:October 6, 2017 at 10:58:47 AM ADT
To:Tracy Verbeke <TVerbeke@unsm.ca>
Subject:CANNABIS UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUEST--Action required:Feedback Requested
TO:Mayors, Wardens, Councillors, All Units
CC:Chief Administrative Officers/Clerks-Treasurers, All Units
FR:Betty MacDonald, Executive Director
RE:CANNABIS UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUEST
Today the Province has announced public consultations on cannabis, seeking input on a few key
questions including legal age to purchase and use recreational cannabis, where it can be purchased,
and where it can be used.(https://novascotia.ca/news/release/?id=20171006001 )You are able to
respond to the public survey, as a concerned citizen,As well, recognizing the role municipalities will
be required to play,Municipal Affairs will be reaching out to municipalities to hear their views on
these questions (more detail to follow).As we understand it, this is only the first part of provincial
consultation, and there will be further opportunities to provide feedback to the province.There are
many questions and issues to be determined.
Following the Cannabis workshop a few months ago, UNSM requested municipalities be party to
the provincial discussions on cannabis.As a result, UNSM, AMANS and law enforcement
representatives have been invited to participate on an Intergovernmental Cannabis Working Group
involving the Departments of Municipal Affairs and Justice.
In the meantime, the UNSM and AMANS have formed a Municipal Cannabis Working Group to
help focus municipal issues and concerns around the legalization of cannabis in the Province. The
goal is for the Municipal Cannabis Working Group is to make recommendations to the
Intergovernmental Working Group over the next several months, prior to announcing provincial
legislation.This group held its initial meeting on October 4 and has agreed to prepare information
in three key areas: Human Resource and Workplace Safety policies, municipal costs and revenues
associated with implementing and enforcing cannabis regulations, and Roles and Responsibilities
between the Province and Municipalities. This Working Group will be tasked with making
recommendations to the Province.
To assist the Municipal Working Group in gathering information, we would like to know
what specific issues your municipality is concerned with regarding cannabis legalization
and if you have begun to set up a cannabis committee at the local level. If you c ould
respond to this request by Wednesday, October 18 it would be appreciated.We would like
to know the issues you have identified and are working on.If you would like to be part of
2
an e-mail group sharing information, please send your name to Tracy Verbeke at
tverbeke@unsm.ca.
We also wanted to make you aware that FCM, in conjunction with its municipal association partners,
is working on a Municipal Guide to Cannabis Legalization that will address the following areas:
1.Introduction and context (federal legislation, consultation processes, provincial and
territorial processes (where known), explanation that the Guide builds on the Cannabis
Primer)
2.Land use planning/zoning /retail location
3.Public consumption/place of use
4.Business licencing and other administration
5.Public Education/Public health/Workplace Safety
6.Supplementary Information (northern communities, drug -impaired driving enforcement,
production facility-related considerations not addressed in above secti ons).
This will be a useful document to assist municipalities across Canada.
Phone: (902) 423-8331
Fax: (902) 425-5592
www.unsm.ca
PLEASE NOTE:If you do not want to receive communications from UNSM, please e -mail
Tracy Verbeke at tverbeke@unsm.ca,and you will be removed from the mailing list.
request for decision
Prepared By: Tammy Wilson, CAO Date September 27, 2017
Reviewed By: Date
Authorized By: Date
CURRENT SITUATION
The Municipality of the District of Chester (MODC) presently has an approval under the COMFIT program
for a 500 KW Biomass energy generation facility. The approval expires April 2019. Municipal Council has
directed through the Strategic Priorities process, that staff seek options for a biomass project, or try to
have the approval type changed to another form of energy generation (i.e.. wind).
MODC has received an unsolicited proposal from Minas Energy for a Feasibility Study for a 500 KW (Wet)
Anaerobic Digestion Facility at Kaizer Meadows. This feasibility study would be a necessary step in
exploring a biogas project to meet the COMFIT approval obtained.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation to Council
If Municipal Council wishes to proceed with the work the following motion and sequence of work is
respectfully recommended:
That Municipal Council approve the work proposed by Minas as Alternative Procurement, due to
time constraints and have the work completed in two phases :
Phase 1- undertake a Step One of the Wet Anaerobic Digestion Study, being a Feed Stock
Characterization Study, for a costs $15,000. If results are successful proceed with:
Phase 2- AD Technology Evaluation; Financial Assessment; FCM Application for a costs of $55,000;
and
That Municipal Council approve the unbudgeted funds to complete the same
BACKGROUND
MODC received a COMFIT approval for a 500 KW Biogas Energy generation facility at Kiazer Meadows in
February 2015. The Department of Energy requires that a project be operational by Feb 25, 2019.
The COMFIT approval was obtained by MODC as a follow through on recommendations contained in an
Energy Strategy developed for MODC by Minas Energy. In addition, an (Dry) Anaerobic Digester Feasibility
REPORT TO: Municipal Council
SUBMITTED BY: Department
DATE: October 4, 2017
SUBJECT: BIOMASS COMFIT- FEASIBLITY STUDY FOR
WET ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
ORIGIN: Strategic Priorities
2 REQUEST FOR DECISION /Direction
Study was completed by Strum Environmental in 2015. The estimated tip fee for 7,000 tonnes per year
was $91. This covered the costs for primary processing on-site, however, secondary processing would still
be required and the costs of an offsite tip fee was not factored in. The feasibility study noted that
feedstock volume was critical to the viability. If the volume were to increase, the costs would decrease,
however at the time there was not volume available outside of MODC and the Joint Services Board (JSB).
In June of 2015 Council issued an Expression of Interest for the development of (Dry) Anaerobic Digestion
of Source separated organics under MODC’s Biomass COMFIT approval. Given the inability to secure
additional volume at the time, Council opted to not proceed with a contract for the development of this
system.
MODC presently sends its Organics to the Whynott’ s Settlement Facility (Joint Services Board). MODC’s r
annual tonnage volume is approximately 1500 and MODC presently pays $95 per tonne, plus
consolidation and trucking at approximately $ 60 per tonne. MODC’s annual costs for handling organics
via offsite processing is approximately $155 / tonne.
DISCUSSION
Minas has presented MODC with a non-solicited proposal for a feasibility study of a (wet) anaerobic
digestion. The feasibility study is an essential step in moving forwarded with sourcing a technology that
will enable MODC develop and construct the Kaizer Meadows Biogas Project per the COMFIT approval.
Minas has advised that the wet anaerobic digestion has a lower capital costs than the previously examined
dry anaerobic digestion, which ultimately affects the costs per tonne.
The dry anaerobic digestion had a $91/tonne costs associated with it, plus offsite trucking and tip fee for
disposing of at another facility for secondary processing. Minus has suggested that the wet anaerobic
digestion is proposed to have approximately $_60/tonne (subject to further review and analysis). This
includes the costs of pre processing (removal of contaminates. It is uncertain of what the technology will
be or if contaminates will be picked out manually, which can affect costs), processing, handling of the
liquid waste and post processing. Staff are unable to comment as to the cost and defer to Minus
respecting the same.
The proposal offers the following steps:
Deliverable Costs
Feedstock Characterization $15,000
AD Technology Evaluation $30,000
Financial Assessment $15,000
Prepare FCM Application $10,000
Total $70,000
3 REQUEST FOR DECISION /Direction
To optimize a wet anaerobic digestion technology the feedstock is important. If the feed stock (source
separated organics) is clean (less than 5-10% contamination) the wet system can be implemented. For
feedstock with a higher contamination, a dry anaerobic digestion technology is required (which a
feasibility study has already been completed on). Presently the contamination level for MODC’s source
separated organics is 15-20%, and it is understood that this is mostly due to the use of the compostable
bags (plastic). It is unknown at this point whether a moratorium on the use of these bags would generate
a different contamination results. Consequently, a feedstock characterization study would be a logical first
step in a feasibility study for wet anaerobic digestion. If this type of contamination is not conducive to the
technology process, or if the pre-processing costs to remove the contaminates is high, it would not make
sense to proceed with the other stages of the feasibility study.
The COMFIT approval expires February 2019 and thus a decision is required as to whether we pursue
biogass, which the approval is for, or whether we ask the Department of Energy to consider changing the
approval type to another form of Energy Generation (i.e wind). It is unknown whether the Department of
Energy will entertain such a request.
IMPLICATIONS
Policy
MODC has a Procurement Policy (P-04). The value of the work requires a Tender or Proposal Call (more
than $50,000) unless it is determined that Alternative Procurement is warranted. The terms under which
alternative procurement can be considered are consistent with the Trade Agreements. The following may
be considered, subject to legal advice:
• (1) Where an unforeseeable situation or urgency exists and the goods, services or construction
cannot be obtained in a time by means of an open procurement procedures.
In this instance, the Comfit Approval expires Feb 2019. It is anticipated that the Feasibility Study
will take 3 months to complete (Feb 2018), leaving just 12 months to plan and construct a facility
Completing a Proposal Call will add an additional 3 months to the process, leaving only 9 months
to complete planning and construction.
.
The Existing Engineering Services Contract for Solid Waste Projects has two prequalified firms, CBCL and
Dillion. The contract with both firms notes that Council is not obligated to keep work exclusive to them if
the contract value exceeds $50,000.
Financial/Budgetary
The following table summarizes the proposal costs:
Deliverable Costs
Feedstock Characterization $15,000
AD Technology Evaluation $30,000
Financial Assessment $15,000
4 REQUEST FOR DECISION /Direction
Prepare FCM Application $10,000
Total $70,000
This is not a budgeted item and thus Council would have to approve an unbudgeted expense. Council
may wish to track expenses until it is known if the 2017-18 fiscal year will end in a surplus. If there are
sufficient surplus funds forecasted, this project could be funded from that surplus. If there is no surplus,
then Council should consider funding from operating reserves.
The objective of any such project is to generate non-tax revenue and thus lessen the reliance on property
taxes and strengthen MODC’s financial position. The success of the project is very much driven from a
volume perspective. The more volume (up to a point) the lower the processing costs and the greater the
profit. Presently the volume that had been included is 6900 tonnes (Lunenburg County). With these
volumes Minas estimates at 14% Internal Rate of Return.
Environmental
n/a
Strategic Plan
The COMFIT approval is a high priority on Council’s Strategic Priorities Chart
Work Program Implications
The COMFIT approval is within the workplan of CAO / Administration. The feasibility study for a wet
anaerobic digester will require Engineering and Solid Waste Operations Support. Presently this project is
not within the Engineering Departments workplan.
OPTIONS
List options here.
• Council may accept the proposal, in phases or all at once
• Council may direct that staff issue a Request for Proposals for the proposed work and not sole
source
• Council may wish not to pursue any part of the feasibility study given the anticipated costs per
tonnne and the existing feedstock contamination.
ATTACHMENTS
• Minas Energy Proposal (August 15, 2017)
COMMUNICATIONS (INTE RNAL/EXTERNAL)
Kaizer Meadow Biogas Project
Municipality of the District of Chester
Overview of Anaerobic Digester Project (2015)
Proposed construction of an AD system for handling municipal source separated organic
(SSO) waste
Two scenarios of:
7,000 tpy from Chester and Lunenburg
17,500 tpy from Chester, Lunenburg and Valley Waste -Resource Management
6 Dry AD technologies were reviewed for each scenario of 7,000 tpy & 17,500 tpy
Tipping fees were calculated based on 13% IRR
Problems
Handling the Digestate Material
Financial Viability of the project Including the Capital Costs for
Digestate Handling Equipment
Problems
Handling Digestate Material
1.Applied directly as landfill cover material
•Limited tonnage can be applied per square foot of land
•Depends on the digestate components
2.Shipped off-site to an existing composting facility
•It will add more to tipping fee
•Requires more logistics
•Only one facility identified (Northridge Farms) close to the proposed site
3.Treated on-site
Problems
Handling Digestate Material
1.Applied directly as landfill cover material
•Limited tonnage can be applied per square foot of land
•Depends on the digestate components
2.Shipped off-site to an existing composting facility
•It will add more to tipping fee
•Requires more logistics
•Only one facility identified (Northridge Farms) close to the proposed site
3.Treated on-site
Digestate Solutions
Digestate treatment:
•Secure the use of digestate material
•Create new markets for digestate products
•Increase the value of digestate material
•Decrease the operating costs (OPEX) of the facility
Post-Processing Material Flow
Wet vs. Dry Anaerobic Digestion
Total Solid wet < dry
Process water consumption wet > dry
Process retention time wet > dry
Parasitic energy consumption wet < dry
Complexity of pre and post treatment steps wet < dry
Biogas yield per ton of treated waste wet > dry
Specific capital cost per m3 of bio-gas produced wet < dry
Specific capital cost per ton of treated waste wet < dry
Wet vs. Dry Anaerobic Digestion
Total Solid wet < dry
Process water consumption wet > dry
Process retention time wet > dry
Parasitic energy consumption wet < dry
Complexity of pre and post treatment steps wet < dry
Biogas yield per ton of treated waste wet > dry
Specific capital cost per m3 of bio-gas produced wet < dry
Specific capital cost per ton of treated waste wet < dry
Overall,WET AD plants show better energy balance and economic performance
compared to DRY AD plants.
Wet AD + Pre & Post-Processing
•7000 MT of SSO
•Capital Cost $5 M
•Nominal Electricity 500KW
•Actual Electricity 250KW
•IRR 14%
•Average Annual Net Revenue $130,000
•Tipping Fee $60
•Debt Funding 80%
•Interest Fee 5%
•Rough Estimation
•Turnkey Project
•Potential FCM Funding
•Mechanical Grinder and Separator
•have a high rate of contaminant removal
•produce a mixed uniform sized feedstock
•are produced by a number of manufacturers
•Liquid Solids Separation
•In the “receiving”tank where it is mixed with liquids to 10%solids:
•Low density products like plastics float and can be skimmed from the surface
•High density materials like rocks,soil and gravel will settle on the bottom of
the tank where they can be easily removed.
Contaminant Removal Pre -Processing
www.scottequipment.com
Pre-Processing-Example
•244 Anaerobic Digesters in Europe processing MSW:
•All CSTR or Variation of this Design
•A few small scale demo high solids “dry” digesters
•North America 20+ Anaerobic Digesters processing MSW:
•Majority are CSTR
•2 small commercial “dry” systems (Harvest Power BC, Zero Energy CA)
•1 in construction City of Edmonton (Bioferm)
Anaerobic Digesters for SSO
FCM
Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program
Climate Mitigation Capital Project Grants
•Eligible Initiatives:
•“Eligible capital projects will address corporate or community GHG emissions at a site, or in a neighbourhood
or region. These projects are designed to enable the adoption of a technology or solution that has the potential
to reduce GHG emissions.”
•Targets:
•For anaerobic treatment or biodigestion
•Capital projects should be designed to reduce GHG emissions from the site by 50%.
•Funding:
•Grants of up to $1,000,000
•Larger grants may be available
•Funding for up to 80% of eligible costs
WEnTech Solutions
•A software company specialized in Waste to Energy industry
•Expertise and Experience in Waste to Energy Systems Selection and Design
•Involved in multiple Projects in Municipal Waste to Energy Projects
•Local Company and Familiar with Local Policy and Regulations
W-SAS™
(WEnTech Smart Analysis System)
WEnTech Solutions
EXECUTIVE TEAM
Amir Akbari
(CEO)
MScE in Mechanical Eng.
specialization in
Manufacturing and Power
generation
8 years of industrial and
academic experience in
power generation and
turbine manufacturing
industry
Dr. Farough Motasemi
(CTO)
PhD in Mechanical Eng.
specialization in Waste–
to–Energy process
8 years of industrial and
academic experience in
biochemical and
thermochemical processing
Kevin Shiell
(CRO)
MSc in Agriculture
specialization in
Biofuels and Biogas
Over 18 years
experience in applied
research on biomass
and waste to energy
technologies design and
selection
Dr. Kenneth Kent
(CPO)
PhD in Computer Science
with specialization in
Software Systems
Extensive industrial
experience having
worked with over 20
companies in product
development
Proposal
Deliverable Cost Date of Completion
Feedstock Characterization $15,000 November 30, 2017
AD Technology Evaluation $30,000 December 15, 2017
Financial Assessment $15,000 January 15, 2017
Prepare FCM application $10,000 February 28, 2017
Total $70,000
(plus applicable taxes)
Question?
Amir Akbari
aakbari@wentechsolutions.com
Chris Peters
chris.peters@minasenergy.com
Technology Suppliers –Examples
Process Suppliers Reference plants
Thermal Hydrolysis CAMBI Lillehammer (Norway), Cardiff WWTW
(UK), Aberdeen WWTW(UK)
Enzymic Liquefaction ---Pilot plant operational in Copenhagen
(Denmark)
Mechanical separation –
in-vessel cleaning
Finsterwalder Umwelttechnik GmbH & Co. KG Langage Farm
Gravity belt thickening Ashbrook Simon Hartley and Ovivo Water Numerous WWTW reference sites
Centrifuge thickening Alfa Laval;Ashbrook Simon Hartley;Euroby; GEA
Westfalia; MSE Hiller
Numerous WWTW reference sites
Belt Press Ashbrook Simon Hartley;Ovivo Water; Siemens;
Aquatreat
Numerous WWTW reference sites
Technology Suppliers –Examples
Process Suppliers Reference plants
Rotary drying Andritz AG;Swiss Combi;GmbH Vandenbroeck;
Siemens
Tilbury and Glasgow WWTWs; Ringsend
WWTW, Dublin; Isle of Man WWTW
J-Vap dewatering & drying Siemens Installations at WWTW in America
Solar drying Thermo –System;Veolia –Solia TM;Degremont –
Heliantis TM
Langage Farm AD (UK)
Multiple references in France
Incineration Veolia Water,Pyrofluid ®;Envirotherm GMBH;
ThyssenKruup
Numerous references in France
Shell Green (UK)
Centrifuge dewatering Alfa Laval;Ashbrook Simon Hartley;Euroby;GEA
Westfalia; MSE Hiller
Numerous WWTW reference sites
Digestate Solutions
Digestate Enhancement Methods
Pre-digestion enhancement methods Post-digestion enhancement methods
Thermal hydrolysis
Autoclave systems
Enzymic liquefaction
In-vessel cleaning systems
Physical (Thickening,Dewatering & Purification)
Thermal (Drying, Evaporation & Conversion)
Biological (Composting, Reed Beds, Oxidation, Biofuel & etc.)
Chemical (Ammonia recovery, Acidification & etc.)
FCM
More info: fcm.ca/home/programs.htm
FCM
Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program
Programs for Solid waste:
•Climate mitigation studies funding
•Climate mitigation capital project grants
FCM
Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program
Climate Mitigation Studies Funding
•Eligible Initiatives:
•“A feasibility study assesses the technical and financial feasibility of a specific project to reduce or avoid
GHG emissions. It uses a verifiable evaluation process that leads to a recommended course of action.”
•Targets:
•For anaerobic treatment or biodigestion
•The target is capturing 50%reduction in GHG emissions from the site.
•Funding:
•Grants of up to $175,000
•Funding for up to 80% of eligible costs
FCM
Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program
Eligible Costs (up to 80%)
•Services
•Professional and Technical Consultants and Contractor
•Staff Salaries:
•Direct staff time working on the initiative
•Meeting and Public Gatherings:
•Costs related to meetings that communicate the initiative to the public
•Travel and Accommodation
•Travel and associate expenses for the main applicant, partners and consultants
Investment Assessment Site SelectionRisk Assessment Environment Impact
Assessment
Waste Material Analysis Bio-pathway Selection Conversion Technology
Selection
WEnTech Solutions
District Group Name Name of Event Date of Event Request Approved Notes
1 District No 1 Community Centre 150 BBQ & Dance Saturday, August 26 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Approved June 22 / 17
1 Blandford Fire Service Family Fun Day Saturday, August 19 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 Approved June 22 / 17
1 East Chester Recreation Association Canada 150 Bingo & Christmas in July Saturday, July 15 $1,200.00 $0.00 Discussed July 13 / 17
1 Aspotogan Recreation Association Community Fun Day Saturday, August 19 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Approved July 27 / 17
TOTAL $7,200.00 $5,000.00
2 Hubbards Area Lions Club Pancake Breakfast & Turkey Dinner Saturday, August 5 500.00$ $0.00 Discussed July 13 / 17
2 Hubbards Area Lions Club Murder Mystery Night/Roast Beef Dinner Saturday, September 22 1,500.00$ $1,500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
2 Hubbards Radio Society Music Festival: Hubbards Waterfront Saturday, August 12 2,000.00$ $1,500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
2 Hubbards Area Business Association Canada Day Celebration & Hubbards Parade July 1 & August 12 1,000.00$ $500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
2 Hubbards Barn Pavilion Grand Opening Saturday, July 1 589.00$ $500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
2 Hubbards Fire Department Fireworks (Co-sponsored by Ceilidh)Saturday, August 5 1,000.00$ $1,000.00 Approved July 13 / 17
TOTAL 6,589.00$ $5,000.00
3 Chester Legion BBQ (Parade has been cancelled)Firday, August 18 2,000.00$ $350.00 Approved June 8, Amended June 22 / 17
3 Chester Yacht Club Junior Sailing Canada Day Chester Harbour Parade of Lights Saturday, July 1 1,000.00$ $500.00 Approved June 8 / 17
3 Chester Art Centre Chester Creates Event (one venue at Skate Park)Saturday, September 9 2,000.00$ $250.00 Approved June 22 / 17
3 Chester Merchants Association 9th Annual Gingerbread Competition & Display Nov 18 - Dec 18, 2017 700.00$ $250.00 Approved June 22 / 17
3 Friends of Nature Planting two trees at OHC Monday, July 17, 2017 875.00$ $250.00 Approved June 22 / 17
3 Chester Curling Club Canada 150 celebration & Curling Season Kickoff Mid-October 1,000.00$ $300.00 Approved June 22 / 17
3 Church Memorial Park Beer Garden / Dance Saturday, September 16 1,000.00$ $550.00 Approved July 13 / 17
3 Chester Fire Department Open House Saturday, July 29 800.00$ $550.00 Approved July 13 / 17
3 Village Commission Lido Pool Centennial Project 50 Years Later Friday, August 25 700.00$ $550.00 Approved July 13 / 17
3 Masons (Clark Lodge #61)Annual Masonic Picnic celebrating Canada 150 Sunday, August 20 500.00$ $500.00 Approved July 27 / 17
3 Chester Tennis Club Backboard Rebuild & Christening TBA 2,500.00$ $950.00 Approved August 31 / 17
TOTAL 13,075.00$ $5,000.00
4 Chester Basin Legion (& Partners)Chester Basin Canada 150 Community Celebration Saturday, August 13 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Approved July 13 / 17
TOTAL $5,000.00 $5,000.00
5 Wetern Shore Legion Canada Day Legion Walk & Garden Party Saturday, July 1 1,290.00$ $1,666.00 Approved June 8 / 17
5 Western Shore & Area Improvement Assoc.21st Annual Chicken BBQ Saturday, July 1 1,500.00$ $1,666.00 Approved June 8 / 17
5 Western Shore Fire Department 60th Anniversary BBQ, Cake & Fireworks Saturday, July 1 2,000.00$ $1,666.00 Approved June 8 / 17
TOTAL 4,790.00$ $4,998.00
6 Forties Community Centre Variety Show with refreshments Sunday, October 29 200.00$ $200.00 Approved June 8 / 17
6 New Ross Legion Canada Day Saturday, July 1 2,000.00$ $1,000.00 Approved June 8 / 17
6 Rural Roots Market Education Event with Guest Speakers Sundays, September 17 682.00$ $682.00 Approved June 22 / 17
6 New Ross Farmers Association Canada 150 at the New Ross Fair Saturday, August 19 950.00$ $500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
6 New Ross School Canada 150 Heritage Walkway November 2017 650.00$ $500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
6 Charing Cross Garden Club Canada 150 Tree Planting September 15 500.00$ $500.00 Approved June 22 / 17
6 Forties Garden Club Canada 150 Annual Flower Show August 2 200.00$ $200.00 Approved August 10 / 17
6 New Ross Regional Development Society New Ross 150 Community Picnic Sept 10 Raindate Sept 17 500.00$ $500.00 Approved August 10 / 17
6 New Ross Country Market Final Market of the Year Celebration Saturday, October 7 200.00$ $200.00 Approved September 14 / 17
6 New Ross Regional Development Society New Ross Christmas Festival & Promotional Social Nov. 10 & Dec. 1 800.00$ New October 12 / 17
TOTAL 6,682.00$ $4,282.00
7 Canaan & District Hall Association Little Red School Day (Canada 150 & Canaan 200th)Saturday, July 15 2,500.00$ $2,500.00 Approved June 8 / 17
7 Canaan & District Hall Association Planting of Maple Trees, Plaques & Ceremony Saturday, December 9 2,500.00$ $2,500.00 Approved September 28 / 17
TOTAL 5,000.00$ $5,000.00
GRAND TOTAL $48,336.00 $34,280.00
CANADA 150 GRANT REQUESTS
MEMORANDUM
Prepared By:Garth Sturtevant Date September 28,2017
Reviewed By:Tara Maguire Date October 4, 2017
Authorized By:Tammy Wilson Date October 6, 2017
RECOMMENDATION
1.Recommend that Council give First Reading to the revised draft amendments attached as
Appendix A to impose limits on the height, footprint and building ratio for shipping containers,
and further, that Council set a date for a Public Hearing;
CHANGES TO PROPOSED AMENDMENT REQUESTED BY COUNCIL
Staff presented the proposed Land Use By-law amendment and staff report to Council at a meeting held
September 14, 2017. During discussion, Council requested that staff revise the proposed amen dment to
allow flexibility for containers which slightly exceed the standard size (8ft x 40ft) but are generally in
conformance with the intent of the regulations.
The global shipping industry works with standard sizes of shipping containers and is unlikely to be altered,
however,Council wished to allow containers that meet the intent of the proposed amendment but which
could come under scrutiny or complaint due to a minor difference in footprint or height.To address this
direction from Council, staff have revised the proposed standards for ship ping containers by increasing
the permitted height from 2.59m (8ft 6in) to 2.7m (8ft 10 in) and the maximum footprint from 29.73 sq. m
(320 sq. ft) to 31.59 sq. m. (340 sq. ft).
The revised amendments also include language to
be added to Section 4.4.4A,Shipping Containers,to
exclude handles, latches, pins,lights,vents or other
minor protrusions from being included in the
maximum size limit calculations. This exemption
would not apply to any features which protrude
more than 0.6m (1 foot) from the wall, floor or roof
of a shipping container.Such protrusions would
however be subject to any applicable yard setbacks
for shipping containers.
Staff would like to note that the proposed width to
length ratio will remain unchanged and will
REPORT TO:Council
SUBMITTED BY:Garth Sturtevant
DATE:October 12, 2017
SUBJECT:Revisions to proposed LUB Amendment to
Limit Size of Shipping Containers
ORIGIN:VAAC Motion Requesting Amendment
Example of a container building with protrusions.
Source:http://www.mechequip.com/wpcontent/uploads/
2016/08/skidbuilding.jpg
Memorandum –Limit Size of Shipping Containers
continue to require containers to be in the general shape and size as originally proposed. The revisions
requested by Council provide an opportunity for flexibility without permitting a significantly larger
container from being used for storage purposes.
CURRENT SITUATION
At the April 18, 2017 meeting of the Village Area Advisory Committee, members passed a motion which
requested an amendment to the Chester Village Land Use By-law. The purpose of the proposed
amendment is to limit the maximum size of shipping containers permitted under Sec tion 4.4.4A Shipping
Containers.The proposed amendment would also prohibit all forms of refrigerated containers due to
concerns with noise and exhaust creating a nuisance or land use conflict with adjacent properties.
Staff have prepared draft amendments to implement size limits for shipping containers, attached as
Appendix A.The draft amendments were presented to the Village Area Advisory Committee at a meeting
held July 18, 2017. VAAC Members passed a motion to recommend that CPAC give positive
recommendation to Council to adopt the proposed amendments to limit the size of shipping container s.
Text of VAAC Motion:
MOVED by Ray Cambria, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the Village Area Advisory
Committee recommend that the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee accept the
proposed Land Use By-law amendment to impose limits on the size of shipping containers
and prohibit refrigerated containers. CARRIED
The Citizens Planning Advisory Committee considered the proposed amendments at a meeting held
August 28, 2017. CPAC members voted in favour of the proposed amendment with one minor wording
change to replace “Maximum Floor Area” with “Maximum Footprint”for better clarity.Staff have included
this wording change in the current version of the proposed amendment.
Text of CPAC Motion:
MOVED by John Carroll, SECONDED by Mary Ellen Clancey that the Citizens Planning
Advisory Committee recommend to Council to accept the draft amendments as attached as
Appendix A to the Memo dated August 28, 2017 regarding the Proposed Amendment to
impose limits on the height, maximum floor area and a maximum width to length ratio for
shipping containers as discussed and amended to use the term “footprint” regarding
maximum floor area. CARRIED.
DISCUSSION
The draft amendments include maximum limits for the height of containers,footprint and a maximum
building ratio of width to length (1:5). Under the Municipal Government Act, a Land Use By -law cannot
directly dictate the dimensions of a structure. In order to accomplish the stated goal of the amendment,
staff have drafted provisions with the understanding that the combined effect of these provisions will
result in permits only being issued for containers similar to the standard 8 foot width by 40 foot length.
Memorandum –Limit Size of Shipping Containers
OPTIONS
1.Recommend that Council give First Reading to the revised draft amendments attached as
Appendix A to impose limits on the height, footprint and building ratio for shipping containers,
and further, that Council set a date for a Public Hearing;
2.That Council not accept the draft amendments to impose limits on the height, floors area and
building ratio for shipping containers;
3.Refer the issue back to staff to make changes, additions or provide further information.
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A –Draft Amendments to Chester Village Land Use By-law
Memorandum –Limit Size of Shipping Containers
APPENDIX A –PROPOSE D AMENDMENT
Municipality of the District of Chester
A By-Law Amending the Village of Chester Land Use By-law.
NOTE:The proposed amendments are shown below. Strikethrough text is to be remov ed and new text is
underlined. Recent changes or additions to the proposed amendment are shown in red text.
Be it enacted by the Council of the Municipality of the District of Chester that the Village of Chester Land
Use By-law be amended as follows:
1.Section 4.4.4A (e) and (f) are added as follows:
4.4.4A Shipping Containers
(a)Shipping containers are not permitted in any zone;
(b)Notwithstanding 4.4.4A(a), shipping containers are permitted to be used as temporary
structures for the storage and shelter of goods incidental to construction of a permitted
development in any zone, subject to section 4.5.5;
(c)Notwithstanding 4.4.4A(a), in the Protected Watershed Zone shipping containers shall only be
used for the storage or shelter of goods, subject to Section 12.2; and
(d)Notwithstanding 4.4.4A(a), within the Rural Commercial Overlay shipping containers shall be
permitted for the storage or shelter of goods, subject to Section 6.3.5 and 6.3.5A.
(e)Shipping containers permitted under 4.4.4A (b), (c), and (d) must comply with the following
limitations:
(f)Notwithstanding 4.4.4A (e),handles, latches, pins, vents and other minor protrusions shall not
be included in the maximum size calculations but shall be subject to any required yard
setbacks.
(g)Notwithstanding 4.4.4A (f)This exemption shall not apply to any features that protrude more
than 0.6m (1 foot) from the wall, floor or roof of a shipping container.
(h)Refrigerated shipping containers are prohibited and are not permitted under any
circumstances within the area regulated by this by -law. This includes manufactured shipping
containers with built-in refrigeration equipment as well as customized refrigeration units
attached to, or housed within, any shipping container.
Maximum Height Maximum Footprint Maximum Ratio (Width:Length)
2.70 m (8 feet 10 inches)31.59 sq. m. (340 sq. ft)1:5
Municipality of the District of Chester
Community Development Department
Staff Report -Council
Prepared for:Municipal Council
Submitted by:Garth Sturtevant, Development Control/Planning Assistant
Date:October 12, 2017
Subject:SPS & LUB Amendments to Prohibit Shipping Containers in Chester Village
Prepared By:Garth Sturtevant Date October 2, 2017
Reviewed By:Tara Maguire Date October 4, 2017
Authorized By:Tammy Wilson Date October 6, 2017
APPLICANT Council Initiated,following recommendation by Village Area Advisory
Committee and Citizens Planning Advisory Committee
PROPOSAL Amend Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By -
law to Prohibit Shipping Containers within Chester Village Boundary
ZONE HC (Highway Commercial)
SURROUNDING USES General Amendment to Highway Commercial Zone
NEIGHBOUR
NOTIFICATION
General Amendment to Highway Commercial Zone. No individual
notification required.
Recommendation
The topic and recent discussions around the use of shipping containers has been contentious at times.
Varying opinions have been expressed on where and how shipping containers should be permitted to be
used for non-residential storage.
Staff believe that the strong display of public support to prohibit shipping containers within the Village
Boundary is reflective of the opinion of most Village residents.Counter arguments to provide more
flexibility and economic opportunity for existing businesses have been voiced in support of shipping
containers as a storage option. While shipping containers can provide a relatively inexpensive storage
Staff Report -Council Page 2
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
option for commercial businesses,a main fixture of the existing Chester Village Secondary Planning
Strategy outlines goals intended to maintain and preserve the existing visual character of Chester Village.
Shipping containers do not easily compliment or co-exist with this goal despite standards and measures
that require screening and setbacks from residential properties.
The proximity to the Architectural Control Area, established residential neighborhoods and waterfront,in
conjunction with the public comments and opinions received,has led to the conclusion that the negative
effect on visual character and community concerns outweigh the potential benefits for non-residential
properties.
Staff Recommend Option 1:That Chester Municipal Council give First Reading to the proposed
amendments, attached as Appendix A, to amend the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy and
Land Use By-law to prohibit the use of shipping containers within the Village Boundary and further, set a
date for a Public Information Meeting and a Public He aring.
Background
Initial Amendment:
Beginning in 2016,a request was considered by Municipal Council to permit the keeping of shipping
containers for non-residential storage uses within the Highway Commercial Zone. The original proposed
amendment would have applied only to properties within the Highway Commercial (HC) Zone which are
located outside of the Chester Village Boundary.Map A-3 (Rural Commercial Overlay) was created as a
schedule to the Chester Village Land Use By-law to indicate which properties were permitted to apply to
keep a shipping container for storage use.The initial amendment was supported by both the Village Area
Advisory Committee and the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee.
Expansion of Rural Commercial Overlay:
When the amendment was considered by Council, staff were asked to expand the permitted area (Rural
Commercial Overlay)for the keeping of shipping containers to also include Highway Commercial
properties on the north side of Highway 3 within the Chester Village Boundary. The revised amendments
were approved by Council and came into effect on April 5, 2017.
Current Proposed Amendment:
At the June meeting of the Village Area Advisory Committee (VAAC), concerns were raised regarding the
revisions made to the amendment to permit shipping containers within the Village Boundary. VAAC
members passed a motion at this meeting asking Municipal Council to reconsider the recently approved
amendment and to further amend the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By -law
to prohibit shipping containers within the Village Boundary.The goal of the VAAC motion was to return to
Staff Report -Council Page 3
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
the original proposal to permit shipping containers only on Highway Commercial properties,outside the
Chester Village Boundary.
The request of the VAAC received a positive recommendation from the Citizens Planning Advisory
Committee at a meeting held on August 28, 2017.
Council,at a meeting held on September 14, 2017, directed staff to prepare amendments to fulfil the
request of the VAAC.
Discussion -Considerations
Following the adoption of the amendment which permitted shipping containers within the Village
Boundary in April 2017, a subsequent amendment was requested by a local business owner, to further
expand the area (Rural Commercial Overlay)within which the use of shipping containers is permitted. This
second request aimed to permit shipping containers on Highway Commercial zoned properties to the
south of Highway 3 within the Village Boundary. Before ultimately being rejected by Council, the
amendment was considered by the Village Area Advisory Committee and C itizens Planning Advisory
Committee and received negative recommendations from both committees. Additionally, a Public
Information Meeting and survey were conducted to solicit input and comments from the public. Email
submissions were also received as the amendment was being considered and discussed . Upon review of
the public comments and feedback, it became clear that a strong majority of community members who
participated in one or more forms of public engagement are strongly opposed to shipping containers
being used anywhere within the Village Boundary. It was this community support for prohibiting shipping
containers that VAAC members asked Council to consider when requesting the current amendment to
prohibit containers within the Village Boundary.
The draft amendments, attached as Appendix A, are intended to reverse a portion of the amendments
which took effect on April 5, 2017. The attached amendments will revise the location and properties
covered by the Rural Commercial Overlay as indicated on Map A-3: Rural Commercial Overlay of the
Chester Village Land Use By-law. The Rural Commercial Overlay will now only include properties within
the Highway Commercial Zone which are outside of the Village Boundary. Language within the Chester
Village Secondary Planning Strategy will now prohibit the use of shipping containers within the Chester
Village Boundary.
Policy Analysis
Policy Analysis
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,
This proposal aligns with this policy, the aim
is to prohibit shipping containers within the
Village Boundary and distinguish between
Staff Report -Council Page 4
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
commercial, institutional and light industrial
development -is regarded as the primary point of
reference and model for future development.
the Rural Commercial Overlay and the village
proper.
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.
Through public submissions, meetings and
opinion surveys, it is clear that the majority
of residents who participated in the public
process are strongly opposed to shipping
containers being permitted within the Village
Boundary.
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 the Municipal services.
Despite provisions to regulate and screen
shipping containers from residential
properties, the proposed amendments wo uld
further buffer Chester Village from shipping
containers and thus is less likely to encounter
land use conflicts resulting from the use of
this type of structure.
2.26 It is the intention of Council that the study
“Planning Vision and Streetscape Design for Highway 3
at Chester Village” by Ekistics Planning and Design,
dated January 2011 expresses Council’s general intent
for future development along Highway 3 within the
Chester Village Area.
This change will more accurately align the
Rural Commercial Overlay with its intended
use and development pattern and further
distinguish this area from Chester Village.
4.3.8 Council shall create the Rural Commercial
Overlay area which shall encompass all Highway
Commercial (HC) zoned land that lays outside the
Village of Chester Boundary but is within the Village
Area Planning Boundary. The Rural Commercial Overlay
area shall also include properties to the North of
Highway 3 within the Village of Chester Boundary. The
Rural Commercial Overlay area shall be shown on Map
A-3 of the Land Use By-law: Rural Commercial Overlay
Area.
As a result of the proposed amendments,
this policy will be amended so that the Rural
Commercial Overlay no longer includes those
properties within the Chester Village
Boundary. This change will more accurately
align the Rural Commercial Overlay with its
intended use and development pattern and
further distinguish this area from Chester
Village.
4.3.9 The Land Use By-law shall include provisions to
allow shipping containers, for storage by non-
residential uses, within the Rural Commercial Overlay
Area.
These amendments would only alter the area
within which shipping containers may be
used for non-residential storage.
4.3.10 Shipping containers shall not be permitted on
lands to the south of Highway 3 within the Village of
Chester boundary, which shall be shown on the Chester
This area will be expanded to prevent the use
of shipping containers for non-residential
Staff Report -Council Page 5
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
Village Planning Area Land Use By-law Map A-3: Rural
Commercial Overlay Area.
storage on any property within the Chester
Village Boundary.
4.3.11 The Land Use By-law shall contain standards
for shipping containers, including: a limit of 1 shipping
container per property; establishing setbacks; and
creating screening standards.
These amendments will not impact the
existing standards and requirements for
shipping containers as detailed in Section
4.4.4A of the Land Use By-law.
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:
i)financial ability of the Municipality to absorb
costs related to the development;
ii)adequacy of Municipal services;
iii)the adequacy of physical site conditions for
on-site services;
a)Several existing policies are required
to be amended in order to bring the
amendment into effect
b)Yes.
i)No anticipated costs.
ii)N/A
iii)N/A
Staff Report -Council Page 6
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
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;
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.
iv)Further restrictions to the areas
where shipping containers are
permitted will have no negative
effects on these criteria
v)N/A
vi)N/A
vii)N/A
viii)N/A
d)N/A
e)No other matters identified.
Staff Report -Council Page 7
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
Options
1.That Chester Municipal Council give First Reading to the proposed amendments, attached as
Appendix A, to amend the Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy and Land Use By -law to
prohibit the use of shipping containers within the Village Boundary and further, set a date for a
Public Information Meeting and a Public Hearing;
2.Direct staff to make further changes to the proposed amendments for consideration at a future
Council meeting;
3.Reject the proposed amendments and not amend the Chester Village Secondary Planning
Strategy and Land Use By-law.
Staff Report -Council Page 8
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
Appendix A –Proposed Amendment
Municipality of the District of Chester
A BY-LAW AMENDING THE MUNICIPALITY OF DISTRICT OF CHESTER SECONDARY PLANNING
STRATEGY AND LAND USE BY-LAW
NOTE: The proposed amendments are shown below. Strikethrough text is to be removed and new text is
underlined.
Be it enacted by the Council of the Municipality of the District of Chester as follows:
Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy Amendments:
The Chester Village Secondary Planning Strategy is amended as indicated below. Added text is underlined.
Deleted text is struck through.
The text of the 8th paragraph of the preamble to Section 4.3 Commercial Developments is
amended as indicated:
The Highway 3 Streetscape report recognized two different commercial clusters, a Village commercial
cluster and a rural commercial cluster.Council recognizes that within the Village commercial cluster, there
is some distinction between the north side of Highway 3 and south side of Highway 3 and feels that there
should be greater flexibility in the types o f structures permitted for those businesses. Within the Village
of Chester, the area south of Highway 3 Within the Chester Village Boundary the keeping of shipping
containers is not seen as an appropriate use location for shipping containers due to the proximity to the
Inner Architectural Control Area.
The text of the 12th paragraph of the preamble to Section 4.3 Commercial Developments is
amended as indicated:
As identified through many forms, architectural and site design controls that enco urage traditional
community design are especially important in the Village of Chester. For that reason, shipping containers
shall not be allowed on land to the south of Highway 3 within the Village of Chester boundary.
Policy 4.3.8 is amended as indicated:
4.3.8 Council shall create the Rural Commercial Overlay area which shall encompass all Highway
Commercial (HC) zoned land that lays outside the Village of Chester Boundary but is within the Village
Area Planning Boundary.The Rural Commercial Overlay area shall also include properties to the North of
Staff Report -Council Page 9
OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017
Highway 3 within the Village of Chester Boundary.The Rural Commercial Overlay area shall be shown on
Map A-3 of the Land Use By-law: Rural Commercial Overlay Area.
Policy 4.3.10 is amended as indicated:
4.3.10 Shipping containers shall not be permitted on lands to the south of Highway 3 within the Village
of Chester boundary,and within the Chester Village Planning Area, shall only be permitted within the
Rural Commercial Overlay which shall be shown on the Chester Village Planning Area Land Use By-law
Map A-3: Rural Commercial Overlay Area.
Chester Village Land Use By-law Amendments:
The Chester Village Land Use By-law is amended as indicated below. Added text is underlined. Deleted
text is struck through.
Amendment made to Map A-3: Rural Commercial Overlay.Remove the Rural Commercial Overlay
from properties from within the Chester Village Boundary. The Rural Commercial Overlay now
encompasses only those properties zoned Highway Commercial which are also lo cated outside of
the Chester Village Boundary.
Staff Report -Council Page 10OHC Cupola Height Exemptions October 6, 2017Proposed Map A-3: Rural Commercial Overlay