Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2020-05-21_Public Hearing Package - Part 2 MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER A G E N D A PUBLIC HEARING Proposed amendments to the Municipal Planning Strategy & Land Use By-law to clarify MPS Policy E-9, add Section 4.28.2 c) to the Land Use By-law and to align zoning with property boundaries to correct visual errors on the Zoning Map. Virtual Zoom Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER – PART 1 (April 30, 2020, 8:45 a.m.) a. The Agenda b. General Rules of Conduct c. Council’s decision governed by Chester Municipal Planning Strategy 2. COMMENTS BY MUNICIPAL SOLICITOR 3. OVERVIEW BY PLANNER a. Location and nature of proposal b. Municipal Planning Strategy c. Outstanding Concerns d. Recommendations 4. PRESENTATION BY DEVELOPER 5. ADJOURNMENT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD a. Hearing is adjourned until the advertised date for Part 2 6. RECONVENE HEARING - CALL TO ORDER – PART 2 (May 21, 2020 8:45 a.m.) 7. COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC READ INTO RECORD a. In Favour b. Opposed c. Any other comments 8. CLOSING REMARKS (CHAIR) 9. DECISION OF COUNCIL / DEFERMENT OF DECISION Public Hearing Part 1: April 30, 2020, 8:45 a.m. Public Hearing Part 2: May 21, 2020 8:45 a.m. Public Hearing Schedule•Part 1 – April 30th, 2020•Staff present amendments to Council•Council discussion and questions to staff•Hearing Adjourned•Minutes from Part 1 posted online•Public can write, email or call with comments•Part 2 – May 21st, 2020•Hearing reconvened•Any public comments received are read and entered into the record•Council discussion followed by decision (vote) Process•Amendments initiated by staff•No MPAC currently due to lack of members, therefore directly to Council•Council 1stReading April 9th, 2020•Advertised in Progress Bulletin:•April 15th& April 22nd•Posted at MOC Office & Post Office •Voices and Choices page launched April 9th Proposed AmendmentsMunicipal Planning Strategy Amendments•Clarify Policy E-9 – added text is underlined: Proposed AmendmentsMunicipal Land Use By-law:•Add to Part 2 Definitions as follows – added text is underlined: Proposed AmendmentsMunicipal Land Use By-law:•Remove text (struck through) from Part 3 as follows: Proposed AmendmentsMunicipal Land Use By-law:•Add Part 4.28.2 c) to Part 4 General Provisions as follows: Proposed AmendmentsMunicipal Land Use By-law:•Corrections to the Zoning Map attached to the Land Use By-law to correct visual errors. No changes to zoning or regulations, but a technical change in the mapping software used to create the Zoning Map REQUEST FOR DECISION-DIRECTION Prepared By: Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner Date March 30, 2020 Reviewed By: Chad Haughn, Director of CD&R Date April 1, 2020 Authorized By: Dan McDougall Date April 3, 2020 CURRENT SITUATION Staff have identified a policy statement within the Municipal Planning Strategy (MPS) that requires an amendment in order to clarify Council’s original intent. Additionally, minor amendments to the Land Use By-law (LUB) will ensure this policy and its corresponding regulations are clear and function as originally envisioned. Staff suggest also undertaking a minor housekeeping amendment to the Land Use By-law concurrent with the MPS changes. This amendment will result in a minor change to the Zoning Map attached as Schedule A to the Land Use By-law. The amendment is technical in nature and involves aligning the “zoning layer” with the “property layer” in computer mapping software. The result being to correct some areas near the ocean where discrepancies were visible between the “zoning layer” and the “water layer” when viewed at large scales. COVID-19 Changes to Public Participation Program As a result of the current COVID-19 pandemic, Municipal operations have moved away from in person meetings and toward online engagement and collaboration. Public meetings are currently prohibited by the Province, which has led staff to propose an alternate approach for both the Public Information Meeting and Public Hearing. The Public Information Meeting will be replaced with postings to the Voices and Choices website. Information on the proposed amendment will be posted to the site and comments and feedback will be collected. The Public Hearing will be held as a virtual meeting of Council, made available for viewing by the public. Staff will present materials to Council who will then adjourn the hearing until the agreed upon date for the second part of the hearing. In the interim, members of the public may submit comments, ask questions or request further information. On the date of the second part of the hearing, once reconvened, all public comments that had been submitted would be read out into the record. Following this, Council will hold a vote on the matter being considered. REPORT TO: Municipal Council MEETING DATE: April 9, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Garth Sturtevant SUBJECT: Municipal Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law Amendments – Clarification around expert identification of Wetlands & Map amendment to align zoning with property lines ORIGIN: Staff Originated 2 Request for Decision-Direction RECOMMENDATION 1. Give 1st reading to the proposed amendments to the Municipal Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law attached as Appendix A to this report. Alter the standard Public Participation program due to the State of Emergency enacted by the Province of Nova Scotia caused by the COVID-19 pandemic by posting materials to Voices and Choices and collecting submissions for a two-week period in place of holding a Public Information Meeting. Further set dates for a Public Hearing to be held in two parts; April 30, 2020 and May 21st, 2020. BACKGROUND The Municipal Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law contain policies and regulations requiring setback distances be maintained from Wetlands, Watercourses and Waterbodies. To offer relief from this provision, the Land Use By-law contains language which allows a professional report to be submitted to prove that a wetland, waterbody or watercourse that appears on Provincial mapping, does not exist on the ground. The reasons for providing an option for relief include; the scale of the NS topographic database, its origin of visual interpretation based on aerial photography and the dynamic nature of water features. Council’s intent was to offer this option for property owners who wished to prove that a water feature was not present or had an altered shape to what was shown on provincial mapping. DISCUSSION Water Features Setback: When discussing policy for setback distances between new development and wetlands, waterbodies and watercourses in the Municipal Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law, Council opted to refer to the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database to determine whether or not a water feature is present. Policy E-9 in the Municipal Planning Strategy states: “Developments requiring a development permit shall set all buildings back from the edge of any watercourses, water bodies and wetlands as shown in the Provincial 1:10,000 topographic database.” The regulations contained in the Land Use By-law under Section 3.5 expand slightly on this policy by indicating that exceptions from the 1:10,000 topographic database may be made subject to the submission of a professional report which differs from what is shown on the 1:10,000 database. Watercourses, water bodies or wetlands when referenced in this By-law, shall refer to those watercourses, water bodies, and wetlands identified in Nova Scotia Provincial Topographic Database mapping at a scale of 1:10,000, unless it can be proven otherwise through a professional assessment. The ability to submit a professional assessment contrary to the 1:10,000 database was intended as an option to provide relief to property owners. It was envisioned that a property owner, if relatively certain that the data shown on the 1:10,000 database was inaccurate, could submit a professional assessment proving the water feature either does not exist on the property, or that its boundaries have shifted from what is shown. This mechanism was only intended to provide relief in certain situations and was not intended to be used to prove the existence of a previously unknown water feature. Staff have been advised that MPS policy E-9 and the corresponding LUB regulations are written in a manner which is open to an alternate interpretation, that would result in regulations contrary to Council’s intent of creating a mechanism to provide relief from setbacks. This alternate interpretation allows the submission of a professional assessment proving that a previously unknown water feature which does not appear on the 1:10,000 database is present and requires setbacks outlined in the LUB. This could result in a situation where a neighbouring property owner submits a 3 Request for Decision-Direction professional assessment showing the existence of a water feature to prevent or impede development. While unlikely to cause problems if submissions could only be made by the property owner, Policy E-9 and corresponding regulations do not make any distinction as to who may submit such evidence. Further, Policy E-9 does not clarify that the intent is to provide relief and is not looking to identify water features that do not appear on the 1:10,000 topographic database. When deciding to use the NS 1:10,000 topographic database as the baseline to evaluate whether or not water features are present on a given property, Council made a conscious decision that features not appearing in the database, would not require setbacks or be provided the same protection as those features which do appear on the 1:10,000. If the existing language is left unchanged, the possibility exists that the policy and regulations could be used to block or prevent development that aligns with Council’s intention but is impacted by the wording in the LUB regulations. Staff propose minor amendments to MPS Policy E-9 and LUB regulations to clarify the intent of Council and prevent misuse of this provision. The proposed amendments, attached as Appendix A, provide clarification that this option is available solely to the property owner (developer) to submit a professional assessment. The amendments further confirm that this provision is intended to provide relief in certain circumstances from what is shown on the 1:10,000 database and is not intended to provide or require a higher-level analysis or delineation for developments requiring a development permit. LUB Zoning Map Amendment In addition to the MPS and LUB amendments proposed above, staff also recommend a minor housekeeping amendment to improve Schedule “A”, the Zoning Map which forms part of the Land Use By-law as. The amendment involves changes to the data layers used in mapping software to create the Zoning Map. Changes to this data affect how zoning information is visually displayed at large scales only. It has been identified by staff that the “zoning layer” does not currently align with the “property boundaries layer”. This has resulted in some minor visual errors at large scales. Staff identified some areas near the coast where portions of lots appeared to have no zoning while shown at a large scale, when in fact all parts of the Municipality are zoned, with zoning extending to the ordinary high-water mark. This is due to updates to the provincial water and property mapping layers that have occurred since the creation of the municipal zoning layer. The proposed amendment will correct this error by aligning the zoning layer with the property layer. This change has no impact on the applicability of zoning in the Municipality and is simply a change to improve the quality and readability of the zoning mapping data at large scales. The change will not be visible to the naked eye on LUB schedule “A”. IMPLICATIONS Policy The proposed amendments to Municipal Planning Strategy will clarify existing policy E-9 and corresponding Land Use By-law regulations. Financial/Budgetary N/A 4 Request for Decision-Direction Environmental These amendments will help clarify Council’s original intent around protection of wetlands, watercourses and waterbodies. Strategic Plan N/A Work Program Implications N/A Has Legal review been completed? ______ Yes _____No _____N/A OPTIONS 1. Give 1st reading to the proposed amendments to the Municipal Planning Strategy and Land Use By-law attached as Appendix A to this report. Alter the standard Public Participation program due to the State of Emergency enacted by the Province of Nova Scotia caused by the COVID-19 pandemic by posting materials to Voices and Choices and collecting submissions for a two-week period in place of holding a Public Information Meeting. Further set dates for a Public Hearing to be held in two parts; April 30, 2020 and May 21st, 2020. 2. Reject the proposed amendments attached as Appendix A. No further action will be taken; 3. Defer giving 1st reading to the proposed amendments pending changes or additional information being brought forward for consideration by Council. 5 Request for Decision-Direction APPENDIX A – PROPOSED MPS & LUB AMENDMENTS  Amendments to the Chester Municipal Planning Strategy Be it enacted by the Council of the Municipality of Chester as follows: 1. Add language to Policy E-9 to provide clarification on a mechanism to provide relief from required setbacks around water course, water bodies and wetlands. Chester Municipal Planning Strategy Underlined text is added. Strikethrough text is deleted. Policy E-9 Developments requiring a development permit shall set all buildings back from the edge of any watercourses, water bodies and wetlands as shown in the Provincial 1:10,000 topographic database. Exceptions to setback requirements may be sought by the property owner through the submission of a professional assessment, confirming that the water feature either does not exist or its boundaries differ from what is shown on the 1:10,000 topographic database as outlined in the Land Use By-law.  Amendments to the Chester Municipal Land Use By-law Be it enacted by the Council of the Municipality of Chester as follows: 1. Add language to the Definitions Section for a Watercourse, Water body and Wetland to clarify that for the purposes of the Land Use By-law the definitions include those features that appear on the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database; 2. Amend Section 3.5 to remove text relating to a professional assessment. 3. Add Section 4.28.2 c) to clarify that submission of a professional assessment contrary to what is shown on the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database may only be made for the purpose of providing relief from the required setbacks from watercourses, water bodies and wetlands; 4. Revisions to Zoning Map to align zoning layer with property boundaries layer to correct visual errors at large scales. Chester Municipal Land Use By-law Underlined text is added. Strikethrough text is deleted. Add to Part 2 Definitions as follows: Watercourse means the bed and shore of a river, stream, creek, brook or similar. This By-law applies to all watercourses indicated on the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database. Water body means the bed and shore of a freshwater lake, pond or other still body of water. This By-law applies to all water bodies indicated on the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database. Wetland means a land surface that is periodically or permanently saturated with water and sustains biological activities adapted to wet conditions, and may be commonly referred to as a marsh, swamp, bog, or similar or as otherwise defined in the Provincial Environment Act. This By-law applies to all wetlands indicated on the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database. 6 Request for Decision-Direction Remove text from Part 3 Administration as follows: 3.5 Watercourses, water bodies and wetlands Watercourses, water bodies or wetlands when referenced in this By-law, shall refer to those watercourses, water bodies, and wetlands identified in Nova Scotia Provincial Topographic Database mapping at a scale of 1:10,000, unless it can be proven otherwise through a professional assessment. Add 4.28.2 c) to Part 4 General Provisions as follows: 4.28.2 Watercourses, Water Bodies, and Wetlands c) If a property owner disagrees with the location of a watercourse, water body or wetland as shown on the Nova Scotia 1:10,000 topographic database, a professional assessment may be submitted by the property owner or their representative proving that the boundaries of a watercourse, water body or wetland have changed or that no water feature is present. In such circumstances, the setbacks, if applicable, being in accordance with the Professional assessment.