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.