Planning Advisory Committee Wednesday, May 25 th, 2016 1:30 PM Council Chambers, Town Hall 359 Main Street, Wolfville, NS Agenda 1. Approval of the Agenda 2. Approval of the Minutes of April 27 th, 2016 3. Introduction to the Committee: Colin Simic, Policy Analyst 4. Information Report: Kings County Draft MPS 5. Project Charter: Residential Rental Business Bylaw 6. MPS Review a.) Verbal Update: Phase II b.) Discussion Item: Community Engagement Session Topics 7. Question Period 8. Adjournment Note: Upcoming Public Hearing Catherine Court DA Amendment Tuesday, June 21 st, 2016 beginning at 6:00PM in Council Chambers To be held prior to the regular meeting of Council. Town of Wolfville 200 Dykeland Street Wolfville NS B4P 1A2 t 902-542-3718 f 902-542-5066 Wolfville.ca
Town of Wolfville Minutes, Planning Advisory Committee Wednesday, April 27 th, 2016 ATTENDING Chairperson Deputy Mayor Wendy Donovan, Mayor Jeff Cantwell, Councillor Mercedes Brian, Robert Barach, Steve Mattson, Scott Roberts, Councillor David Mangle, CAO Erin Beaudin, Director of Community Development, Chrystal Fuller. Planner Devin Lake and Recording Secretary James Collicutt ALSO ATTENDING 1 Member of the public ABSENT WITH REGRETS Dr. Philip Edgar CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 1:30 PM. 1. AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION: IT WAS REGULARLY MOVED AND SECONDED THAT THE AGENDA BE APPROVED AS CIRCULATED. CARRIED 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: IT WAS REGULARLY MOVED AND SECONDED THAT THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF MARCH 30 th, 2016 BE APPROVED AS CIRCULATED. CARRIED 3. CATHERINE COURT DA AMENDMENT Mr. Lake began with a brief presentation on the Catherine Court DA amendment proposal, which seeks to add two buildings one 4-unit and one 8-unit to the existing development. Currently this development is zoned R-2/HD, contains 40 units and is surrounded primarily by institutional and other residential uses. Citing Part 8 of the MPS in support of higher-density developments, Mr. Lake discussed several of the key specifics of the proposed amendment and noted that a cleaner version of the site plan would be made available for use in administering the development agreement: Maximum number of units for the given area of land would be 62; this amendment will bring the total to 52. Total hard surface coverage would increase to 43%. Total number of parking stalls will increase by 20 to 67 and exceeds the required minimum of 65 for the proposed number of units. Bicycle parking would be available in front of building entrances. The 8-unit building would be identical to those already in existence with the smaller 4-unit building being a scaled-down version. The Committee asked Staff if a requirement for additional trees in the front yard could be added to the DA, which was confirmed as being possible Staff to discuss with the developer. Page 1 of 4
Town of Wolfville Minutes, Planning Advisory Committee Wednesday, April 27 th, 2016 The Committee also asked Staff for their opinion on whether or not 67 parking spots would be enough for this development, which Staff confirmed as being sufficient. MOTION: IT WAS REGULARLY MOVED AND SECONDED THAT THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FORWARD THE DRAFT AMENDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR CATHERINE COURT TO COUNCIL WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION AND DIRECT STAFF TO SPEAK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF TREES ON SITE. CARRIED ACTION: Staff will discuss adding a requirement for front yard trees to the DA, with consideration given to leaving some open spaces for recreation, and report back to Council in this regard. The Committee cited a comment from the developer captured in the PIM notes; that this was primarily a student residence, which was surprising to the Committee in that there have been numerous discussions about not formally identifying this as student housing. Looking to Staff, the Committee asked how the Town should respond to questions about the organization s responsibility to speak to this development on behalf of families. To follow-up, the Committee pointed out that the development (Noel Taiani s) on Gaspereau Avenue was required to provide outdoor recreational spaces. Staff responded by saying that the context for the development has a lot to do with which requirements are put in place and that the open spaces appear to be sufficient, in staff s opinion, for the recreational needs of residents. 4. UPDATE: KINGS 2050 / KINGS COUNTY DRAFT MPS Director Fuller began by introducing the Kings County Draft MPS document to the Committee and expressed her opinion that it is a pared-down, more permissive document as compared to the previous draft MPS. CAO s (Wolfville and Kings) have had some discussion around extending services to provide targeted services outside of Town boundaries; however, concerns relating to planning around the Town are rising and Staff are looking to the Committee for direction on how to proceed. Staff suggest that this issue may be broader than a simple planning matter and acknowledged that the Town s ability to leverage its involvement is limited. Developments on the Town s boundaries can have a significant impact on the Town and that we must be involved in these decisions. The Committee asked Staff if the province is interested in the process. Staff responded by saying that all MPS documents must be consistent with the provincial statements of interest, and therefore, the province s attention is mandated by the Minister s interpretation of document s consistency with those statements. Page 2 of 4
Town of Wolfville Minutes, Planning Advisory Committee Wednesday, April 27 th, 2016 The Committee asked if the Town s boundaries could be extended. Staff informed the Committee that such a process would go through the UARB. The Committee went on to express its concern that perhaps the County is extending their services to the Town boundaries because Wolfville has been unwilling to do so in the past and that those areas represent significant economic value that the County wants to utilize. ACTION: Staff to return to PAC with more information and the implications of different approaches to handling this situation. 5. MPS REVIEW PHASE 2 CONSULTATION STRATEGY Director Fuller began the presentation of the Phase 2 consultation plan by explaining the primary objectives for this phase of the review: Housing Symposium, funds applied for from the Age-Friendly Communities Grant. The symposium would call upon experts to address the unresolved issue from Phase 1 around housing and is designed to gain consensus and direction on these issues. Tentatively scheduled for October. Finalize Draft Documents for PAC and Council review. Consult with the identified communities of interest such as Landlords, R1/R1A property owners, developers, young families, ect. Prepare the draft residential business licensing bylaw. The specifics of the symposium will come to light once the grant has been received. The objective is to get detailed feedback on the issues around housing and solve the related problems - Committee to receive more information on this as details become available. Staff presented the draft consultation schedule to the Committee for Council s review and approval in May which proposes to address the Subdivision Bylaw as a separate item after the MPS, LUB and Design Guidelines. Staff reviewed the individual items of the consultation schedule with PAC and elaborated on the Communities of Interest, a list of which Staff reviewed with the Committee and made an addition to. Consultation schedule to conclude in approximately July 2017 before taking a pause and addressing the SBL. Staff expressed the opinion that the schedule is very ambitious and that aside from the consultation there are numerous planning applications/issues also being addressed. The Committee noted the quality of the work should not suffer as a result of an ambitious schedule and that extending the schedule into late 2017 or early 2018 would not be unreasonable. Staff asked Committee members to send concerns, questions, comments regarding the draft documents to Director Fuller via email, Page 3 of 4
Town of Wolfville Minutes, Planning Advisory Committee Wednesday, April 27 th, 2016 ACTION: Staff to amend list of identified communities of interest to identify older generations as one such community. ACTION: Staff to provide a clean, non-tracked changes copy of the draft documents to PAC and Council within two weeks, with a covering memo requesting a higher-level review from Committee Members. MOTION: IT WAS REGULARLY MOVED AND SECONDED THAT THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS TO COUNCIL THAT THE PROJECT CHARTER FOR PHASE 2 OF THE MPS BE ADOPTED AS A GUIDELINE FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE PROCESS. CARRIED 6. 2016 LPPANS CONFERENCE PAC budget allows for two members of PAC to attend - Robert Barach attending. ACTION: Staff to follow-up with Dr. Edgar and the other Committee Members to gauge their interest in attending the conference with deadlines for expressions of interest. 7. QUESTION PERIOD Comment from Sue MacArthur, praising the Committee for their open-mindedness and looks forward to working with them in the future. 8. ADJOURNMENT OF PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MOTION: IT WAS REGULARLY MOVED AND SECONDED THAT THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 3:12 PM. CARRIED Approved at the Planning Advisory Committee Meeting Day of Week, Month DD, YYYY (date of meeting) As recorded by James Collicutt, AA Community Development Page 4 of 4
INFORMATION REPORT Title: Regional Planning Issues Date: 2016-05-24 Department: Community Development 1) REFERENCES AND ATTACHMENTS Town of Wolfville Draft MPS Draft Municipality of the County of Kings MPS 2) PURPOSE OF REPORT At the last PAC meeting, staff committed to exploring options to promote regional coordination regarding land use issues and to explore the potential impacts of the Kings County MPS on the Town of Wolfville. 3) DISCUSSION As part of the Town of Wolfville s MPS review, there are several communities of interest identified with which we need to consult. One of them is our neighbouring municipal unit (MU) the Municipality of the County of Kings (MOK). As we share a significant boundary with MOK, it is important to understand the potential impacts of its planning policies and seek its input into the Town s plan review. MOK has issued its draft MPS for comment. At the last PAC meeting staff committed to exploring options for the Town to better understand the content and impact of the draft MOK policy directions on The Town. Since the last meeting, staff have taken the following actions: Spoken with Municipal Affairs regarding interpretations of the Statements of Provincial Interest (SPIs). Staff will continue to work to understand if and how the province will apply the SPIs to the broader region. The CAO has invited staff representatives (CAOs, Planners and Engineers) from the 3 other municipal units in Kings County to meet to discuss and provide information on all the plan reviews underway. Kentville, the Municipality of Kings and Wolfville are all reviewing their MPSs. The agenda will also include issues such as planning on our borders and wellfield protection.. 4) FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS None 5) REFERENCES TO COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN AND TOWN REPORTS Understanding the planning regulations in the adjacent municipal unit is important for the Town s planning review to ensure a solid regional approach to planning as outlined in the Kings 2050 Phase 2 report. 6) COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS None Information Report, Page 1 of 2
INFORMATION REPORT Title: Regional Planning Issues Date: 2016-05-24 Department: Community Development 7) FUTURE PAC/COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT Staff will report back on if a meeting occurs and any results from it. Information Report, Page 2 of 2
PROJECT CHARTER: Residential Rental Business Bylaw (Insert date of first Council meeting) 1. GOAL & DESCRIPTION GOAL To develop a Residential Rental Business Bylaw DESCRIPTION Phase 1 of the Municipal Planning Strategy identified significant community concern regarding rental housing and how it is planned for and regulated. The consultants for Phase 1 recommended the Town develop and implement a Residential Rental Business Bylaw as part of Phase 2 of the MPS review as planning regulations are often not the most effective tool to deal with some of the issues relating to rental housing. The MPS will address the creation of new multi-unit rental housing units and the conversion of existing housing for rental accommodation, and the RRBB will regulate the operation and management of residential rental businesses. Rental housing is often cited as a type of affordable housing, particularly aimed at low income individuals, seniors and students, though not exclusively for these segments of our community. In Wolfville, it is believed that students are the main group that takes advantage of multi-tenant rental housing. However, seniors are also another group that may take advantage of this kind of tenure. A RRBB would regulate multi-tenant rental situations to ensure the safety of shared rental accommodation and property maintenance standards. One of the main issues regarding housing relates to the lifestyle differences between the people living in multi tenant rental units and owner occupied dwellings. Although this will not be directly addressed in the bylaw, the hope is that by having quality and safe rental housing stock, that landlords and occupants will better integrate into the surround neighbourhood and the owner occupied properties feel a sense of ease and acceptance when these types of tenured build are located nearby. 2. ALIGNMENT TO COUNCIL S STRATEGIC PLAN & OTHER TOWN PLANS COUNCIL S STRATEGIC PLAN Council s Strategic Plan establishes five (5) strategic goals. The Residential Rental Business Bylaw will meet the strategic goals of Council by: 2. A Diverse, Prosperous, and Sustainable Local Economy Create housing options and opportunity. Project Charter Residential Rental Business Bylaw Page 1 of 3
PROJECT CHARTER: Residential Rental Business Bylaw (Insert date of first Council meeting) 3. A Growing Population Encompassing all Ages and Stages who Live in Safe, Attractive, Cohesive, Neighbourhoods Rental Housing is often an affordable housing choice Housing options need to be available for people at different stages of life. Create less conflict within the community Ensuring that multi- tenant residential buildings are safe and meet all necessary Fire Regulations. OTHER TOWN PLANS What We Have Heard Report 2016 Summary Report on Residential Rental Businesses Fotenn Consulting 2016 3. GUIDING PRINCIPLES: The guiding principles speak to how this project will proceed and our approach. Council, staff and others involved in this project will base actions on these principles: Affordable housing must be available in Wolfville. Students are a welcome addition to our community and must be accommodated within community. We will stive to hear, respect and learn from all points of view. Empircal data and evidence based decision making will guide our thinking. We will name the problem in order to develop solutions that make our community more inclusive, safer and welcoming. 4. SCOPE OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Residential Rental Business Bylaw are: 1. To create a bylaw that regulates residential rental businesses(rrbs), including a definition of RRB s 2. To adopt this bylaw at the same time or before the draft MPS is presented to Council. 3. To educate the public on multi-tenant rental housing options and impacts. DELIVERABLES The deliverables for the project are: 1. Draft Residential Rental Business Bylaw 2. Communiation materials and a Standard Operting Procedures to guide administration. Project Charter Residential Rental Business Bylaw Page 2 of 3
PROJECT CHARTER: Residential Rental Business Bylaw (Insert date of first Council meeting) 5. TIMELINES AND MILESTONES 2016/17 Q1 Project Initiation 2016/17 Q2-Q3 Research and bylaw development 2016/17 Q3 Housing Symposium 2016/17 Q4 - Consultation 2017/18 Q1 - Begin Formal approval process 6. ASSUMPTIONS, CONSTRAINTS & RISKS ASSUMPTIONS The bylaw will be developed concurrently with the MPS Rental Housing is a valuable housing form in Wolfville The Town will receive funding through the Age Friendly Communities Grant and from the Department of Municipal Affairs which will assist in the development of the bylaw The bylaw, if adopted, will be within the capacity of the existing staff complement to administer. CONSTRAINTS Staff capacity RISKS The bylaw will be poorly received by landlords and residents Without this bylaw, the some of the housing policies contained within the draft MPS will need to changed. 7. BUDGET, RESOURCES & PROCUREMENT BUDGET Grant Age Friendly Community Grants (will assist with funding for the symposium) Grant from Department of Municipal Affairs (will assist with research and provide support to project) RESOURCES Project Lead Director of Community Development Others: Planner Building Inspector Development Officer Compliance Officer Policy Analyst Project Charter Residential Rental Business Bylaw Page 3 of 3
PROJECT CHARTER: Residential Rental Business Bylaw (Insert date of first Council meeting) PROCUREMENT An RFP will be issued according to our procurement policies. 8. ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES Staff will draft the bylaw. PAC will provide input and guidance on planning related issues. Town and Gown will provide input and guidance on university/student related issues. COTW/Council will guide and ultimately approve/not approve the bylaw. 9. COMMUNICATION & ENGAGEMENT Engagement will consist, at a minimum of: Housing Forum Landlord meetings An open house with the public to review the draft bylaw Communities of interest meetings: seniors, landlords,students,core area residents,acadia Public Hearing 10. APPROVAL Approved by Council on (month, day, year). (insert motion with resolution number) Project Charter Residential Rental Business Bylaw Page 4 of 3
PROJECT CHARTER: Residential Rental Business Bylaw (Insert date of first Council meeting) Project Charter Residential Rental Business Bylaw Page 5 of 3
MPS Discussions Items 1. HOUSING ISSUES: a. What is affordable housing and what is the Town s responsibility and ability to influence where and how a developer creates affordable housing? b. What effect would reduced amenity requirements in exchange for more affordable housing have on future neighbourhoods? What would those incentives be? c. How do we zone for infill and how would a mix of housing types be preserved in an area/neighbourhood? d. Definition, explanation of cluster housing. 2. RE ZONING OF LARGE SECTIONS OF THE R-1A ZONE: a. What protections will be in place to preserve the integrity of heritage homes in current R1-A zones e.g., no external staircases allowed, parking and landscape strictly controlled? 3. WIND TOWERS ON THE DYKELANDS 4. PROTECTION OF VIEW PLANES a. in residential areas b. in commercial area on Main Street (i.e., views to the waterfront) 5. DISTRIBUTION OF PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND TRAIL LINKS a. Accessible trails what should this include, where and priority b. Review of park dedication and cash-in-lieu policy c. On street and sidewalk plans for cycling and walking 6. EXTENSION OF WATER AND SEWER BEYOND TOWN BOUNDARIES 7. SIGNAGE FOR DESIGNATED NEIGHBOURHOODS 8. HOME BUSINESSES a. based on outline presented for all zones, which appears very non-intrusive why not Zone R1 and what about current home based businesses known to be in the R1 zone? 359 Main Street Wolfville, NS B4P 1A1 t 902.542.5767 f 902.542.4789 Wolfville.ca Memorandum, Wolfville Page 1 of 1