Common use of Discussion Clause in Contracts

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined that the proposed development is consistent with the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted for detailed discussion: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhood, the proposed development will be generally consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreement.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant the applicable policies of the MPS and has determined are of the opinion that the proposed development proposal is consistent with the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS all applicable policies. The following issues are highlighted matters have been identified for more detailed discussion: Residential uses . Staff are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with opinion that the neighbourhood, the scale of development proposed development will be generally is consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions Village designation given that the buildings on the same side of the highway are used for commercial uses and are relatively similar in style and contain a mix of front façades. The proposed addition to the Home Hardware store will not substantially change the look of the existing buildings provided that there is no increase in store particularly as the height or volume front façade of the store (Schedule B of Attachment A) will be consistent with the current design and colour of the building. Under Also, the present addition will be used as a foyer for the existing building, therefore, staff have no concerns with the adequacy of the on-site services. The proposed parking area includes 9 vehicular parking spaces including one barrier free space. The existing parking conditions are similar to that being proposed with the driveway access to the site remaining open to Highway #7 along its full frontage. This parking and access arrangement has functioned well over the years and is intended to remain unchanged. The parking standards of the LUB would require a minimum of 35 parking spaces for the building if the project was an as-of-right application. However, staff feels that this parking requirement is unnecessary in this case given that this business has operated at this location for many years without parking or traffic conflict. It is not anticipated that the new 490 square foot store front addition will generate vehicular traffic flows to this destination beyond pre-existing levels. It should also be noted that the site of the future Home Hardware property at 00000 Xxxxxxx #0 (Map 2) was one of the sites utilized for occasional parking overflow; however, this site cannot be used for parking overflow under the development agreement approved by Council on September 28, 2011. There are other parking areas within very close proximity to the site. This includes a vacant lot across the street that is owned by the Developer and a community parking area to the east beside the existing Home Hardware Store and behind the RBC building. These areas are currently utilized by the community for parking purposes. Nova Scotia Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal (NSTIR) have issued a “Work Within Highway Right-of-Way” permit that indicates no concerns with the proposed parking alignment or access to the site (Map 3). In terms of zoning, the MU zone permits a full range of commercial uses including restaurants, offices, grocery stores, service stations, auto repair shops, manufacturing, and assembly uses as- of-right. To minimize impacts on parking and access due to a change in use, the proposed agreement limits the uses on the properties to the existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential unitshardware retail store, provided that there is no furniture retail store and storage/warehousing operations. Should the applicant require a minor increase in the height or volume existing building footprints on the site, which may impact parking and other issues, Council can consider a non-substantive amendment subject to Policies V-6 and IM-10 of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Eastern Shore East Municipal Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementStrategy.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development is consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B C provides an evaluation of the proposed LUB amendment and development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted for detailed discussion: Residential Considering the mixed nature of land uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial useslocated on and around the subject site, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased trafficwhich includes residential, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhoodinstitutional type uses, the proposed development will be generally consistent with presents an appropriate and beneficial opportunity for comprehensive site planning. As Schedule Q is currently applied to a large area of Peninsula North that is designated Major Commercial, the intent proposed development represents a small expansion of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoningSchedule (Map 3). The proposal will benefit from the controls and flexibility that the development agreement process provides, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given in turn reducing the size of potential for land use and design conflicts. Attachment B contains the proposed development agreement for the subject site and the existing buildingconditions under which the development may occur. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transitIn summary, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreementagreement includes conditions that address: • permitted residential uses (maximum of 35 units, with a minimum of 13 two-bedroom units and 2 two-bedroom+den units); • ground floor minor commercial uses; • building mass, architectural, signage, and lighting; • parking (bicycle and vehicular), circulation and site access; • detailed landscaping for terrace/rooftop landscaped areas; • building services, maintenance and waste facilities; and • options for limited non-substantive amendments by resolution of Council, including: signage requirements and changes to timeframes for development. The portion of attached development agreement will permit a mixed use development that is compatible and appropriate with the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open spaceneighbourhood. The proposal was reviewed Of the matters addressed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementagreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment C, the following have been identified for more detailed discussion. One of the key considerations when reviewing an application within Schedule Q is the compatibility of the proposed land use with the existing neighbourhood and the mitigation of potential impacts that could potentially arise. These aspects were considered as follows: • The site is located in close proximity to properties that recently received Council’s approval for development agreements under Schedule Q (Map 3). Approved proposals include 7 to 8-storey residential and mixed use buildings which consist of townhouse units, commercial ground floors and/or office spaces with residential units on upper floors; • Given the commercial zoning that is applied in the area, substantial building heights and massing are achievable on this site and throughout the area as-of-right and without the requirement for community consultation, Council, or design controls; • The development agreement reduces allowable massing and height below what is permitted as- of-right in the C-2 Zone, and mitigates the effects of the proposal in this mixed use area; and • Due to the location of the subject site on a corner lot, within a transitioning neighbourhood and in relation to local streets with moderate traffic volumes, the proposed building provides an appropriate response to surrounding land uses.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B C provides an evaluation of the proposed LUB amendment and development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted for detailed discussion: Residential Considering the mixed nature of land uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial useslocated on and around the subject site, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased trafficwhich includes residential, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhoodinstitutional uses, the proposed development presents an appropriate and beneficial opportunity for comprehensive site planning. As Schedule Q is currently applied to a large area of Peninsula North that is designated Major Commercial, the proposed development represents a small expansion of the area under the Schedule (Map 3). Once the site is included within Schedule Q, Community Council will be generally consistent able to exercise control over the design of any project containing more than four residential units, reducing the potential for land use and design conflicts that can arise with as of right development in the intent C-2 zone. Attachment B contains the proposed development agreement for the subject site and the conditions under which the development may occur. In summary, the proposed development agreement includes conditions that address:  permitted residential uses (maximum of 66 units, with a minimum of 3 three-bedroom units, 19 two-bedroom units, and the Peninsula North Secondary Planremainder being one-bedroom and studio units);  ground floor minor commercial uses with a floor area up to 4000 square feet;  building massing, which allows internal conversions architectural design, and lighting;  parking (bicycle and vehicular), circulation and site access;  landscaped areas and amenity space;  building services, maintenance and waste facilities; and  options for limited non-substantive amendments by resolution of existing buildings Council, including: the ability to increase the unit count by no more than 6 units provided that there is no increase in the height or volume mass of the building, changes to hours of operation and times for service deliveries and waste collection, and changes to timeframes for development. Under The attached development agreement will permit a mixed use development that, on balance, is compatible and appropriate with the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase neighbourhood and consistent with other approved Schedule Q projects in the height or volume of area. Of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served matters addressed by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreementagreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment C, the following have been identified for more detailed discussion. The portion One of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by key considerations when reviewing an application within Schedule Q is the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within compatibility of the proposed land use with the existing neighbourhood, and the mitigation of potential impacts that could potentially arise. These aspects were considered as follows:  The site is located in close proximity to other properties which have received Council approval for development agreementagreements under Schedule Q (Map 3). Approved proposals include 5 to 8-storey residential and mixed use buildings which contain a mix of townhouse units, commercial ground floors and/or office spaces with residential units on upper floors;  Given the commercial zoning that is applied in the area, substantial building heights and massing are achievable on this site and throughout the area as-of-right and without the requirement for community consultation, no design controls, and no review by Council;  The development agreement reduces allowable massing and height below what is permitted as- of-right in the C-2 Zone for commercial uses, and mitigates the effects of the proposal in this mixed use area; and  Due to the location of the subject site on a corner lot, within a transitioning neighbourhood, and in relation to local streets with moderate traffic volumes, the proposed building provides an appropriate response to surrounding land uses.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative In order to all relevant policies and has determined that allow the proposed addition to proceed, a portion of the abandoned storm sewer must be removed. Staff will support this development is consistent with if the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed applicant takes responsibility for removal of the sewer under the proposed plans addition and indicated that at cap and fill the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted for detailed discussion: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhood, the proposed development will be generally consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted remaining sewer pipe section under the existing zoninghouse with concrete. The applicant has requested that the City pay for the entire cost for removal of the affected portion of sewer pipe. The applicant was aware of the easement at the time of purchase of the subject property, however, staff advise is of the opinion that five residential units a contribution by the City for removal is warranted as the unused sewer pipe was part of the City’s infrastructure and was not fully decommissioned when the diversion sewer was constructed. Staff are appropriate given limited in understanding the size rationale taken by municipal staff at that time; however a large sewer such as this should have been filled at the time of decommissioning. In discussion with staff who have been employed with the City for some time, there may be two or three homes in older areas of the City that have a similar situation as this one. However, those locations may be a non-issue as there may be no pending conflict between house and the abandoned sewers. Staff contacted neighbouring municipalities and they do not have a standard for this type of situation. The applicant has submitted two quotes for the removal of the sewer and staff also obtained two quotes. The bid from Xxxxxxx Construction has been selected as this was the lowest quote. This is acceptable to staff and it is further recommended that the City pay 75% towards the cost for removing the storm sewer under the proposed addition. The applicant will be responsible for the remaining amount. As part of the site and plan approval process, the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in City will require the Peninsula North area and owner to enter into a development agreement which sets out specific conditions to ensure the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required removal of approximately 5.0 meters of pipe under the proposed addition and to cap the ends of the pipe to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering. The easement will remain in place for the storm sewer in order to avoid further encroachment of a similar nature on the remainder of the unused sewer. This situation is a fairly unique situation. From a policy perspective Report No. E67/08 (Residential Drainage Assistance Program) addressed a variety of potential flooding/drainage problems on private properties. Scenario 6 of Appendix C of that report captures some similar aspects of this situation. (Attached her as “Appendix B”) Notwithstanding the respective responsibilities presented in Scenario 6, staff feel a homeowner’s contribution for this situation is appropriate for two reasons. Firstly, the City already took steps at considerable expense in the 1960’s to divert the sewer and it’s outlet from this lot and secondly the easement for this sewer has in fact be in place since 1957. As part of the cost-sharing provisions within the development agreement. The portion , the owner will have to indemnify and save harmless the City from any future damages, claims or actions due to the construction of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by addition and/or removal of the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementunused storm sewer pipe.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B C provides an evaluation of the proposed LUB amendment and development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted for detailed discussion: Residential Considering the mixed nature of land uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial useslocated on and around the subject site, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased trafficwhich includes residential, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhoodinstitutional uses, the proposed development presents an appropriate and beneficial opportunity for comprehensive site planning. As Schedule Q is currently applied to a large area of Peninsula North that is designated Major Commercial, the proposed development represents a small expansion of the area under the Schedule (Map 3). Once the site is included within Schedule Q, Community Council will be generally consistent able to exercise control over the design of any project containing more than four residential units, reducing the potential for land use and design conflicts that can arise with as of right development in the intent C-2 zone. Attachment B contains the proposed development agreement for the subject site and the conditions under which the development may occur. In summary, the proposed development agreement includes conditions that address: • permitted residential uses (maximum of 66 units, with a minimum of 3 three-bedroom units, 19 two-bedroom units, and the Peninsula North Secondary Planremainder being one-bedroom and studio units); • ground floor minor commercial uses with a floor area up to 4000 square feet; • building massing, which allows internal conversions architectural design, and lighting; • parking (bicycle and vehicular), circulation and site access; • landscaped areas and amenity space; • building services, maintenance and waste facilities; and • options for limited non-substantive amendments by resolution of existing buildings Council, including: the ability to increase the unit count by no more than 6 units provided that there is no increase in the height or volume mass of the building, changes to hours of operation and times for service deliveries and waste collection, and changes to timeframes for development. Under The attached development agreement will permit a mixed use development that, on balance, is compatible and appropriate with the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase neighbourhood and consistent with other approved Schedule Q projects in the height or volume of area. Of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served matters addressed by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreementagreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment C, the following have been identified for more detailed discussion. The portion One of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by key considerations when reviewing an application within Schedule Q is the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within compatibility of the proposed land use with the existing neighbourhood, and the mitigation of potential impacts that could potentially arise. These aspects were considered as follows: • The site is located in close proximity to other properties which have received Council approval for development agreementagreements under Schedule Q (Map 3). Approved proposals include 5 to 8-storey residential and mixed use buildings which contain a mix of townhouse units, commercial ground floors and/or office spaces with residential units on upper floors; • Given the commercial zoning that is applied in the area, substantial building heights and massing are achievable on this site and throughout the area as-of-right and without the requirement for community consultation, no design controls, and no review by Council; • The development agreement reduces allowable massing and height below what is permitted as- of-right in the C-2 Zone for commercial uses, and mitigates the effects of the proposal in this mixed use area; and • Due to the location of the subject site on a corner lot, within a transitioning neighbourhood, and in relation to local streets with moderate traffic volumes, the proposed building provides an appropriate response to surrounding land uses.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed The project consists of replacing an existing single span 22’ steel xxxxxxxx bridge with a 2 barrel 13’ x 6’ cast-in- place RCBC. The proposed box culvert will be in the proposal relative to all relevant policies same location as the existing bridge location. The existing surfacing on the road is gravel and has determined that will be resurfaced with gravel upon completion. Minimal grading at the proposed development box culvert location is consistent with anticipated, therefore, the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14material shall be compacted using the Ordinary Compaction Method. HRM Building Officials have reviewed A subsurface investigation was conducted for the proposed plans RCBC. The subsurface investigation consisted of placing a boring near both the proposed inlet and indicated that outlet ends of the structure and logging the material to 3 feet below the flow line. Samples were collected from below the flow line for soils classification. A dynamic cone penetrometer was used at both the inlet and outlet ends to identify the change in relative density of the subsurface material below flow line. Subsurface soils at the building permit stage, proposed site consist of brown silt-clay to 3’ below the building and existing flow line. The 2’ undercut depth is recommended to remove the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of low strength soils with high shrink-swell potential from below the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policiesbox culvert. The following issues are highlighted for detailed discussionparagraphs shall be placed in the plans: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency Compaction of visits earth embankment and box culvert backfill material shall be governed by the Ordinary Compaction Method. Any questions about the recommendations or the subsurface conditions can be directed to the propertyCONSULTANT CONTACT NAME AND PHONE NUMBER. Bridge Improvement Grant Initial NBI Inspection Requirement The County / City will require the construction engineering firm or their subconsultant, either of which must be on the SDDOT’s current consultant retainer for local bridge inspection, to perform an initial NBI inspection of the structure, ensuring a qualified Team Leader is on site for the inspection. Within 90 days of the structure being opened to traffic, the County / City will submit the completed report, BrM coding sheets, plans, applicable load ratings, and may have impacts from increased trafficapproved shop plans for girders, commercial signagereinforced concrete box culverts, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with other applicable items, to the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhood, the proposed development will be generally consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementSDDOT’s LGA Bridge Inspection Engineer.

Discussion. Staff has have reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development it is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B C provides an evaluation of the proposed rezoning and development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. Attachment A contains the proposed amendment to the Land Use By-law for Eastern Passage/ Cow Bay, which includes an amendment to Schedule A (zoning map) to rezone the subject site to CDD (Comprehensive Development District). The proposed rezoning of the site meets the criteria found in Policy UR-13 of the MPS (Attachment C). Specifically, the proposed development: • is capable of utilizing existing services; • includes a minimum land area of 5 acres; • contains a mix of housing types found in the Eastern Passage area, which does not detract from the community’s residential character; and • provides adequate and useable lands for community facilities and private parks on-site, and benefits from public open space immediately adjacent the site. Attachment B contains the proposed development agreement for the subject site and the conditions under which the development may occur. The proposed development agreement addresses the following issues matters: • the scale of the proposed multi-unit buildings, which are highlighted limited to 4 storeys in height and a maximum of 12 residential units per building; • detailed provisions regarding the location and size of the buildings and lots on the site, including but not limited to minimum lot area, frontage, maximum lot coverage, minimum setbacks from the property lines; • the exterior design of the multi-unit buildings and stacked townhouse dwellings, which will be subject to schedules in the agreement; • allowances for phasing and subdivision of the land where frontage is provided by the new public street, including exemptions for two townhouse-style dwellings, which will not have frontage on the street; • the agreement includes a conceptual site plan to address the location of useable landscaped areas, driveway and vehicular parking areas, pedestrian walkways, in addition to proposed building locations; • limits on the size and use of commercial spaces in the multi-unit buildings; • requirements for minimum parking space numbers, sizes, location and access; • landscaping requirements for the private landscaped areas and screening along the southeast property line to help reduce impacts on abutting residential development; and • minor changes, if necessary, to various aspects of the development, including potentially replacing the 6-unit stacked townhouses with 12-unit multiple-unit dwellings, provided the building footprint and height is not increased in size, through the non-substantive amendment process. Case 23724: Rezoning/ Development Agreement 0000 Xxxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Community Council Report - 6 - July 6, 2023 The attached development agreement will permit the proposed development, subject to the controls identified above. Of the matters addressed by the proposed development agreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment B, the following have been identified for detailed discussion: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbage. The proposed fifth unit is in keeping with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhood, the proposed development will be generally consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreement.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant the applicable policies and has determined that of the proposed development Dartmouth MPS. Staff is of the opinion the proposal is consistent with the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standardsall applicable policies. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed amendments to the existing development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS these applicable policies. The following issues are being highlighted for more detailed discussion: Residential . The existing development agreement permits two, 7-storey multiple unit dwellings with approximately 30,000 square feet of commercial space on the first floor which, in the opinion of staff, is compatible with the existing neighbourhood from the perspective of exterior design, height, bulk and scale. This opinion is described in detail in the staff report for Planning Application 00728 located at xxx.xxxxxxx.xx/xxxxxxxx/xxxx/Xxxxxxxx00000XXXX.xxxx. The existing agreement also enables the consideration of an 8th storey as a non-substantive amendment to the agreement, provided the footprint is reduced and the number of units and parking is not increased. The proposal is the consideration of an additional residential storey with the flexibility in the agreement to allow either residential or commercial uses are typically considered less intensive than on the ground floor. This would result in an additional 46 units being added to the 168 units approved in the original development agreement The site’s location makes it desirable for residential development in terms of reuse of a xxxxxxxxxx site, and its proximity to recreational amenities and retail. It is staff’s opinion this proposal promotes urban regeneration in that, if approved, it would allow redevelopment of the site to an appropriate level of density that can be sustained by the established local levels of public transport infrastructure, recreation opportunities and commercial uses. Further, as commercial uses generate the height of the building is limited to 9- storeys and the footprint is guided by the lot coverage. Lot coverage is limited to 26% of the 3.69 acre site (1.48 ha). The building bulk is mitigated by building articulation, balconies, and an inset entrance area which serves to break the scale of the elevations in combination with the proposed varying grey scale colour tile system. The building is also in very close proximately to existing 14 and 18 storey buildings and the recently approved 27 storey building (Can-Euro site). Given the development pattern in the immediate area, the consideration of an additional storey (a higher frequency 9-storey building) is minor in scale and consistent with the policy intent for the area. Policy H-18 and its introductory preamble do not speak to a specific numerical or quantitative density for redevelopment of visits the lands other than to give regard to the property, and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbageR-3 zoning (Attachment B). The preamble provides that a community process carried out in 2000/2001supports redevelopment for multiple unit residential and/or office uses but that major retail was not desired. The proposed fifth unit additional storey and units bring the density to 57.9 units per acre compared to the 45.5 units per acre provided by the existing agreement. The proposed density is 34% greater than the R-3 zone threshold yet less than the adjacent developments along Horizon Court (up to 62 units per acre). It is staff’s opinion the increased density is in keeping with the surrounding mix of medium to high density residential. The existing development agreement requires ground floor commercial uses. Policy H-18 permits the consideration of residential character and/or commercial development but not large scale retail. The proposed amendment is to enable the ground floor to be developed as totally commercial along a continuum to totally residential as market forces will determine the actual amount of commercial or residential that is viable. Staff believe this flexibility is within the spirit of the neighbourhoodpolicy and is compatible with surrounding land uses. To ensure compatibility with The proposed additional storeys do not change the neighbourhood, footprint or location of the approved building and therefore should have negligible impact on space between buildings as a result of the unchanged separation distance. Policies IP-5 and IP-1(c) emphasize the importance of ensuring that multi-unit residential buildings are designed so as to reduce potential impacts on adjacent properties and land uses. It is staff’s opinion the proposed development additional storeys will be generally consistent with not impact adjacent properties and land uses as the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume footprint and location of the building are not changed from the approved building. The site has been identified as being within a highly accessible location both in terms of public transit and at least one other sustainable means of transportation, therefore, the units consideration of a reduction in the converted building contains two or more bedroomsrequired number of parking spaces is warranted. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under Specifically, the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size development agreement requires a minimum of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three 260 parking spaces are required under for the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open 168 dwelling units and ground floor commercial space. The proposal was reviewed by proposed development agreement requires a minimum of 273 parking spaces to accommodate the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) 192 dwelling units and the residential and/or commercial space on September 22, 2014the ground floor. A report The provision of 273 parking spaces represents a slight reduction from the PAC will requirements that would be submitted assigned under the Dartmouth Land Use By-law. Given the transportation alternatives available, such as the site's proximity to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations public transit and opportunities for inclusion within active transportation, it is staff’s opinion that the proposed total amount of parking to be provided for the development agreementis appropriate.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development it is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. Case 23293: Development Agreement Beaver Bank Road, Beaver Bank Community Council Report - 4 - December 12, 2022 Attachment A contains the proposed development agreement for the subject site which sets out the conditions under which the development may occur. The proposed development agreement addresses the following issues are highlighted matters: • Site development details; • Architectural requirements; • Parking provisions for motor vehicles; • Landscaping provisions, including requirement for landscape plan to be prepared; • Requirements relative to maintenance; and • Matters able to be considered in future as non-substantive change to the agreement, such as the landscaping requirements; and extensions to the commencement and completion times. The attached development agreement will permit a four storey 46-unit apartment building, subject to the conditions identified above. Of the matters addressed by the proposed development agreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment B, the following have been identified for detailed discussion: Residential . Policies UR-8 and IM-13 both direct Council to ensure controls are placed on the proposed development to reduce conflict with any adjacent or nearby land uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial usesin regards to height, as commercial uses generate bulk and lot coverage of the proposed building. To reduce the visual perception of bulk, the roof line introduces a higher frequency stepping form that varies in height. The lower portions of visits to the property, stepped roof have corresponding recessed sidewalls that articulate the building and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbagebreak up the overall mass. The proposed fifth unit is building uses traditional character forms of xxxxx-ended roofs which are predominant in keeping with the residential character of area; the neighbourhoodpitched roof and the stepped height respect local forms and styles. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhood, the The proposed development will be generally consistent with set within an area containing lot sizes and layouts of inconsistent character. This is likely due to the intent acute intersection of Beaver Bank Road and Windgate Road and a remnant of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided Old Beaver Bank Road (that there is no increase in edges the height or volume interior of the building. Under subject site) in addition to the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume historic location of the building railway. The proposed lot coverage of 25% is less than other residential lot coverage requirements under the LUB. Typical requirements are set at 35% for single detached, semi-detached and at least one townhouses and 50% for multiple unit buildings, but because of the units in varied site characteristics surrounding the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would subject site, the difference will likely be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementunnoticeable.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development it is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed amending development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. Attachment A contains the proposed amendments to the existing development agreement for the subject site and the conditions under which the development may occur. The proposed amended development agreement addresses the following issues are highlighted matters: • The maximum number of dwelling units; • The location of driveways, location of surface parking areas and number of parking spaces; • The location of landscaping and pedestrian features; • Schedule changes to the architectural detail of the building to update the window placement to correspond with internal changes to the layout; and • Amendments to commencement and completion of development dates. The attached amending development agreement will permit a multi-unit building, subject to the controls identified above. Of the matters addressed by the proposed amending development agreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment B, the following have been identified for detailed discussion. Case 22708: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial usesAmending Development Agreement Fourth St, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to Bedford Community Council Report - 4 - December 14, 2020 The MPS policy requires that any multi-unit building be developed in accordance with the property, and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbageRMU Zone. The proposed fifth RMU Zone has density requirements that require 1,500 sq. ft of lot area per bachelor and 1 bedroom unit is in keeping and 2,000 sq. ft for units with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhood, the proposed development will be generally consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although In order to meet this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under requirement with the existing zoningincreased number of units, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the applicant must increase the size of the site lot. To accommodate this, they are proposing a boundary alteration to add land from an adjacent property that is located on Bedford Highway to this lot. This will happen prior to permits being issued for the proposal. Staff have reviewed the proposal and note that it does comply with all of the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in requirements of the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreementRMU Zone. The portion MPS policy recommends that significant vegetation stands be retained, where possible. This concern was also brought up by the public at the PIM. The applicant updated the proposal after the public and PAC meetings to reduce the number of parking spaces, thus reducing the size of the rear yard not used for surface parking shall be maintained as landscaped open spacelot in order to enlarge the landscape area. The Staff advise that the proposal was reviewed by meets the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from intent of the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementpolicy.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined that the proposed development is consistent with the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted Attachment A contains the proposed development agreement for detailed discussion: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, subject property and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbagethe conditions under which the applicant must comply. The proposed fifth agreement addresses the following matters: • architectural design, signage, lighting and maximum building height requirements; • parking (bicycle and vehicular), circulation and access; • landscaping throughout the site; especially surrounding property lines; • the accommodation for the future development of Active Transportation Linkages, such as a sidewalk and multi-use trail; and • options for various non-substantive amendments by resolution of Council, including minor changes to the placement and architectural design of the building and changes to the timeframes for development. In staff’s opinion, the attached development agreement will permit a multi-unit residential development that is compatible and appropriate with the neighbourhood. Of the matters addressed by the proposed development agreement, the following have been identified for more detailed discussion. The proposed building is terraced into three sections to reflect the grade of the property. Although the overall height of the building is 7 storeys due to the grading on the site, the residential floors vary from 5-7 storeys, which is in keeping with the residential character heights of the neighbourhoodneighbouring multiple unit buildings. To ensure compatibility with the neighbourhoodFurther, the proposed development will be generally consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume terraced design of the building and at least one provides the opportunity to use portions of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained roof as landscaped open space. The proposal proposed development agreement requires a mix of building materials to further break up the mass of the building. The proposed development agreement requires landscaping to be provided throughout the property with an emphasis of landscaping along property lines to protect residential amenities; particularly the low density residential uses located to the north of the subject property. Policy 1.8.1(m) requires that proposed developments to be considered through Schedule R provide active transportation linkages where needed (see Attachment B). During the public information meeting it was noted that there is an informal walking path located on the property. Although at this point there is little interest in HRM taking over the trail, the proposed development agreement includes a provision that would restrict development along the trail. This will enable the opportunity for HRM to place an easement over the trail, and the ability to develop a more formal trail if desired in the future. Further to this, through staff’s review of the application it was noted that a sidewalk may be warranted where the property abuts Bedford Highway. As such, the applicant has agreed to provide the required grading where the property fronts Bedford Highway to facilitate the development of a sidewalk in the future. The proposed development agreement will also require that a hard surface walkway be provided along the driveway to provide pedestrian connectivity to the proposed building and Bedford Highway. During the public information meeting, concerns were expressed regarding the safety of cyclists along Bedford Highway due to the increase of vehicular traffic accessing the property. A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) was provided for this application which indicated the proposed development would generate a small increase in the number of trips along the Bedford Highway and would not have a significant impact on Bedford Highway. The TIS was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate coverHRM staff who agreed with its conclusion. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within TIS recommends that the bushes on the west side of the Bedford Highway need to be trimmed to improve visibility of the project’s driveway access. The proposed development agreementagreement requires the developer to trim the bushes in this area. Additionally, the development agreement requires the portion of the property along Bedford Highway be graded to accommodate a future sidewalk. Together, these improvements will enhance pedestrian, cyclist and vehicular movements in this area.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development is consistent with the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B C provides an evaluation of the proposed LUB amendment and development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. The following issues are highlighted have been identified for more detailed discussion: Residential uses . The inclusion of the subject site in Schedule L will allow the development to benefit from comprehensive site planning, which is achieved through the development agreement process. The subject site is within a minor commercial node and the development proposal will benefit from the controls and flexibility that are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to provided through the property, development agreement process. Attachment B contains the proposed development agreement for the subject site and the conditions under which the development may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbageoccur. The proposed fifth unit development agreement addresses the following matters: • the types of commercial uses and their location at the ground-level along Oxford Street; • a maximum of 29 residential units are permitted, which includes a mix of three bedroom; two bedroom; one bedroom and bachelor units; • architectural, signage, lighting and maximum building height requirements; • parking (bicycle and vehicular), circulation and site access; • detailed landscaping requirements for at grade amenity space and the requirement of planter boxes where the property abuts Oxford Street; • building services, maintenance and waste facilities; and • options for various non-substantive amendments by resolution of Community Council, including: a small increase in residential units, changes to the parking requirements, landscaping details, and changes to timeframes for development. The attached development agreement will permit a mixed use development that is in keeping anticipated to be compatible and appropriate with the residential character of the neighbourhood. To ensure compatibility with Of the neighbourhood, matters addressed by the proposed development will be generally consistent with agreement to satisfy the intent of MPS criteria as shown in Attachment C, the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or following have been identified for more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementdetailed discussion.

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined advise that the proposed development it is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B C provides an evaluation of the proposed LUB amendment and amending development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies. Considering the mixed nature of the surrounding land uses and the abutting existing development agreement, the property has been assessed by staff as appropriate for mixed use development. As Schedule “Q” is currently applied to large portions of Peninsula North that are designated Major Commercial, application to the property at 0000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx represents a relatively small expansion of the area under the Schedule (Map 3). However, the incorporation of the property at 0000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx into the abutting development presents a significant opportunity for further comprehensive site planning along Gottingen Street between Xxxxx and Macara Streets. The proposal will benefit from the controls and flexibility that the development agreement process provides to reduce future land use conflicts. Attachment B contains the proposed amending development agreement for the subject site and the conditions under which the development may occur. The proposed amending agreement addresses the following issues are highlighted matters: • Residential uses limited to a maximum of 63 units with a minimum of 25 of those units containing two or more bedrooms); • Maximum building height of 25.9 metres (85 feet); • Minimum 232.2 square metres (2,500 square feet) of a combination of landscaped open space and recreational space. A minimum 107.7 square metres (1,160 square feet) of landscaped open space required on level 2; • Minimum of 41 vehicular parking spaces; • Bicycle parking requirements; and • Time extensions to commencement of construction and completions dates. The proposed amending development agreement will permit a mixed-use building, subject to the controls identified above. Of the matters addressed by the proposed development agreement to satisfy the MPS criteria as shown in Attachment C, the following have been identified for detailed discussion. Case 21321: Residential uses LUB and Development Agreement Amendments 0000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Community Council Report - 6 - September 12, 2018 To achieve investment in commercial and residential redevelopment, the MPS requires that Council consider “the relationship of new development to adjacent properties and uses” and “the mitigation of impacts on the amenity, convenience and development potential of adjacent properties through effective urban design and landscape treatment”. Substantial building heights and massing are typically considered achievable through the as-of-right permitting process in this area. However, the existing development agreement addresses design and compatibility issues, resulting in a building of greater density with less intensive massing and height than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate could be achieved in an as-of-right situation. The addition of the property at 0000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx and the addition of an eighth storey enabled under the amending development agreement still results in a higher frequency building of visits to the property, less massing and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbagepotentially height (depending on setbacks) that could be achieved in an as-of-right situation. The proposed fifth unit height is consistent with building height recently approved by Community Council on the adjacent property at the corner of Gottingen and Macara Streets (Case 20149). The MPS encourages effective urban design treatments and the use of high quality exterior building materials. These elements were regulated through the existing development agreement and no changes have been made to the existing requirements for building materials, streetwall height, or signage. To minimize potential land use conflicts, commercial uses were limited in keeping the existing agreement to those permitted in the C-2A (Minor Commercial) Zone (with the residential character exception of service stations and billboards). No changes to these limitations are proposed. The design of the neighbourhoodproposed building also includes measures to reduce land use conflict such as larger setbacks from the neighbouring property line for the upper stories of the building. To ensure compatibility with A further increased setback of 20 feet at the neighbourhoodeighth level is proposed to mitigate impacts from the additional storey. Setbacks for all other stories have remained the same as those approved in the existing development agreement. MPS policy encourages vehicular traffic to use principal streets and discourages traffic from infiltrating through existing neighbourhoods. However, the Streets Bylaw S300 requires driveways to be on the lower volume street whenever possible. A traffic impact statement prepared by the applicant’s consultant was reviewed by HRM and was deemed acceptable. While the primary residential access and parking entrance is proposed on Xxxxx Street, commercial customers accessing the building will use the entrance from Gottingen Street. The site is located along major transit routes. MPS policy calls for on-site open space and leisure areas which are adequate for the building residents. The original agreement requires a minimum of 153.66 square metres (1,654 square feet) of a combination of indoor and outdoor common amenity space, including a minimum of 112.41 square metres (1,210 square feet) being located on a second-floor outdoor patio. The proposed amending development will agreement requires an increase of amenity area/landscaped space proportional to the larger building size and increased unit count. This results in a minimum of 232.2 square metres (2,500 square feet) of landscaped open space and recreational space, including a minimum of 107.7 square metres (1,160 square feet) of landscaped open space required to be generally located on the 2nd level of the development. Additional roof top amenity space is permitted on the upper levels. The existing development agreement requires a detailed landscaping plan prepared by a landscape architect when applying for the development permit. The development agreement requires a minimum of 41 interior parking spaces which equates to approximately 0.65 parking spaces per unit. Staff consider the need for parking in a building based on it’s location in relation to transit connections, opportunities for active transportation and the community desire for less costly housing. This building is well located with regular and frequent bus service on Gottingen and Xxxxx Streets. Minimizing the required number of parking spaces can reduce construction costs which can contribute to less costly units. Under these circumstances, staff support the proposed parking requirements. Case 21321: LUB and Development Agreement Amendments 0000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Community Council Report - 7 - September 12, 2018 Staff have reviewed the application in terms of all relevant policy criteria and advise that the proposal is reasonably consistent with the intent of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided Halifax MPS. Staff recommend that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building. Under the present zoning, existing buildings in this area may be converted to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase in the height or volume of the building Halifax and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing building. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in the Peninsula North area and the area is well-served by public transit, only the existing three parking spaces are required under West Community Council approve the proposed land use by-law amendment (Attachment A) and proposed amending development agreement. The portion of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee agreement (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementAttachment B).

Discussion. Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and has determined that the proposed development is consistent with the MPS, particularly Implementation Policy 3.14. HRM Building Officials have reviewed the proposed plans and indicated that at the building permit stage, the building and the proposed unit will require detailed review and may need upgrades to meet current building code standards. Attachment B E provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policiespolicies (P-100 and P-155). The following issues are highlighted Attachment A contains the proposed development agreement for detailed discussion: Residential uses are typically considered less intensive than commercial uses, as commercial uses generate a higher frequency of visits to the property, subject property and may have impacts from increased traffic, commercial signage, and garbagethe conditions under which the applicant must comply. The proposed fifth unit agreement addresses the following matters: • addition of new lands; • outdoor storage; • landscaping; • hours of operation; and • parking. Attachment B contains the proposed discharging development agreement for the subject property which would remove the existing use (truck maintenance yard) as a permitted land use from the lands. Staff advises that the attached development agreement will permit a commercial development that is in keeping with appropriate for the residential character site while balancing the needs of the neighbourhoodsurrounding community. To ensure compatibility with Of the neighbourhood, matters addressed by the proposed development will be generally consistent with agreement, the intent following have been identified for more detailed discussion. There is an existing development agreement applied to the subject lands and an adjacent parcel (1495 Cobequid Road) which enables storage of construction equipment and operation of a maintenance facility. The lands covered by the agreement are no longer in the original ownership and neither current owner wishes to operate the land use enabled by the existing development agreement. Thus, it is appropriate to discharge the existing development agreement (Attachment B). Due to the industrial nature of the Peninsula North Secondary Plan, which allows internal conversions of existing buildings provided that there is no increase on the lands, and their lack of frontage on major roads in the height area (Rocky Lake Drive and Cobequid Road) they are not ideally suited for most commercial land uses permitted in the C-2 (Community Commercial) Zone. Policy P-100 (Attachment E) enables consideration of either a change of use or volume an expansion of the buildingexisting use. Under The proposal is to enable uses which are appropriate for the present zoning, existing buildings current building and staff have reviewed the I-3 (Light Industrial) in this area the Planning Districts 14 and 17 Land Use By-law for guidance on light industrial land uses which may be converted appropriate for the buildings. Staff recommend that in addition to up to 4 residential units, provided that there is no increase the uses permitted in the height or volume of C-2 (Community Commercial) Zone, the building and at least one of the units in the converted building contains two or more bedrooms. Although this proposal would allow one additional residential unit than what would be permitted under following uses are appropriate for the existing zoning, staff advise that five residential units are appropriate given the size of the site and the existing buildingbuildings: • Parking Lot; • Building Supply Outlet; • Warehousing; • Wholesale operations; • Service Industry1 not including heavy equipment repair, auto body repair shop, truck depot or paint shop; • Service and repair of automobiles; and • Light manufacturing, assembly uses which are not obnoxious. As additional parking is not required for an internal conversion for residential units in Land uses such as truck depots, paint shops, heavy equipment repair and auto body shops were specifically excluded due to concerns with compatibility. Further staff have included limits to the Peninsula North area and number of commercial vehicles on the area is well-served by public transit, only lands (maximum 10) to restrict the existing three parking spaces are required under the proposed development agreement. The portion scale of the rear yard not used for parking shall be maintained as landscaped open space. The proposal was reviewed by the Districts 7 & 8 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) on September 22, 2014. A report from the PAC will be submitted to Community Council under separate cover. The Committee had no recommendations for inclusion within the proposed development agreementcommercial development.