1992-10-13_Minutes
83-784
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
At a meeting of the Common Council, held at the City Hall in the City of
Saint John, on Tuesday, the thirteenth day of October, AD. 1992, at 7:00 o'clock p.m.
present
Elsie E. Wayne, Mayor
Councillors Chase, Coughlan, Gould, Knibb, Landers, McAlary,
Rogers, Trites, A Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. P. Groody, Acting City Manager; F. Rodgers, City
Solicitor; D. Wilson, Commissioner of Finance; C. Robichaud,
Assistant City Manager - Operations; J. C. MacKinnon,
Commissioner of Environment and Infrastructure Services; S.
Bedford, Commissioner of Development Services; S. Armstrong,
Director of Engineering; C. Campbell, Manager of Policy Division,
Planning; J. Baird, Manager of Development Division, Planning;
J. Bezanson, Heritage Planner; R. Johnston, Deputy Fire Chief;
G. Ingraham, Assistant Deputy Chief of Police; Mrs. M. Munford,
Common Clerk; and Ms. C. Joyce, Assistant Common Clerk.
The Mayor offered the opening prayer.
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor Landers
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting
of Common Council, held on October 5, 1992, be approved.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The Mayor proclaimed October 18 to 24 to be National Home Support
Week, and October 11 to 17 to be John Howard Society Week, in the City of Saint
John.
(Councillor A Vincent entered the meeting.)
Councillor M. Vincent extended a message of sympathy to the family of
the late Mr. Donald Goss, who passed away on October 9, and noted that Mr. Goss,
who was an ardent sportsmen in the City, operated Freedom Tours and was a former
SMT employee.
On motion of Councillor Landers
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that the Common Council of
the City of Saint John extend condolences to the family of the late Mr. Donald Goss.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The Mayor recognized the presence in the Council Chamber of Mr. W.
Grant, President of the John Howard Society, who addressed Council briefly
concerning the Society.
Public presentation was made of a proposed Municipal Plan amendment
to redesignate on Schedule 2-A, the Future Land Use Plan, an approximately 2.7 acre
portion of a larger parcel of land located at 2 Pokiok Road (NBGIC Number 40287),
from Open Space to Low Density Residential classification, to permit this portion of the
larger lot to be re-zoned to a "RM-1" Three-Storey Multiple Residential zone and
ultimately developed.
Public presentation was made of a proposed Municipal Plan amendment
to redesignate on Schedule 2-A, the Future Land Use Plan, an area of approximately
36 hectares (88 acres) located adjacent to Midwood Avenue and Bayside Drive (NBGIC
83-785
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
Numbers 346445 and 348474 - part), from Low Density Residential to Heavy Industrial
classification, to permit the property to be used as a process water treatment plant by
Irving Paper Limited, as requested by Irving Paper Limited.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was
completed with regard to the proposed amendment to the Saint John City Centre
Preservation Area By-Law with regard to (1) changing the name of the By-Law to Saint
John Preservation Areas By-Law; (2) adding the following section: "Within the Douglas
Avenue Preservation Area the setback for new infill development is to be in alignment
with the last building from the historic period (1853 - 1940) to have occupied the site.
The Preservation Review Board may permit a different setback where it is compatible
with the appearance and rhythm of the historic streetscape. "; (3) enlarging the area of
the By-Law by including the following properties as shown on the submitted map
(Schedule D): 7, 16,24,25,29, 32, and 34 Alexandra Street (NBGIC Numbers 368969,
369066,369041,368977,368985,369033, and 369025, respectively); 3, 4-6,14,20-
22, and 28-30 Bentley Street (NBGIC Numbers 369082, 372953, 372961, 372979, and
372987, respectively); 55, 56, 61,67,69, 75, 77-79, 81 and 85 Clarendon Street
(NBGIC Numbers 379156 and 471375,377549,379149,379313,379305,379297,
379131,379123, and 377515, respectively); 25, 29-31, 99,106-108,114,126,127,
147,149,152,173,186,187,191-193,195,197,201, 202-204, 203, 206, 207, 209,
215,222,226,228,229,233,234,241,247,248,249,254,260,261,263,268,270,
272,274,276,285,297,298, 302, 303, and 306 Douglas Avenue (NBGIC Numbers
377606,377614,377671,368829,368811,368795 and 55081871,377705,377739,
377747 and 55020911,368753,377788,55049118 and 55049092 and 55049100 and
368704,377812,377820,377888,377846,377853, 368670, 377861, 368662,
377879, 379222, 377887, 368639 and 55024723, 372946, 368621, 377911, 377929,
372938,379230, 379248 and 55032353, 372920, 379255, 368613, 368605, 377945,
358481,372912,368597,372904,372896, 368571,426270, 377978, 368514,
368506, 379289, and 368480, respectively); to change the name of the By-Law to
include areas that are outside of the City Centre; to add a setback provision due to the
different site usage on Douglas Avenue; and to designate the above-noted properties
as a heritage preservation area, as requested by the Preservation Review Board, and
that a letter was received from Harold J., Suzanne M. and John O. Henneberry
expressing opposition to the inclusion of their property at 173 Douglas Avenue (NBGIC
Number 377788) as part of the heritage preservation area as defined in the proposed
amendment.
Consideration was also given to a letter from the Preservation Review
Board expressing the understanding that, as a result of the due process of notification
of the above-proposed By-Law amendment, several additional property owners have
forwarded letters expressing their desire to be excluded from the proposed preservation
area; and advising of its continuous support of the recommendation of the Douglas
Avenue Working Group to proceed with the By-Law amendment and to designate only
those properties which have not forwarded letters expressing their desire to be
excluded from the proposed heritage preservation area, as indicated in the submitted
correspondence from Bill Paterson, Chairman of the Douglas Avenue Working Group.
Mr. Donald Gillis, Chairman of the Preservation Review Board, appeared
in support of the proposed By-Law amendment; commented on the activities leading up
to the proposed amendment, including a two-phase study of Douglas Avenue during
1990 and 1991 which concluded that the area is unique in Canada and definitely
worthy of heritage preservation, and a series of over 20 meetings held during the first
half of 1992 by a Working Group of property owners in the area which presented
recommendations to the community in May and the Board in June, and subsequently
presented by the Board to Common Council at the end of August 1992; and noted that
a summary of the Working Group's recommendations is included in the above
correspondence as Appendix #1, along with a copy of Planning staff's report
summarizing the recommendations and comments of the consultants, the community
Working Group and staff in Appendix #2. Mr. Gillis made the observation that many of
the recommendations included in the submitted correspondence deal with various
policies, guidelines and procedures which would be considered by the Board if the area
is designated by Council, and that the key action for Council's consideration at this time
is the proposed By-Law amendment; and explained that all other items would be
discussed and considered by the Board at a public meeting of the Board, with
continuing input requested from residents of the area. Mr. Gillis, in citing the proposed
83-786
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
By-Law amendment, noted that the properties to be included are listed in the submitted
Appendix 3 and shown on Schedule 'D', with the property at 173 Douglas Avenue also
to be exempted based on the above-mentioned letter requesting exemption; and
advised that all property owners who indicated that they do not wish their property
designated, as listed in the submitted Appendix #4, are not included in the proposed
area, including several additional property owners who requested to be excluded
following the Board's initial presentation of recommendations to Council the end of
August. Mr. Gillis recommended that Common Council give the appropriate readings to
the proposed By-Law amendment and designate the properties as a heritage
preservation area for the Douglas Avenue area.
Deputy Mayor McAlary asked if a person who purchases a property
included in the heritage area would have the choice of having the property removed
from the designated area or would the property be required to remain so designated, to
which Mr. Gillis replied that, if a designated property were sold and the new owner
wished to not be designated, the new owner could go through a process similar to the
process being undertaken at this time in order to have property removed from the
designated area, as would be the case with a property owner who, at this time, does
not want to be included in the heritage area, in that such property owner could make
application and go through a process to be included at a later date; and the Mayor
noted that the process would be a By-Law amending process the same as in this
instance. Concerning the grant program for designated properties and the advantage
of being included in a designated area which does not include the whole of Douglas
Avenue as questioned by Deputy Mayor McAlary, Mr. Gillis advised that grants are
subject to and governed strictly by rules set down by Council, and not at all by income,
and also that designation of this geographic area, which is about the same size as
Orange Street, has a definite impact on the value of the property itself by increasing its
value; and, with regard to Deputy Mayor McAlary's observation that some property
owners might not be able to afford renovations to the standards of the Preservation
Review Board, Mr. Gillis advised that the Board's standards would ask, for example,
that wood windows be replaced with wood windows, and the brick be maintained and
re-pointed, the latter which would have to be done in any event. Councillor Trites
expressed concern that, in view of the above letter from the Henneberrys which is
dated October 7 and indicates that their preference not to have their property included
in the heritage preservation area was communicated on two separate occasions to the
committee, there could be other property owners who are not fully aware of the
situation and, if at the time of enactment, could indicate that they did not know or that
they had informed the committee and the letter went astray; and suggested that a letter
requesting to be included in the area could have been used to ensure that property
owners desire to be included, rather than silence being considered as consent to be
included. Mr. Rodgers, in response to Councillor M. Vincent, confirmed that the
Henneberrys' letter satisfies the requirement to be excluded from the heritage
preservation area. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the proposed By-Law amendment is
offering something different from what the situation is in the City core by giving the
Douglas Avenue area residents the choice of being included or excluded from the
designated area, to which Mr. Rodgers replied that he is unaware of Council doing
something which it does not have the authority to do, although the source from where
the recommendation is coming should be able to inform Council what it is proposing
and if it is different from what has been done somewhere else. The Mayor made the
observation that the Preservation Area By-Law was initially enacted to preserve the City
centre, without the choice of being included or excluded in the designated area, and
that Council has amended the By-Law to include a single building, such as the case of
the former Quinton farmhouse on Manawagonish Road, and suggested that Council
must give consideration to the proposed amendment in that it could mean subsequent
grant funding for property renovations.
Dr. W. Paterson, Chairman of the Douglas Avenue Working Group,
addressed Council in support of the proposed By-Law amendment; explained that the
Working Group was formed at a public meeting in January to follow through on the idea
of designating part of the neighbourhood as a heritage preservation area by reviewing
the report prepared by consultants for the Preservation Review Board, talk with people
in the area, look at various alternatives, and make recommendations to the
Preservation Review Board; and commented on the Working Group's efforts to
encourage discussion in the neighbourhood and to be sure that everybody was aware
of the proposal and what it means, and to be aware that there was the option of not
83-787
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
being included in the designated area. Dr. Paterson also commented on reasons for
property owners favouring designation, such as a sense of stability the designation
would bring to the area, an interest in preserving the City's heritage, the major
improvements which has resulted from designation of other areas such as Orange
Street thereby sustaining and possibly enhancing property values, the opportunity to
get help and advice on the work needed on their properties, and the recently-approved
program for design grants to assist owners to prepare proper long-term overall
maintenance plans for work to be done on their buildings.
The Mayor, in noting that the residents of Douglas Avenue have been
able to do work on their homes in the past and have done a fine job, asked if the
residents would be satisfied if the area were designated without having access to
grants in view of the City's tight financial situation, to which Dr. Paterson advised that
he would be wrong to indicate that grants would not make a difference because they
would from the point of view that sometimes persons cannot do much of the work they
want to do and, with a few extra dollars, they could possibly do the work properly;
therefore, grants would be of assistance. With regard to the concern expressed by
Councillor Trites that there could be other residents who do not wish to be included in
the designated area and his request that all residents included be informed in writing
that their property is included which would give them the opportunity to request
removal, Mr. Bedford requested that, while the normal procedure would be to proceed
with third reading at the next meeting should Council give first and second readings of
the proposed amendment at this meeting, staff be given two weeks to inform the
residents, which would mean delaying third reading of the By-Law amendment one
week.
On motion of Councillor Rogers
Seconded by Councillor Coughlan
RESOLVED that the by-law to amend
the Preservation Area By-Law by (a) changing the name from "The Saint John City
Centre Preservation Area By-Law" to "Saint John Preservation Areas By-Law; (b)
adding the following section: "Within the Douglas Avenue Preservation Area the
setback for new infill development is to be in alignment with the last building from the
historic period (1853 - 1940) to have occupied the site. The Preservation Review
Board may permit a different setback where it is compatible with the appearance and
rhythm of the historic streetscape."; and (c) enlarging the area of the By-Law by
including the following properties:- 7,24,25,29, 32, and 34 Alexandra Street (NBGIC
Numbers 368969, 369041, 368977, 368985, 369033, and 369025, respectively); 4-6,
14,20-22, and 28-30 Bentley Street (NBGIC Numbers 372953, 372961, 372979, and
372987, respectively); 56, 61,67,69, 75, 77-79, 81 and 85 Clarendon Street (NBGIC
Numbers 377549,379149,379313,379305,379297,379131,379123, and 377515,
respectively); and 25,29-31,106-108,126,127,147,149,152,186,187,191-193,
195,197,202-204,203,206,207,215,222,226,229,233, 234, 241, 247, 248, 249,
254,261,268,272,274,276,285,297, 302, 303, and 306 Douglas Avenue (NBGIC
Numbers 377606,377614,368829,368795 and 55081871,377705,377739,377747
and 55020911,368753,55049118 and 55049092 and 55049100 and 368704,377812,
377820,377888,377846,368670,377861,368662, 377879, 377887, 368639 and
55024723,372946,377911,377929,372938, 379230, 379248 and 55032353,
372920,379255,368613,377945,372912,372904, 372896, 368571,426270,
377978, 368506, 379289, and 368480, respectively), be read a first time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor voting
"nay".
Read a first time the by-law to amend the Preservation Area By-Law.
On motion of Councillor Rogers
Seconded by Councillor Trites
RESOLVED that the by-law to amend the
Preservation Area By-Law by (a) changing the name from "The Saint John City Centre
Preservation Area By-Law" to "Saint John Preservation Areas By-Law; (b) adding the
following section: "Within the Douglas Avenue Preservation Area the setback for new
infill development is to be in alignment with the last building from the historic period
83-788
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
(1853 - 1940) to have occupied the site. The Preservation Review Board may permit a
different setback where it is compatible with the appearance and rhythm of the historic
streetscape."; and (c) enlarging the area of the By-Law by including the following
properties:- 7,24,25,29, 32, and 34 Alexandra Street (NBGIC Numbers 368969,
369041,368977,368985,369033, and 369025, respectively); 4-6,14,20-22, and 28-
30 Bentley Street (NBGIC Numbers 372953, 372961, 372979, and 372987,
respectively); 56, 61,67,69, 75, 77-79, 81 and 85 Clarendon Street (NBGIC Numbers
377549,379149,379313,379305,379297,379131, 379123, and 377515,
respectively); and 25,29-31,106-108,126,127,147,149,152,186,187,191-193,
195,197,202-204,203,206,207,215,222,226,229,233, 234, 241, 247, 248, 249,
254,261,268,272,274,276,285,297, 302, 303, and 306 Douglas Avenue (NBGIC
Numbers 377606,377614,368829,368795 and 55081871,377705,377739,377747
and 55020911,368753,55049118 and 55049092 and 55049100 and 368704,377812,
377820,377888,377846,368670,377861,368662, 377879, 377887, 368639 and
55024723,372946,377911,377929,372938, 379230, 379248 and 55032353,
372920,379255,368613,377945,372912,372904, 372896, 368571,426270, 377978,
368506, 379289, and 368480, respectively), be read a second time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor voting
"nay".
Read a second time the by-law to amend the Preservation Area By-Law.
On motion of Councillor Trites
Seconded by Councillor Knibb
RESOLVED that third reading of the
above-proposed By-Law amendment be delayed until Council's regular meeting of
October 26 in order for the Planning Department to notify the individuals on the list of
included properties that their property will be designated as of that date.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Knibb
RESOLVED that the above
correspondence be received and filed.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a letter from Mayor Wayne submitting a letter from the Students'
Representative Council of the University of New Brunswick In Saint John Inc. regarding
the placing of an advertisement in the 1992-93 yearbook.
A motion was proposed by Deputy Mayor McAlary and seconded by
Councillor Coughlan to approve a quarter-page advertisement at a cost of $100.
(Councillor Rogers withdrew from the meeting.)
Councillor M. Vincent suggested that the City could be more supportive
of the University of New Brunswick in Saint John, and the Mayor proposed that the
chair could be allowed to use her discretion, rather than submit such requests to
Council; whereupon the mover and seconder of the proposed motion changed the
motion to approve a half-page advertisement at a cost of $180. Councillor M. Vincent
indicated that he would be prepared to leave such requests to the discretion of the
chair and that his intent had been for a full-page advertisement at a cost of $325, and
the mover and seconder withdrew the proposed motion.
On motion of Councillor McAlary
Seconded by Councillor Coughlan
RESOLVED that the Mayor use her
discretion with respect to the above request.
83-789
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
(Councillor Rogers re-entered the meeting.)
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Knibb
RESOLVED that the letter from Mayor
Wayne submitting a copy of a letter to Traffic Engineer John E. Griffin from Calvary
Temple expressing concern about the Traffic By-Law amendment with regard to
Sydney Street between Duke and Princess Streets removing the parking meters and
subsequently covering this area with a two-hour parking limit -- be referred to the City
Manager for a report and recommendation at the next meeting of Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Consideration was given to a letter from the City Manager advising that,
further to Council's agreement on November 27, 1989 to contribute $1 million towards
the construction of the Imperial Theatre, $200,000 was provided in the 1992 operating
budget and a further $800,000 will be included in 1994, based on construction cash
flows prepared by The Market Square Corporation; also advising that the City has
recently received a request from the Corporation for the $200,000; and recommending
that authority be given to issue a cheque in this amount toward the construction of the
Imperial Theatre.
On motion of Councillor Landers
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that as recommended by
the City Manager, authority be given to the Commissioner of Finance to issue a cheque
in the amount of $200,000 towards the construction of the Imperial Theatre.
Councillor A. Vincent asked the status of funding for 1993 to which Mr.
Wilson replied that most of the funding for the project flows from the Federal
Government and will be sufficient to cover most of the construction payments in 1993;
and Councillor A. Vincent suggested that it would make good business sense for the
City to provide $400,000 in each of 1993 and 1994, rather than $800,000 in 1994.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent
voting "nay".
Read a report from the City Manager clarifying the nature of the
additional conditions being requested by Council with respect to the proposed taxi
dispatch office at 170 Charlotte Street, which was the subject of a public hearing on
September 28 and Council's consideration and subsequent tabling of third reading on
October 5, as follows: (1) all stock cars be removed from the site; (2) the building or
repairing of stock cars not be allowed; (3) unlicensed and/or derelict vehicles not be
allowed to be stored on site; (4) the parking lot be required to have the required
drainage and landscaping; and (5) all used tires and cars be removed from the site on
a regular basis; advising that, of the items listed above, all but one has been addressed
by the existing Planning Advisory Committee conditions and, although the storage and
regular repair of the stock car was not directly addressed, the condition prohibiting
unlicensed vehicles will indirectly also apply to the stock car, and items (3) and (4) have
been addressed and item (5) is addressed in the Zoning By-Law at the present time as
outside storage is not permitted in a "B-2" General Business zone; suggesting, if
Council wishes, that Council could adopt a motion requesting the Planning Advisory
Committee to amend the conditions of September 22, 1992, for a taxi business at 170
Charlotte Street, by adding:" f) the storage, repair, rebuilding, or parking of stock cars,
or any other racing car, be prohibited on this site. "; and recommending that this report
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor McAlary
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Planning
83-790
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
Advisory Committee be requested to consider amending the conditions of September
22, 1992, for a taxi business at 170 Charlotte Street, by adding:" f) the storage, repair,
rebuilding, or parking of stock cars, or any other racing car, be prohibited on this site."
During discussion Councillor Knibb, in noting that the above location is
already zoned for a garage and the functions performed there are legitimate and lawful,
re-iterated his objection to imposing restrictions on the basis that the taxi industry is not
in a position at this time to undertake large expenditures and Council should not be
unduly persecuting either the owner of the above property or any other garage operator
at this time and that the request to have the actual dispatch office located on the
property is presenting the opportunity to impose conditions that would not normally be
applied to a normal garage; and Councillor Chase noted that the above report indicates
that all but one of the items of concern to Council has been addressed by the existing
Planning Advisory Committee conditions, with the one item being that of the existing
stock car which is addressed, although indirectly, by the condition prohibiting
unlicensed vehicles which will also apply to the stock car, and asked the reason for
Council's concern in this regard. Mr. Bedford advised that, if the above motion is
adopted, Council will be advised of the Planning Advisory Committee's decision and the
conditions require that a site plan be submitted and all site improvements be completed
by June 30, 1993; and noted that, while third reading of the proposed Zoning By-Law
text amendment could be tabled until the site is cleaned up, there is a six-month time
frame to be considered which could result in the necessity to readvertise for the
proposed amendment.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Chase
and Knibb voting "nay".
Read a report from the City Manager advising that, further to Common
Council resolution of August 31, 1992 accepting the sum of $2,400 as money-in-lieu of
land for public purposes for Phase 4 of the Barbara Snodgrass et al Subdivision at 41
Anthony's Cove Road, this sum represented six per cent of the appraised value of the
five lots; also advising that the Housing and Property Management Department has
revised its appraised market value of the five lots, based on new information which has
recently come to its attention and the revised market value is estimated at $28,000
resulting in a required payment of money-in-lieu of land for public purposes, at six per
cent, of $1,680; and submitting a recommendation in this regard.
On motion of Councillor McAlary
Seconded by Councillor Rogers
RESOLVED that as recommended by
the City Manager, Common Council resolution of August 31, 1992 accepting money-in-
lieu of land for public purposes with respect to a subdivision at 41 Anthony's Cove
Road, be amended to accept the sum of $1,680 as money-in-lieu of land for public
purposes.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a report from the City Manager referring to Council's consideration
on August 4 of a letter from Mrs. Mary E. Hanley of Manners Sutton Road complaining
of drainage problems and parking and access to her property being restricted because
of curbing improvements made to the street in 1991 and in the area of her residence at
111 Manners Sutton Road, and advising that staff has monitored the situation
throughout this year and is of the opinion that the drainage controls in place are
working effectively and that sufficient width of street exists for the situation, and that
there is a total of 5 catch basins in the immediate area of the Hanley property and Mrs.
Hanley's request to remove the curbing and reinstate the widened shoulder is not seen
as a positive solution, and is not supported by staff. The report also advises that the
concern of water from Bedell Avenue or an abandoned well aggravating the situation
on Manners Sutton Road has been investigated by staff and it has been determined
that no water from the Bedell Avenue storm system is directed towards this area, nor
does an abandoned well exist that could be identified; expresses the opinion that the
major problem in this area is as a result of rain not being able to penetrate the rock
surface that exists in the area and, as a result, is directed immediately down the hill to
the drainage system on Manners Sutton Road, and that this situation is very common in
83-791
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
areas with this type of topography and it is virtually impossible to eliminate ice forming
during certain weather conditions; and recommends that this report be received and
filed and that staff continue to monitor the situation, and also that a copy of this report
be forwarded to Mrs. Hanley for her information.
Councillor Knibb proposed a motion, which was not seconded, that the
above recommendation be adopted.
On motion of Councillor Landers
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that Mr. Larry Hanley be
invited to address Council at this time with respect to the above matter.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and
Councillor Knibb voting "nay".
Mr. Larry Hanley, having identified himself as Mrs. Mary Hanley's son,
circulated photographs of the area depicting both the present situation and the situation
prior to the existence of the curbing; and referred to his mother's correspondence to Mr.
Robichaud, dated October 18, 1991, questioning the City's liability should there be
accidents. Mr. Hanley asked that the curbing in front of his mother's residence be
removed and an alcove be created to allow the plows to push the snow back from the
Road and allow persons to park in that alcove area, as well as make the situation safer.
On motion of Councillor Chase
Seconded by Councillor Knibb
RESOLVED that as recommended by the
City Manager, the above report be received and filed and staff continue to monitor the
situation, and that a copy be forwarded to Mrs. Hanley for her information.
Councillor Chase suggested that staff could advise Council its response
to Mr. Hanley's concerns which are somewhat different from those addressed in the
above report. Councillor Landers advised that her reason for moving the motion to
hear from Mr. Hanley is because the above report does not address Mrs. Hanley's
concerns, and that Mr. Robichaud indicated to Mrs. Hanley that he was not going to
take any action on this matter but that it would have to be brought to Council in order
for a change to be made; and also advised that she would not support the above
motion to monitor a situation which is unacceptable to Mrs. Hanley. The Mayor
suggested that the matter should be tabled for staff to address Mr. Hanley's comments
and submit a further report to Council.
On motion of Councillor Chase
Seconded by Councillor Landers
RESOLVED that the above matter be
laid on the table for staff to address Mr. Hanley's comments and report to Council.
Question being taken, the tabling motion was carried with Councillors
Knibb, McAlary, Rogers and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Councillor M. Vincent asked for the Mayor to call for a show of hands on
the above motion and, at the Mayor's indication of calling again for the vote, Mr.
Rodgers expressed the opinion that the Mayor should ask the Common Clerk what the
record shows from the previous vote. The Common Clerk advised that the tabling
motion was passed with four "nay" votes, and Councillor M. Vincent rose on a point of
order in that he had merely asked what the vote count was and he challenged the City
Solicitor's decision in this regard. Mr. Rodgers stated that he was merely bringing to
Council's attention that the Common Clerk officially recorded the "nay" votes and the
ruling should be determined from the Common Clerk, although Council could
reconsider a matter on motion by a Council member on the prevailing side.
On motion of Councillor Knibb
83-792
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
Seconded by Councillor Chase
RESOLVED that the report from the City
Manager responding to the following three questions raised by The Saint John District
Labour Council in its submitted letter of October 5, 1992: (1) why the two fire stations,
for which the budget for construction was approved some time ago, are not under
construction at this time; (2) was the approved construction funds for the fire stations
used to cover the costs incurred to temporarily repair the main sewer trunk line in the
North End of Saint John which collapsed recently; and (3) what explanation is given for
the North End main sewer trunk collapse -- be received and filed and a copy be
forwarded to The Saint John District Labour Council for its information.
In response to questions asked by Councillor A. Vincent, Mr. Wilson
advised that the City's insurance company has, in fact, recognized the loss to third
parties who were affected as a result of the sewerage backup and, as well, the City is
still negotiating with the company in terms of trying to have covered all the costs
incurred as a result of the emergency situation; and Mr. Robichaud explained that 24-
hour security is still being maintained at the North End main sewer site in that the
sewer, which has quite high flows, is open in an area where many children play and
staff decided it was prudent to place 24-hour security on the site at the rate of $8.46
per hour, although if the situation is to continue it might be in the City's best interest to
put a fence around the site rather than continue to hire security and staff is looking at
getting second-hand chainlink fence and putting it up in the near future, and he advised
that he would follow up on the issue of the commissionaire being closer to the site as
opposed to being on Adelaide Street.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on October 5, 1992,
when there were present Mayor Wayne and Councillors Chase, Coughlan, Gould,
Knibb, Landers, McAlary, Rogers, Trites, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and your
Committee submits the following recommendations, namely:-
1. That as recommended by the City Manager, Common Council adopt: (a)
Interim HR Policy #807(POL) Duty Managers, On-Call Duty; and (b) HR Policy 809
(POL) Staff Advisory Committee on Employment Matters, as submitted.
2. That as recommended by the Nominating Committee, Paul Meier be
appointed to the Saint John Regional Exhibition Centre Interim Committee, replacing AI
MacLean, who has resigned.
3. That as recommended by the Nominating Committee, Councillor Knibb
be appointed to the Fort LaTour Development Authority, replacing David Goss, who
has resigned.
4. That as recommended by the City Manager, Mr. Ian Swanton of Acres
Real Estate Ltd. be advised that the City has no interest in the acquisition of the
property on Sandy Point Road or Gault Road shown as NBGIC Numbers 46433 and
423665.
5. That as recommended by the City Manager, the City Solicitor or his
designate be authorized to initiate and proceed with all steps necessary to expropriate
from the owner or owners, the fee simple absolute title in and to the lands described as
NBGIC Numbers 31161 and 31591 located on Monroe's Alley.
Tuesday, October 13, 1992,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) Elsie E. Wayne,
C h air man.
83-793
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor Coughlan
RESOLVED that section 1 of the
above report be adopted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
(Councillor M. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.)
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor Chase
RESOLVED that section 2 of the above
report be adopted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Landers
RESOLVED that section 3 of the above
report be adopted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor Landers
RESOLVED that section 4 of the above
report be adopted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Chase
Seconded by Councillor Landers
RESOLVED that section 5 of the above
report be adopted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that as recommended by
the Planning Advisory Committee, Common Council assent to the subdivision plan
(photo-reduction submitted) of Chesley Drive (Harrison Street) with respect to vesting of
a 19 square metre (204 square foot) portion of Parcel "0" as a public street.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Trites
Seconded by Councillor Knibb
RESOLVED that as recommended by the
Planning Advisory Committee, the sum of $900 be accepted as money-in-lieu of land
for public purposes with respect to the subdivision on Lawrence Long Road.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
83-794
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor Rogers
RESOLVED that the application of
Sandra Cullen for the re-zoning of 336/338 Charlotte Street West be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation and that the necessary
advertising be authorized in this regard, with the public hearing to be held on November
23, 1992.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that the application of
Wayne Douglas Brown for the re-zoning of 15-17 Harvey Street be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation and that the necessary
advertising be authorized in this regard, with the public hearing to be held on November
23, 1992.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Trites
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that the letter from Uptown
Saint John Inc. advising that the City of Bathurst intends to put forth the submitted
resolution at the forthcoming Cities of New Brunswick Association meeting scheduled
for Edmundston, such resolution proposing that it would be more practical and efficient
for the Business Improvement Area levy to be involved and collected with the property
tax assessments; and requesting the City of Saint John to support this resolution as it
would streamline the process of collecting the levy for Uptown Saint John Inc. -- be
referred to the City Manager.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor McAlary
Seconded by Councillor Coughlan
RESOLVED that the letter from David
R. Bowen, Chairman of the River Road Concerned Citizens Committee, submitting
copies of correspondence sent by the Committee regarding the proposed
Moosehead/Brookville quarry at Acamac; and requesting that Council have staff
immediately investigate the issues raised, and a full report be returned to Council as to
the findings and appropriate legal and other action which will be taken if violations have
occurred, and that a copy of this report be forwarded to the Committee -- be referred to
the City Manager for a report to Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
(Councillor M. Vincent re-entered the meeting.)
On motion of Councillor Chase
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint
John College Development Incorporated advising that it has learned that discussions
are being held to investigate the policy of the New Brunswick Nursing Association that
all nurses must have a university bachelor of nursing degree before being accepted as
registered nurses, which will mean closing out of the Saint John School of Nursing, and
83-795
COMMON COUNCIL
OCTOBER 13, 1992
preliminary discussions do not appear to contemplate the development of a university
school at Saint John; and asking that early action be initiated to ensure an appropriate
degree is offered at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John so that Saint John
does not lose jobs, related benefits and excessive cost and inconvenience to
prospective students -- be received and filed.
The Mayor, in calling for a motion to receive and file the above letter,
advised that she is on an interim committee, which has been established with respect
to the above, along with Mr. Teed and representatives of the Nurses Association and
the University, and that Council will be kept informed.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor McAlary
RESOLVED that the letter from members
of the Save Our Shores Committee and/or members of an affiliate group and/or
concerned with protection of the coastline, regarding the proposed Irving Pulp and
Paper waste treatment lagoons, West and East; requesting, as Irving interests have
acknowledged three meetings in Committee of the Whole to discuss use of land and
Council has refused the Committee's representation in Committee of the Whole, the
release of the transcripts of the three Committee of the Whole meetings as
aforementioned -- be received and filed and Council decline the request for the release
of transcripts.
The Mayor clarified that there was not three meetings in Committee of
the Whole at any time dealing with the above matters, and that there was one meeting
only on each of the proposed lagoons; and suggested that the request for Committee
of the Whole minutes is out of order on the basis that it could lead to other requests of
this nature. Councillor Coughlan advised that, as there is a very strong perception on
this particular topic that Council did discuss other than a business plan of the Irving
interests, he would have no difficulty releasing the contents of the meetings in
Committee of the Whole as this is an unusual situation and each situation should be
dealt with on its own merits. Councillor Landers expressed the opinion that Council
should have met with the concerned citizens in that there is a perception that Council,
by meeting with Mr. W. Borland of the Irvings, has given preference to a large
corporation; therefore, the concerned citizens should be given the same opportunity to
meet with Council. Councillor Rogers asked if the above group would have access to
information requested under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to which Mr. Rodgers
replied that the Charter would not apply and the Freedom of Information Act does not
apply to municipalities; however, this is a case where Council can either comply with or
deny the request and, if Council denies the request, there is certainly an argument to
say that the group is not entitled to the information.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Coughlan,
Landers and Rogers voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Trites
Seconded by Councillor Knibb
RESOLVED that this meeting be
adjourned.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Common Clerk