The URL can be used to link to this page

2006-11-20_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour supplémentaireCity of Saint John Common Council Meeting Monday, November 20, 2006 Committee of the Whole 1. Call to Order 5:00 p.m. 8th Floor Boardroom City Hall 1.1 Nominating Committee 10.2(4)(b) 1.2 Labour Negotiations (Pension Plan) 10.2(4)(b) 1.3 Land Negotiations 10.2(4)(d) Regular Meeting 1. Call to Order — Prayer 6:00 p.m. Council Chamber City Hall 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1 November 2nd and November 6, 2006 Minutes 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 5. Adoption of Consent Agenda 5.1 Eric Teed re Energy Efficiency and Environmental Standards (Recommendation - Refer to Building & Design Committee) 5.2 St Pius X Roman Catholic Church re Construction near St Joseph's Cemetery (Recommendation - Refer to City Manager) 5.3 Village Neighbourhood Association Request for Traffic Light (Recommendation - Refer to City Manager) 5.4 Public Hearing Date - 450 Ashburn Rd (Recommendation in Report) 5.5 Loch Lomond Watershed Structures - Evaluation & Design (Recommendation in Report) 5.6 Access Agreement Fairville Boulevard (Recommendation in Report) 5.7 Rescheduling of Public Hearing for proposed Zoning By -law Amend - 53 -75 Leinster St (Recommendation in Report) 5.8 NB Horticultural Trades Association re Use of Pesticides (Recommendation - Refer to City Manager & City Solicitor) 5.9 Grants for Heritage Conservation Program (Recommendation in Report) City Manager's Update re Grants for Heritage Conservation Program 5.10 Rural Road Upgrade Project (Recommendation - Receive for Information) 5.11 Agreement - King William Road Vesting ( Recommendaton in Report) 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 7.1 Proclamation - Addictions Awareness Week 8. Delegations/ Presentations 6:15 p.m. 8.1 Beaverbrook Art Gallery 9. Public Hearings 7:00 p.m. 9.1 Public Hearing proposed Zoning By -law Amend - 53 -75 Leinster St 9.2(a) Public Hearing proposed Zoning By -law Amend - 17 Admiralty Dr & 66 Anchorage Ave 9.2(b) Planning Advisory Committee recommending proposed Zoning By -law Amend - 17 Admiralty Dr & 66 Anchorage Ave 9.3(a) Public Hearing proposed Zoning By -law Amend - 304 Westmorland Rd 9.3(b) Planning Advisory Committee recommending proposed Zoning By -law amendment with Section 39 Conditions - 304 Westmorland Rd 9.4(a) Public Hearing proposed Zoning By -law Amend - 587 Wallace Court 9.4(b) Planning Advisory Committee recommending proposed Zoning By -law Amend be denied - 587 Wallace Court 9.5(a) Public Hearing proposed Section 39 Amendment - 1350 Hickey Road 9.5(b) Planning Advisory Committee recommending proposed Section 39 Amendment - 1350 Hickey Road 10. Consideration of By -laws 10.1(a) Third Reading Zoning By -law Amend - 77 Golden Grove Rd 10.1 (b) Planning Advisory Committee recommending Section 101 Agreement - 77 Golden Grove Rd 10.1(c) Letters of Support for proposed Rezoning of 77 Golden Grove Road (received after Public Hearing - not to be considered in dealing with 3rd Reading) 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Freedom of the City (Councillor Titus) 11.2 Disability Management (Councillor Titus) 11.3 Saint John Youth Hockey (Councillor Ferguson) 11.4 Development of buildings in uptown area (Councillor Farren) 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1 Gas Tax Funding Agreement 12.2 Contract 2006 -30: Watermain Cleaning & Lining - Phase 1 12.3 Approval Request - Design Services for Upgrade to Culvert Servicing - West Side Estates Subdivision 12.4 Lease of Stall A - Raymond's Deli, City Market 13. Committee Reports 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 15.1 Letter from Frank Rodgers re Compliance of Procedural By -law 15.2 Winegarden Estate Ltd request for support for Farmers Market Sales Permit 16. Adjournment City of Saint John Seance du conseil communal Le lundi 20 novembre 2006 Comite plenier 1. Ouverture de la seance 17 h Salle de conference du 8e etage a 1'h6te1 de ville 1.1 Comite des candidatures — alinea 10.2(4)b) 1.2 Negociations collectives (regime de retraite) — alinea 10.2(4)b) 1.3 Negociations relatives aux terrains — alinea 10.2(4)d) Seance ordinaire 1. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere 18 h Salle du conseil a 1'h6tel de ville 2. Approbation du proces- verbal 2.1 Proces- verbaux des reunions tenues les 2 et 6 novembre 2006 3. Adoption de l'ordre du jour 4. Divulgations de conflits d'interets 5. Adoption de l'ordre du jour relatif aux questions soumises a 1'approbation du consed 5.1 Eric Teed : efficacite energetique et normes relatives a 1'environnement (recommandation — transmettre au Comite sur les normes de conception et de construction) 5.2 Eglise catholique romaine St. Pius X : Construction a proximite du cimetiere St Joseph's (recommandation - transmettre au directeur general) 5.3 Demande d'installation de feu de circulation de 1'Association Village Neighbourhood (recommandation - transmettre au directeur general) 5.4 Date de la tenue d'une audience publique relativement au 450, chemin Ashburn (recommandation deposee au rapport) 5.5 Structures du bassin hydrographique Loch Lomond — evaluation et conception (recommandation deposee au rapport) 5.6 Entente relative a 1'acces du boulevard Fairville (recommandation deposee au rapport) 5.7 Changement d'horaire de 1'audience publique relative au projet de modification de 1'arrete sur le zonage visant le 53 -75, rue Leinster (recommandation deposee au rapport) 5.8 Association des horticulteurs du Nouveau - Brunswick relativement a 1'utilisation des pesticides (recommandation - transmettre au directeur general et a 1'avocat municipal) 5.9 Subventions pour le programme de conservation du patrimoine (recommandation deposee au rapport) Compte rendu du directeur g6n6ral relativement aux subventions pour le programme de conservation du patrimoine 5.10 Projet d'am6lioration des routes rurales (recommandation — accepter a titre informatif) 5.11 Entente relative a la d6volution du chemin King William ( recommandation d6pos6e au rapport) 6. Commentaires presentes par les membres 7. Proclamation 7.1 Proclamation de la Semaine nationale de sensibilisation aux toxicomanies 8. Delegations et presentations 18 h 15 8.1 Galerie d'art Beaverbrook 9. Audiences publiques 19h 9.1 Audience publique relative au projet de modification de 1'arr&6 sur le zonage visant le 53 -75, rue Leinster 9.2a) Audience publique relative au projet de modification de 1'arret6 sur le zonage visant le 17, promenade Admiralty et le 66, avenue Anchorage 9.2b) Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le projet de modification de 1'arr&6 sur le zonage visant le 17, promenade Admiralty et le 66, avenue Anchorage 9.3a) Audience publique relative au projet de modification de 1'Arret6 sur le zonage visant le 304, chemin Westmorland 9.3b) Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le projet de modification de 1'arr6t6 sur le zonage et des conditions impos6es par Particle 39 relativement au terrain situ6 au 304, chemin Westmorland 9.4a) Audience publique relative au projet de modification de l'Arr&6 sur le zonage visant le 587, impasse Wallace 9.4b) Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant que le projet de modification de 1'arr6t6 sur le zonage visant le 587, impasse Wallace soit rejet6 9.5a) Audience publique concernant le projet de modification relatif a Particle 39 visant le 1350, chemin Hickey 9.5b) Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant les modifications propos6es en vertu de Particle 39 visant le 1350, chemin Hickey 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10. la) Troisi6me lecture du projet de modification de 1'arret6 sur le zonage visant le 77, chemin Golden Grove 10. lb) Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant les modifications propos6es en vertu de Particle 101 visant le 77, chemin Golden Grove 10.1c) Lettres d'appui au rezonage propos6 du 77, route Golden Grove (revues apres l'audience publique — ne seront pas prises en compte au moment de la troisi6me lecture) 11. Intervention des membres du conseil 11.1 Droit de cit6 (conseiller Titus) 11.2 Gestion de l'incapacit6 (conseiller Titus) 11.3 Saint John Youth Hockey (conseiller Ferguson) 11.4 Construction d'immeubles au centre -ville (conseiller Farren) 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Entente relative au fonds de la taxe f6d6rale sur 1'essence 12.2 Soumission pour le contrat 2006 -30 : Nettoyage de la conduite d'eau principale et programme de revetement int6rieur — phase 1 12.3 Demande d'approbation relativement aux services de conception pour 1'am6lioration de Pentretien des ponceaux — lotissement West Side Estates 12.4 Location de fetal « A » au march6 municipal a Raymond's Deli 13. Rapports de comites 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a 1approbation du consed 15. Correspondance generale 15.1 Lettre revue de Frank Rodgers relative au respect de 1'arret6 procedural 15.2 Demande de soutien de Winegarden Estate Ltd pour l'obtention d'un permis de vente au march6 des fermiers 16. Cloture de la seance 92 -544 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 2, 2006 /LE 2 NOVEMBRE 2006 COMMON COUNCIL MEETING — THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN CITY HALL — NOVEMBER 2, 2006 - 4:30 P.M. present Norman McFarlane, Mayor Deputy Mayor Hooton and Councillors Chang, Chase, Court, Farren, Ferguson, McGuire, Tait, Titus and White - and - T. Totten, City Manager; J. Nugent, City Solicitor; Greg Yeomans, Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; A. Bodechon, Chief of Police; P. Woods, Common Clerk and Deputy City Manager; and E. Gormley, Assistant Common Clerk SEANCE DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN A L'HOTEL DE VILLE, LE 2 NOVEMBRE 2006 A 16 H 30 Sont presents : Norman McFarlane, maire la mairesse suppleante Hooton et les conseillers Chang, Chase, Court, Farren, Ferguson, McGuire, Tait, Titus et White et T. Totten, directeur general; J. Nugent, avocat municipal; Greg Yeomans, commissaire aux finances et tresorier; P. Groody, commissaire aux operations municipales; A. Bodechon, chef de police; P. Woods, greffier communal et directeur general adjoint; ainsi que E. Gormley, greffiere communale adjointe Call To Order — Prayer Mayor McFarlane called the meeting to order; advised that the meeting is a special regular meeting of Council, and offered the opening prayer. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest The Mayor asked Council members to disclose any conflicts of interests, if any, to which Councillor Court advised that he will be an intervener to the National Energy Board in favor of a marine route, but does not have a conflict of interest in the matter at hand. Ouverture de la reunion, suivie de la priere La seance est ouverte par le maire McFarlane; it affirme qu'il s'agit d'une seance extraordinaire du conseil et recite la priere d'ouverture. Divulgations de conflits d'interets Le maire demande aux membres du conseil de divulguer tout conflit d'interets, le cas echeant, et le conseiller Court indique qu'il devra agir en qualite d'intervenant devant I'Office national de 1'energie afin de se prononcer en faveur d'un trace maritime, mais it affirme n'avoir aucun conflit d'interets relativement a la presente affaire. 1.1 Easements — Emera Brunswick Pipeline On motion of Councillor Court Seconded by Councillor Ferguson RESOLVED that Council convene in closed Legal Session of Committee of the Whole meeting for discussions on Easements — Proposed Emera Brunswick Pipeline. Question being taken, the motion was defeated, with the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillors Chang, Chase, McGuire, Tait, Titus and White voting nay. 92 -545 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 2, 2006 /LE 2 NOVEMBRE 2006 On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that Council convene the meeting in an open regular session of Council for discussions on Easements — Proposed Emera Brunswick Pipeline. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Councillor Court questioned the appropriateness and possible conflict of interest regarding the meeting with certain Councillors and Emera to discuss proposed benefits to the City with regard to the proposed pipeline through the City. The City Solicitor responded that conflict of interest is addressed in the Municipalities Act, and refers to benefits that could be potentially enjoyed by any member of Council, and does not apply in this case. He added that there is no issue regarding such a meeting from a legal perspective. Referring to a submitted information package and notes, Robin McAdam, President of Emera Brunswick Pipeline presented further information on the proposed pipeline land route through the City including Rockwood Park. He addressed safety concerns and with the updated information being given, asked Council to support Emera's proposal. Councillor Court raised a point of order stating that given the purpose of the meeting is to discuss easements, other information should not be presented to which the City Solicitor advised that the subject of easements should be adhered to, however some preamble would be reasonable if it is leading to the topic. Mr. McAdam advised Council that his company is prepared to provide the City with benefits of $2.15 million for projects at Rockwood Park; a fund that will produce annual income so as to enable Rockwood Park to be self sufficient and not require the annual grant that has been provided by the City, and additional monies for the City to direct to other community projects for a total of $5.3 million exclusive of taxes and easement fees. Mr. McAdam confirmed the funding would be available in any circumstance, provided the National Energy Board approves their application. Responding to a question by Councillor Titus, the City Solicitor advised that the terms under which the City holds title to Rockwood Park does not provide the City the authorization to approve a pipeline through the park, adding that in his view, should it be the wish of Council and the Horticultural Association to allow a pipeline through the park, they should request that the Legislation be changed to permit this. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that The City of Saint John endorse the land based route through the City, including Rockwood Park as proposed by the Emera Brunswick Pipeline's application to the National Energy Board. Councillor Farren raised a point of order regarding a motion being made while there was a presentation being made on which the Mayor ruled that he would allow the motion and permit further discussion with questions to the presenter. Responding to a question from Councillor Titus, the City Solicitor advised Council that the motion on the floor is within Council's authority to make, and is based upon Council's implied reliance on Mr. McAdam's representation vis a vis the benefits commitment made to Council. Responding to a question from Councillor Titus, the City Manager offered his recommendation in favour of the motion, and advised that if Council wishes to support the motion, it would be appropriate for the City to withdraw as intervener at the National Energy Board Hearing. Councillor Farren stated that he has a problem with the City route. Councillor Court spoke about the fact that there were few jobs to be associated with the LNG facility and the proposed pipeline. Councillor Ferguson advised that he cannot support the motion based on his lack of technical expertise. 92 -546 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 2, 2006 /1-E 2 NOVEMBRE 2006 Question being taken, the motion was carried, with Councillors Court, Farren and Ferguson voting nay. 1.1 Emprises — Emera Brunswick Pipeline Proposition du conseiller Court Appuyee par le conseiller Ferguson RESOLU que le conseil convoque une seance juridique privee du comite plenier afin de discuter de la question d'emprises visant le projet de gazoduc de la societe Emera Brunswick Pipeline. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est rejetee. Le maire, la mairesse suppleante et les conseillers Chang, Chase, McGuire, Tait, Titus et White votent contre la proposition. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le conseil convoque une seance publique ordinaire du conseil afin de discuter de la question d'emprises visant le projet de gazoduc de la societe Emera Brunswick. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Le conseiller Court remet en question la justesse de la reunion entre certains conseillers et Emera afin de discuter des retombees avantageuses prevues pour la Ville si le pipeline devait traverser celle -ci et la possibilite que des conflits d'interets se presentent. L'avocat municipal repond que la Loi surles municipalifes prevoit certaines dispositions relatives aux conflits d'interets, it souligne les avantages dont pourrait profiter tout membre du conseil et qu'en 1'espece, ils ne s'appliquent pas. II ajoute qu'aucune difficulte ne se presente du point de vue juridique relativement a une telle reunion. Se reportant a une trousse d'information presentee et a ses notes, Robin McAdam, president de la societe Emera Brunswick Pipeline, presente des renseignements supplementaires relatifs au trace terrestre du pipeline traversant la ville et le parc Rockwood. II souligne les mesures de securite prevues, donne une mise a jour de ('information et demande au conseil d'appuyer la proposition d'Emera. Le conseiller Court, par voie de rappel au reglement, indique qu'etant donne que l'objectif de la seance vise a discuter de la question d'emprises, de ('information sur d'autres sujets ne devrait pas titre presentee. L'avocat municipal repond qu'il est preferable de se tenir a la question d'emprises quoi qu'il soit raisonnable de presenter un preambule comme introduction a cette question. M. McAdam indique au conseil que son entreprise est prete a offrir a la Ville 2,15 M$ destines a la mise en oeuvre de projets dans le parc Rockwood, une souscription qui produira des revenus annuels visant a assurer l'autosuffisance du parc Rockwood afin qu'il puisse renoncer a la subvention annuelle octroyee par la Ville, et des sommes supplementaires que la Ville pourra utiliser pour subventionner d'autres projets communautaires; it est prevu que ces sommes s'eleveront a un montant total de 5,3 M$, impots et droits d'emprises en sus. M. McAdam affirme que le financement serait disponible dans n'importe quelle situation pourvu que I'Office national de I'Energie approuve sa demande. En replique a une question posee par le conseiller Titus, l'avocat municipal indique qu'en vertu des modalites prevues au titre de propriete du parc Rockwood detenu par la Ville, celle -ci n'est pas investie de l'autorite necessaire pour approuver la construction d'un gazoduc traversant le parc et ajoute que, selon son opinion, si le conseil et I'Association d'horticulture desirent qu'un tel gazoduc traverse le parc, ils devront deposer une demande visant a modifier la legislation en vue de permettre un tel amenagement. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que The City of Saint John appuie le trace terrestre traversant la ville et le parc Rockwood, conformement a la demande deposee par la societe Emera Brunswick Pipeline a I'Office nationale de I'Energie. 92 -547 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 2, 2006 /LE 2 NOVEMBRE 2006 Le conseiller Farren, par voie de rappel au reglement, constate que cette motion est proposee au cours d'une presentation; le maire declare qu'il accepte la proposition et permet que les discussions se poursuivent et que des questions soient adressees au presentateur. En replique a une question soulevee par le conseiller Titus, I'avocat municipal affirme que le conseil a le droit d'autoriser cette proposition vu qu'elle est fondee sur les declarations prononcees par M. McAdam relativement aux avantages qu'il s'engage a offrir au conseil. Le directeur general repond a une question soulevee par le conseiller Titus et recommande au conseil de se prononcer en faveur de la proposition; it affirme que si le conseil desire appuyer cette proposition, la Ville, en toute justesse, doit se desister en sa qualite d'intervenant a I'audience devant I'Office national de I'Energie. Le conseiller Farren affirme qu'il a des reserves sur le trace du pipeline qui traverse la ville. Le conseiller Court souligne le fable nombre de nouveaux emplois lies au terminal de GNL et au projet de pipeline. Le conseiller Ferguson indique qu'il ne peut appuyer cette proposition puisqu'il ne possede pas suffisamment de connaissances techniques en la matiere. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Les conseillers Court, Farren et Ferguson votent contre la proposition. Adjournment The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Cloture de la seance Le maire declare que la seance est levee a 18 h 45. Mayor /maire Common Clerk /greffier communal 92 -548 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 COMMON COUNCIL MEETING — THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN CITY HALL — NOVEMBER 6, 2006, - 6:15 P.M. present Norman McFarlane, Mayor Deputy Mayor Hooton and Councillors Chang, Chase, Court, Farren, Ferguson, McGuire, and Titus - and - T. Totten, City Manager; J. Nugent, City Solicitor; Greg Yeomans, Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; J. Baird, Commissioner of Planning and Development; W. Edwards, Commissioner of Buildings and Inspection Services; R. Simonds, Fire Chief; B. Reid, Deputy Chief of Police; P. Woods, Common Clerk and Deputy City Manager; and E. Gormley, Assistant Common Clerk SEANCE DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN A L'HOTEL DE VILLE, LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 A 18 H 15 Sont presents : Norman McFarlane, maire la mairesse suppleante Hooton et les conseillers Chang, Chase, Court, Farren, Ferguson, McGuire et Titus et T. Totten, directeur general; J. Nugent, avocat municipal; Greg Yeomans, commissaire aux finances et tresorier; P. Groody, commissaire aux operations municipales; J. Baird, commissaire a I'urbanisme et au developpement; W. Edwards, commissaire aux services d'inspection et des batiments; R. Simonds, chef du service d'incendie; B. Reid, chef de police adjoint; P. Woods, greffier communal et directeur general adjoint; ainsi que E. Gormley, greffiere communale adjointe Call To Order — Prayer, Mayor McFarlane called the meeting to order and Reverend David Edward, Rector of Stone Church offered the opening prayer. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere La seance est ouverte par le maire McFarlane et le pasteur David Edward, de I'eglise Stone Church, offre la priere d'ouverture. 2 Approval of Minutes On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Deputy Mayor Hooton RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on October 23, 2006, be approved. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 2 Approbation des proces- verbaux Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par la mairesse suppleante Hooton RESOLU que le proces- verbal de la reunion du conseil communal tenue le 23 octobre 2006 soit approuve. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 92 -549 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 3 Approval of Agenda On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the agenda of this meeting be approved. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 3 Adoption de I'ordre du jour Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que I'ordre du jour de la presente seance soit adopte. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest Councillor Titus disclosed a conflict of interest regarding item 5.13, Collings' Land Exchange. 4. Divulgations de conflits d'interets Le conseiller Titus divulgue un conflit d'interets relatif au point 5.13, Echange de terrains appartenant aux Collings. 5. Adoption of Consent Agenda 5.1 That the letter from the Fundy Solid Waste Commission submitting its proposed Operating Budget for the year 2007, be received for information. 5.3 That Common Council approve the submitted 2007 meeting schedule. COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE - 2007 Regular Meetings Committee of the Whole (as required) 2006 2006 Nov 20 Nov 27 Dec 4 Dec 11 Dec 18 2007 2007 January 2 (Tuesday) January 8 January 15 January 22 January 29 February 5 February 12 February 19 February 26 March 5 March 12 March 19 March 26 April 2 April 10 (Tuesday) April 16 April 23 April 30 May 7 May 14 May 22 (Tuesday) May 28 June 4 June 11 June 18 June 25 July 3 (Tuesday) July 9 July 16 July 23 July 30 August 7 (Tuesday) August 13 August 20 August 27 September 4 (Tuesday) September 10 September 17 92 -550 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 September 24 October 9 (Tuesday) October 22 November 5 November 19 December 3 December 17 October 1 October 15 October 29 November 13 (Tuesday) November 26 December 10 5.4 That the letter from Saint John Waterfront responding to the letter from the NB Historical Society regarding the Three Sisters Lamp, be received for information. 5.5 That the letter from Eric Teed regarding energy efficiency and standards concerning new construction, be received for information. 5.6 That the letter from Frank Rodgers regarding the Emera Brunswick Pipeline, be received for information. 5.7 That the letter from Fusion Urban Planning requesting that the City of Saint John strongly consider implementing urban design guidelines be referred to the Committee on Design and Building Standards. 5.8 That the letter from Gertrude Haslett requesting a new sidewalk on Daniel Ave. and Manners Sutton Rd. and a new street sign, be referred to the City Manager. 5.9 That the report on Green Municipal Fund (GMF) - Application for Funding be received for information. 5.11 That the proposal submitted by Controls & Equipment Ltd. in the amount of $48,281. for the supply and installation of a card access and video surveillance system at the Municipal Operations Complex located on Rothesay Ave. be accepted. 5.12 That the tender for the supply of plow blades and edges be awarded to the low bidder, LSW Wear Parts, Fredericton, N.B. at a cost of $29,120.22. 5.14 That Common Council schedule the Public Hearings for the rezoning applications of Blair Construction Inc. (648 Westmorland Road & 166 Golden Grove Road), Cavanagh Construction (1000 Somerset Street) and Antonio & Evelyne Saturnino (16 Fern Street) for Monday, December 4, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. 5.15 That the report of the use of property at 1521 Manawagonish Road regarding industrial usage, be received for information. 5.17(a) That the letter and related materials from the Friends of Rockwood Park in opposition to the Emera Brunswick Pipeline application to the National Energy Board, be received for information. 15.17 (b) That the letter and related materials from Leland and Janice Thomas in opposition to the Emera Brunswick Pipeline application to the National Energy Board, be received for information. 5.18 That the letter from the National Golf Owners Association opposing pesticide regulations, be referred to the City Manager and City Solicitor for information. 5.19 That the letter from the New Brunswick Golf Association in opposition to a proposed Pesticide by -law, be referred to the City Manager and City Solicitor for information. 5.20 That the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease for office space between Se -fish Associates Limited and 058854 N.B. Ltd. ( The Landlord and The City of Saint John ( The Tenant). On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the recommendation set out for each consent agenda item be adopted with items 5.16 (a), 5.16(b), 5.2, 5.10 and 5.13 removed to Section 14 as 14.1, 14.2, 14.3 and 14.4 respectively. 92 -551 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 Question being taken, the motion was carried. 5. Adoption de I'ordre du jour relatif aux questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 5.1 Que la lettre presentee par la Commission de gestion des dechets solides de Fundy, accompagnee du budget d'exploitation de 2007, soit acceptee a titre informatif; 5.3 Que le conseil communal approuve le calendrier de seances presente pour 2007. CALENDRIER 2007 DES SEANCES DU CONSEIL Seances ordinaire Comite plenier (au besoin) 2006 2006 Le 20 novembre Le 27 novembre Le 4 decembre Le 11 decembre Le 18 decembre 2007 2007 Le 2 janvier (mardi) Le 8 janvier Le 15 janvier Le 22 janvier Le 29 janvier Le 5 Wrier Le 12 Wrier Le 19 Wrier Le 26 Wrier Le 5 mars Le 12 mars Le 19 mars Le 26 mars Le 2 avril Le 10 avril (mardi) Le 16 avril Le 23 avril Le 30 avril Le 7 mai Le 14 mai Le 22 mai (mardi) Le 28 mai Le 4 juin Le 11 juin Le 18 juin Le 25 juin Le 3 juillet (mardi) Le 9 juillet Le 16 juillet Le 23 juillet Le 30 juillet Le 7 aout (mardi) Le 13 aout Le 20 aout Le 27 aout Le 4 septembre (mardi) Le 10 septembre Le 17 septembre Le 24 septembre Le 1 er octobre Le 9 octobre (mardi) Le 15 octobre Le 22 octobre Le 29 octobre Le 5 novembre Le 13 novembre (mardi) Le 19 novembre Le 26 novembre Le 3 decembre Le 10 decembre Le 17 decembre 5.4 Que la lettre regue du partenariat d'amenagement du secteur riverain de Saint John, en replique a la lettre redigee par la Societe historique du Nouveau - Brunswick visant la lanterne des trois sceurs, soit acceptee a titre informatif. 5.5 Que la lettre presentee par Eric Teed, visant 1'efficacite energetique et les normes relatives aux nouveaux projets de construction, soit acceptee a titre informatif. 5.6 Que la lettre regue de Frank Rodgers relative au projet de gazoduc de la societe Emera Brunswick Pipeline, soit acceptee a titre informatif. 5.7 Que la lettre de demande regue de l'organisme d'urbanisme Fusion Saint John voulant que The City of Saint John examine attentivement la possibilite de mettre en oeuvre des lignes directrices relatives a l'urbanisme, soit transmise au Comite sur les normes de conception et de construction. 5.8 Que la lettre regue de Gertrude Haslett voulant que soient amenages de 92 -552 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 nouveaux trottoirs sur I'avenue Daniel et le chemin Manners Sutton et qu'une nouvelle plaque de rue soit installee, soit transmise au directeur general. 5.9 Que le rapport relatif au Fonds d'habilitation municipal vert : demande de financement, soit accepte a titre informatif. 5.11 Que la soumission presentee par 1'entreprise Controls & Equipment Ltd., au montant de 48 281 $, relativement a I'approvisionnement et a ('installation d'un systeme d'acces par carte et de videosurveillance au complexe des operations municipales de I'avenue Rothesay, soit acceptee. 5.12 Que la soumission relative a I'approvisionnement de socs de charrue et de bords correspondants soit accordee au soumissionnaire moins disant, LSW Wear Parts, de Fredericton, Nouveau - Brunswick, au cout de 29 120,22 $. 5.14 Que le conseil communal fixe la date d'audiences publiques relatives aux demandes de rezonage deposees par Blair Construction Inc. (le 648, chemin Westmorland et le 166, chemin Golden Grove); Cavanagh Construction (1000, rue Somerset); et Antonio et Evelyne Saturnino (16, rue Fern) au lundi 4 decembre 2006 a 19 h dans la salle du conseil. 5.15 Que le rapport relatif a ('utilisation de la propriete situee au 1521, chemin Manawagonish, visant les usages industriels, soit accepte a titre informatif. 5.17a) Que la lettre d'opposition a la demande deposee a I'Office national de 1'energie, et la documentation afferente, reques des Amis du parc Rockwood, visant le projet de gazoduc de la societe Emera Brunswick Pipeline, soient acceptees a titre informatif. 15.17b) Que la lettre d'opposition a la demande deposee a I'Office national de 1'energie, et la documentation afferente, reques de Leland et Janice Thomas, visant le projet de gazoduc de la societe Emera Brunswick Pipeline, soient acceptees a titre informatif. 5.18 Que la lettre d'opposition a la reglementation sur ('utilisation des pesticides, reque de I'Association canadienne des proprietaires de terrains de golf, soit transmise au directeur general et a I'avocat municipal, a titre informatif. 5.19 Que la lettre reque de I'Association de golf du Nouveau - Brunswick s'opposant a I'arrete propose visant a interdire les pesticides, soit transmise au directeur general et a I'avocat municipal, a titre informatif. 5.20 Que le maire et le greffier communal soient autorises a signer le bail de location de bureaux, entre Se -fish Associates Limited et 058854 N.B. Ltd. (les « proprietaires ») et The City of Saint John (le « locataire ))). Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que les recommandations soulignees en vertu de chaque question soumise a I'approbation du conseil soient adoptees moyennant le deplacement des points 5.16a), 5.16b), 5.2, 5.10 et 5.13 sous la section 14, en tant que points 14.1 et 14.2, 14.3 et 14.4, respectivement. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 6. Members Comments Council members commented on various community events. 6. Commentaires presentes par les membres Les membres du conseil s'expriment sur diverses activites communautaires. 7. Proclamation 7.1 The Mayor proclaimed the month of November as Family Violence Prevention Month in the City of Saint John. 92 -553 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 7.2 The Mayor proclaimed November 8, 2006 as World Town Planning Day in the City of Saint John. (Councillor Titus withdrew from the meeting as he declared a conflict of interest on item 5.13 (14.4), Collings' Land Exchange.) 7. Proclamation 7.1 Le maire declare que le mois de novembre est le « Mois de prevention contre la violence familiale » dans The City of Saint John. 7.2 Le maire declare le 8 novembre 2006 Journee mondiale de I'urbanisme dans The City of Saint John. (Le conseiller Titus annonce que le point 5.13 (14.4), Echange de terrains appartenant aux Collings, lui presente un conflit d'interets et it quitte la seance.) 14.4 Collings Land Exchange On motion of Councillor Ferguson Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that: 1. The City of Saint John exchange the fee simple interest in a to be created 2 acre +/- portion of PID #55023451 with Coleen and Peter Collings for the fee simple interest in PID 353821, 73 Lake Cove Lane on or before November 15, 2006 conditional upon the following: A. the Collings acquire, any necessary rights -of -way, easements and approvals from the Province of New Brunswick's Department of Health required to relocate their dwelling from 73 Lake Cove Road to the to be created parcel on or before November 15, 2006, and further; B. the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign any document required to effect this transaction. 2. That Common Council authorize the City Solicitor or his designate, upon the completion of the aforesaid land exchange, to consent to a further amendment to the existing Consent Order, which is dated January 19, 2006. The existing Consent Order required Peter E. Collings and Coleen F. Collings to immediately cease using or permitting the use of their property at 73 Lake Cove Lane, Saint John, N.B., for business purposes and to refrain from such use in the future. It also required them to demolish or remove their building that is located on the property no later than July 31, 2006. This further amendment is to extend the deadline until not later than June 30, 2007. The Building Inspector is directed to not proceed with the demolition of the aforesaid building until he receives further direction from Common Council. Question being taken, the motion was carried. (Councillor Titus re- entered the meeting.) 14.4 Echange de terrains appartenant aux Collings Proposition du conseiller Ferguson Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU : 1. QUE The City of Saint John echange I'interet en fief simple dans une parcelle a creer d'environ 2 acres, portant le NID 55023451, avec Coleen et Peter Collings en contrepartie de I'interet en fief simple dans la parcelle portant le NID 353821, situee au 73, allee Lake Cove, au plus tard le 15 novembre 2006, sous reserve des conditions suivantes : A. que les Collings acquierent les droits de passage, les emprises et les approbations necessaires du ministere de la Sante de la province du Nouveau - Brunswick pour demenager leur habitation du 73, allee Lake Cove vers la parcelle a creer, au plus tard le 15 novembre 2006; 92 -554 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 B. que le maire et le greffier communal soient autorises a signer toute la documentation requise pour conclure cette transaction. 2. QUE le conseil communal autorise l'avocat municipal ou son representant, suivant 1'execution de 1'echange de terrains susmentionne, a approuver une modification supplementaire apportee a l'ordonnance par consentement datee du 19 janvier 2006, en vigueur a 1'heure actuelle. Ladite ordonnance par consentement ordonne que Peter E. Collings et Coleen F. Collings cessent immediatement 1'exploitation commerciale exercee sur leur propriete situee au 73, allee Lake Cove, a Saint John, N. -B. et qu'ils s'abstiennent a l'avenir d'utiliser leur propriete a des fins commerciales. L'ordonnance stipule egalement que les Collings doivent demolir ou enlever I'immeuble situe sur ladite propriete au plus tard le 31 juillet 2006. Cette modification supplementaire vise a prolonger le delai jusqu'au 30 juin 2007, au plus tard. L'inspecteur des batiments est ordonne de ne pas proceder a la demolition de I'immeuble susmentionne a moins qu'il ne regoive des instructions contraires a cet egard provenant du conseil communal. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. (Le conseiller Titus est de nouveau present a la reunion.) 10. Consideration of By -laws 10.1 Third Reading Zoning By -law Amendment - 270 Cottage Road On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor White RESOLVED that the by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -24, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 20 hectares, located at 270 Cottage Road, also identified as being PID Number 55112510, from "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential classification, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -24, a Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John was read in its entirety. On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor Court RESOLVED that the by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -24, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 20 hectares, located at 270 Cottage Road, also identified as being PID Number 55112510, from "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential classification, be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Read a third time by title, the by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -24, a Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ". 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10.1 Troisieme lecture du projet de modification de I'arrete sur le zonage visant le 270, chemin Cottage Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller White RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no CP 110 -24, modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », relativement au rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 20 hectares, situee au 270, chemin Cottage et inscrite sous le NID 55112510, afin de faire passer la classification de zone residentielle de banlieue amenagee — habitations unifamiliales « RSS » a zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R- 2 », fasse ('objet d'une lecture. 92 -555 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -24 modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller Court RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no CP 110 -24, modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », relativement au rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 20 hectares, situee au 270, chemin Cottage et inscrite sous le NID 55112510, afin de faire passer la classification de zone residentielle de banlieue amenagee — habitations unifamiliales « RSS » a zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R- 2 », fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -24 modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John ». 10.2(a)Third Reading Zoning By -law Amendment 1210 Loch Lomond Road 10.2(b) Section 39 Conditions 1210 Loch Lomond Road 10.2(c) Planning Advisory Committee Report Section 39 Conditions Consideration was given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee addressing concerns raised over Section 39 conditions discussed at the Public Hearing of October 23, 2006, and presenting revised conditions. On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor White RESOLVED that the by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -25, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1 hectare, located at 1210 Loch Lomond Road, also identified as being PID Number 55008593, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "B -2" General Business classification, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -25, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John" was read in its entirety. On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor White RESOLVED: That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the rezoning of a portion of the parcel of land located at 1210 Loch Lomond Road, having an area of approximately 1.0 hectares, also identified as being a portion of PID Number 55008593, be subject to the conditions that: a) the use of the property be limited to the following uses: antique shop or boutique, artist's or photographer's studio, barber shop or beauty salon, business office, dance or yoga studio, florist or gift shop, health club, retail store, institution of an educational, governmental or philanthropic nature, or a public library, park or playground; b) the development be in accordance with detailed site and elevation plans approved by the Development Officer illustrating building design, asphalt parking areas, access, curbing, landscaping and lighting; c) the site be developed in accordance with detailed driveway construction and drainage plans, subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer; d) the site be provided with water and sanitary sewer services in a manner approved by the Chief City Engineer; 92 -556 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 e) exterior lighting be designed and placed in a manner that does not direct light onto adjacent residential properties; f) all disturbed areas of the site not occupied by buildings, parking areas and a driveway be landscaped within six (6) months of the issuance of a building permit for any phase of commercial development; g) no structures, except fencing, be permitted within 10 metres (33 feet) of the northwest property boundary; h) an all- season buffer of either coniferous trees or a solid board -on -board fence, as approved by the Development Officer, be constructed along the northwest property boundary between the proposed development and the dwelling at 1204 Loch Lomond Road; and i) any areas designed for the storage of refuse or composting be screened by a solid board -on -board fence. and further that upon the rezoning of the parcel of land, the land and any building or structure thereon must be developed and used in conformity with the proposal and conditions identified herein. On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor White RESOLVED that the by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -25 , A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1 hectare, located at 1210 Loch Lomond Road, also identified as being PID Number 55008593, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "B -2" General Business classification, be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Read a third time by title, the by -law entitled, "By -law Number C.P. 110 -25, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ". 10.2a) Troisibme lecture du projet de modification de I'arrete sur le zonage relativement au 1210, chemin Loch Lomond 10.2b) Conditions imposees par I'article 39 visant le 1210, chemin Loch Lomond 10.2c) Rapport presente par le Comite consultatif d'urbanisme relatif aux conditions imposees par I'article 39 Examen d'un rapport presente par le Comite consultatif d'urbanisme soulignant les inquietudes relatives aux conditions imposees par I'article 39 qui ont fait ('objet de discussions lors de I'audience publique tenue le 23 octobre 2006, et modifiant ces conditions. Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller White RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », modifiant le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative d'un hectare, situee au 1210, chemin Loch Lomond, et inscrite sous le NID 55008593, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone residentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « RS -2 » a zone commerciale generale « B -2 », fasse ('objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -25 modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller White RESOLU RESOLU qu'en vertu des conditions prevues a I'article 39 de la Loi surl'urbanisme, le rezonage d'une partie de la parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative d'un 92 -557 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 hectare, situee au 1210, chemin Loch Lomond, et faisant partie du terrain portant le NID 55008593, soit assujettie aux conditions suivantes : a) la propriete ne doit viser que les usages suivants : antiquaire, atelier d'artiste ou de photographe, salon de coiffure, bureau commercial, ecole de danse ou de yoga; fleuriste, boutique de cadeaux, centre de culture physique, magasin de vente au detail, etablissement educatif, gouvernemental ou philanthropique, bibliotheque publique, parc ou terrain de jeux; b) I'amenagement doit titre conforme au plan de situation et aux plans d'elevation detailles approuves par I'agent d'amenagement et qui montrent un dessin de I'immeuble, des aires de stationnement et des allees asphaltees, des bordures, un amenagement paysager et le systeme d'eclairage; c) 1'emplacement doit titre amenage conformement aux plans de drainage et aux croquis illustrant la construction des entrees, sous reserve de I'approbation de l'ingenieur municipal en chef; d) 1'emplacement doit prevoir un reseau d'aqueduc et d'egouts sanitaires adequat aux fins d'approbation par l'ingenieur municipal en chef; e) le systeme d'eclairage exterieur doit titre conqu et installe de maniere a empecher que la lumiere se propage directement sur les proprietes residentielles adjacentes; f) ('amenagement paysager de toutes les zones perturbees de 1'emplacement qui ne sont pas occupees par des batiments, des aires de stationnement et des entrees doit se faire dans les six (6) mois de la date de delivrance du permis de construire en ce qui concerne toutes les phases du projet d'amenagement commercial; g) aucune construction, a 1'exception d'une cloture, n'est permise a moins de 10 metres (33 pieds) de distance de la limite nord -est de la propriete; h) un tampon toutes saisons, compose de coniferes ou d'une cloture solide planche sur planche, approuve par I'agent d'amenagement, doit longer la limite nord- ouest de la propriete entre I'amenagement propose et la residence situee au 1204, chemin Loch Lomond; i) tous les secteurs destines a 1'entreposage ou au compostage doivent titre caches par une cloture solide planche sur planche; de plus, a la suite du rezonage de la parcelle, le terrain ainsi que tout batiment ou construction qui s'y trouve, doivent titre amenages et utilises conformement a la proposition et aux conditions stipulees par les presentes. Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller White RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », modifiant le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative d'un hectare, situee au 1210, chemin Loch Lomond, et inscrite sous le NID 55008593, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone residentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « RS -2 » a zone commerciale generale « B -2 », fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -25 modifiant I'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John ». 92 -558 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Need for New Federal Museums Policy and Investment to Assist Museums On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that: WHEREAS museums play a fundamental role in the preservation of our heritage for future generations; WHEREAS museums are important local centres for learning, teaching 7.5 million school children each year about Canadian history and values; WHEREAS museums are important generators of economic development in all communities, providing more than $650 million in direct salaries and wages invested in people and local communities to provide permanent jobs; WHEREAS museums are dynamic community centres that employ 24,000 people, and are supported by 55,000 volunteers and 300,000 friends across the country; WHEREAS museums are central to driving tourism across the country, with 59 million visitors annually; 60% of international tourists visit a Canadian museum during their stay; WHEREAS museums across Canada require strong public support and adequate resources to achieve their goals in communities; WHEREAS the federal government is developing a new Canadian Museums Policy; BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of Saint John, New Brunswick call on the federal government to introduce a new Canadian Museums Policy and to invest in Canada's museums to help build our communities and a better Canada as soon as possible. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11. Intervention des membres du conseil 11.1 Besoins au chapitre de la nouvelle Politique museale canadienne et I'investissement visant a aider les musees Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU QUE: ATTENDU QUE les musees jouent un role fondamental dans la conservation de notre patrimoine pour les futures generations; ATTENDU QUE les musees sont des centres educatifs locaux importants et qu'ils assurent 1'enseignement de I'histoire et des valeurs canadiennes pour 7,5 millions d'ecoliers chaque annee; ATTENDU QUE les musees contribuent de fagon importante au developpement economique de toutes les collectivites, versent plus de 650 M$ en salaires directs et investissent des sommes au sein des collectivites afin d'offrir aux citoyens des emplois permanents; ATTENDU QUE les musees sont des centres communautaires dynamiques qui emploient 24 000 personnes et qui beneficient du soutien de 55 000 benevoles et de 300 000 amis partout au pays; ATTENDU QUE les musees sont au coeur de I'elan touristique d'un bout a I'autre du pays, accueillant 59 millions de visiteurs annuellement, et que 60 % des touristes internationaux visitent un musee canadien au cours de leur sejour; ATTENDU que les musees partout au Canada requierent un solide appui du public et des ressources adequates afin d'atteindre leurs objectifs au sein des collectivites; ATTENDU QUE le gouvernement federal elabore une nouvelle Politique museale canadienne : 92 -559 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 IL EST RESOLU que le conseil de The City of Saint John, Nouveau - Brunswick, incite le gouvernement federal a presenter sa nouvelle Politique museale canadienne et a investir dans les musees canadiens, des que possible, afin d'aider a renforcer nos collectivites et a ameliorer le Canada. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11.2 Three - Dimensional Graphics Program On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that Common Council direct the Planning Department to investigate and report back to Council, the possibility of incorporating a graphics program that will provide three dimensional imaging with our current Geographic Information Services. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11.2 Programme de graphiques a trois dimensions Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que le conseil communal charge le Service d'urbanisme d'examiner la possibility d'incorporer un programme de graphiques qui puisse produire des images a trois dimensions, compatibles avec le systeme d'information geographique utilise a I'heure actuelle et d'en presenter le compte rendu devant le conseil. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11.3 Parking /Development /Cash -In -Lieu On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Deputy Mayor Hooton RESOLVED that staff (planning and parking) prepare a policy "cash -in -lieu" re parking /variances. The details of location, amount, incentives, would be included in the policy and the funds collected would be directed to "parking ". Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11.3 Stationnement, amenagement et compensation monetaire Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par la mairesse suppleante Hooton RESOLU que les employes municipaux (urbanisme et stationnement) elaborent une politique de compensation monetaire relativement aux services de stationnement et de modifications urbanistiques. Les details relatifs a 1'emplacement, aux montants et aux primes seraient inclus a la politique et les fonds preleves affectes au « stationnement ». A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11.4 Booklet on how your Municipal Tax Dollar is Spent On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the City Manager review the template provided by the Halifax Regional Municipality, and direct staff to develop an appropriate publication that can be distributed to the citizens of Saint John. Question being taken, the motion was carried. (Councillor Court withdrew from the meeting.) 92 -560 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 11.4 Livret sur la maniere dont les taxes foncieres sont affect6es Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le directeur general examine le modele fourni par la municipalite regionale d'Halifax et charge les employes d'elaborer un ouvrage adequat qui puisse titre distribue aux citoyens de Saint John. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. (Le conseiller Court quitte la reunion.) 11.5 Retail Development on Fairville Boulevard On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that the City Manager provide a verbal update this evening regarding West Side Fairville Blvd. retail development, and a written report be submitted in two weeks time to include all variables regarding this development with special attention given to land acquisitions for the new transit terminal. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The City Manager reported that there is activity on the Fairville Blvd. land issue and that he will be reporting to Council as soon as a purchase of sale agreement is obtained which he believes will be within two weeks. 11.5 Am6nagement commercial sur le boulevard Fairville Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que le directeur general presente une mise a jour verbale des ce soir relativement a I'amenagement commercial sur le cote ouest du boulevard Fairville, qu'il presente un rapport ecrit dans deux semaines afin d'inclure les variations relatives a cet amenagement et qu'une attention particuliere soit accordee a I'acquisition de bien -fonds destines a I'amenagement de la nouvelle gare de transport. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Le directeur general confirme que des demarches sont en cours relativement a I'acquisition de bien -fonds et qu'il fera le compte rendu devant le conseil aussitot que la convention d'achat sera executee et, a son avis, ceci devrait se produire d'ici deux semaines. 8. Delegations /Presentations 8.1 Crescent Valley Action Team Referring to a submitted electronic slide presentation and submitted script, Gail Taylor, Community Coach of Vibrant Communities, Anne McLeod, Bev Thibodeau, Lisa Duplessis, and Janet McLaughlin, members of the Crescent Valley Survey Action Team, reviewed the demographics and geography of the Crescent Valley area and offered survey information gathered from residents. They presented information on housing and leisure and recreation in the area, and made recommendations to promote sustainable development in the area. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the Crescent Valley Survey Action Team's presentation be referred to the City Manager, and that he address the four issues identified in the submission, and come back with an action plan on the subject. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 92 -561 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 8. Delegations et presentations 8.1 Crescent Valley Action Team (equipe d'action sur 1'etude du quartier Crescent Valley) Se reportant a une presentation electronique de diapositives et le texte presentes, Gail Taylor, monitrice communautaire au sein des collectivites vivantes, Anne McLeod, Bev Thibodeau, Lisa Duplessis et Janet McLaughlin, membres de I'equipe d'action sur I'etude du quartier Crescent Valley, presentent un aperqu de la demographie et de la geographie de la region de Crescent Valley et fournissent de ('information relative aux sondages effectues aupres des citoyens. Its presentent de ('information relative aux logements et aux loisirs et recommandent la promotion de I'amenagement durable dans la region. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que la presentation donnee par I'equipe d'action sur I'etude du quartier Crescent Valley soit portee a I'attention du directeur general pour qu'il puisse etudier les quatre questions soulevees lors de la presentation et ensuite preparer un plan d'action sur la matiere aux fins d'examen par le conseil. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 14.1 2006 Interim Financial Operating Results and August 2006 Operating Results Schedule On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the report, 2006 Interim Financial Operating Results and the August 2006 Operating Results Schedule, be received for information. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 14.1 Bilan financier du budget d'exploitation interimaire 2006 et annexe du bilan financier du budget d'exploitation jusqu'en aout 2006 Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le rapport relatif au bilan financier du budget d'exploitation interimaire 2006 et a I'annexe du bilan financier du budget d'exploitation jusqu'en aout 2006 soient acceptes a titre informatif. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 13.5 Saint John Transit Commission re Budget On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Transit Commission commenting on the budget for the year end December 31, 2006, and advising that they expect to be over budget by $150,000., be received for information. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 13.5 Budget de la Commission de transport de Saint John Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que la lettre regue de la Commission de transport de Saint John, relatif au budget pour 1'exercice financier se terminant le 92 -562 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 31 decembre 2006 et affirmant que la Commission prevoit depasser son budget par 150 000 $, soit acceptee a titre informatif. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 8.2 Heritage Development Board Referring to a submitted electronic slide presentation, Jim Bezanson, Heritage Development Officer reviewed the role of the Board; the grant program and the benefits of a Heritage program, including the tax benefits of areas designated. He requested that Council consider increasing the Heritage Development funding from $50,000. to $150,000. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the request of the Heritage Development Board for $150,000. be referred to budget deliberations. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 8.2 Conseil d'amenagement du patrimoine Se reportant a une presentation electronique de diapositives, Jim Bezanson, agent d'amenagement du patrimoine, donne un aperqu du role qu'assume le conseil, et mentionne le programme de subvention et les avantages lies a un programme patrimonial, y compris les avantages fiscaux dont beneficient les quartiers designes demande au conseil d'augmenter le montant de la subvention accordee aux fins d'amenagement patrimonial de 50 000 $ a 150 000 $. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Farren QUE la demande de subvention au montant de 150 000 $ presentee par le Conseil d'amenagement du patrimoine, soit soumise aux deliberations budgetaires. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 9. Public Hearings 7:00 P.M. 9. Audiences publiques a 19 h 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.0 Presentation on Saint John Harbour Clean -Up Referring to a submitted electronic slide presentation and submitted report, the Commissioner of Municipal Operations reviewed a proposed 7 -year Plan of Action for Harbour Clean -up, to achieve 100% treatment of collected municipal wastewater, the elimination of all raw sewage outfalls and the alignment of the community's environmental responsibilities with its vision for a sustainable future. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, Common Council endorse the 7 -Year Plan of Action for Saint John Harbour Clean -Up presented in the submitted report and that a letter be sent to the Government of Canada confirming Council's support of the 7 -Year Plan for Harbour Clean -up. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.0 Presentation relative au nettoyage du port de Saint John Se reportant a une presentation electronique de diapositives et au rapport presentes, le Commissaire aux operations municipales donne un apergu du plan d'action prevu sur sept ans visant a nettoyer le port afin d'assurer le traitement integral des eaux usees 92 -563 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 municipales, I'elimination des deversements d'eaux d'egouts, et I'alignement des responsabilites environnementales de la collectivite avec sa vision d'un avenir durable. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general, le conseil communal appuie le plan d'action sur sept ans visant a nettoyer le port de Saint John tel que le souligne le rapport presente et qu'une lettre soit expediee au Gouvernement du Canada confirmant que le conseil appuie ce plan d'action visant a nettoyer le port de Saint John, sur sept ans. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12.1 Provincially & Regionally Designated Highways - Proposed 5 -Year Capital Improvement Program (2007- 2011) On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Deputy Mayor Hooton RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, Common Council request additional funding from the Minister of Transportation in the amount of $620,000. in the Municipal Designated Highways Grant Program to complete additional reconstruction work and an additional $72,000. for asphalt resurfacing on the section of Loch Lomond Road between Garnett Road and Charles Street before cold milling and resurfacing in 2007 to complete the original Municipal Designated Highways Grant Program as approved by Common Council on October 28, 2002; and recommend to the Minister of Transportation that the Municipal Designated Highways Grant Program be extended to 2011 to include reconstruction of "all" sections of Provincially and Regionally Designated Highways to be turned over to The City of Saint John as municipal streets under the original concept of the program bringing the total estimated cost for the Municipal Designated Highway Grant Program to approximately $15,714,000. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12.1 Programme quinquennal d'amelioration des immobilisations relatif aux routes provinciales et regionales designees (2007 a 2011) Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par la mairesse suppleante Hooton RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general, le conseil communal demande au ministre des transports d'octroyer une subvention supplementaire au montant de 620 000 $ en vertu du programme relatif aux routes municipales designees afin d'achever les travaux de refection supplementaires ainsi que la somme de 72 000 $ pour des travaux de resurfagage asphaltique d'un trongon du chemin Loch Lomond situe entre le chemin Garnett et la rue Charles avant que soient entames les travaux de fraisage a froid et de resurfagage en 2007 en vue de realiser le programme original relatif aux routes municipales designees, tel qu'il fut approuve par le conseil communal le 28 octobre 2002; et recommandant au ministre des transports que le programme relatif aux routes municipales designees soit prolonge jusqu'a 2011 afin d'inclure les travaux de refection sur tous les tronQons de routes provinciales et regionales designees destines a titre annexes a The City of Saint John en tant que routes municipales en vertu du projet initial relatif au programme; le total des couts lies au programme de subvention relatif aux routes municipales designees est prevu s'elever a environ 15 714 000 $. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12.2 Provincially Designated Highways Proposed 5 -Year Capital Improvement Program (2007- 2011) On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Deputy Mayor Hooton RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the submitted Provincially Designated Highways 5 -year Capital Improvement Program for the years 2007 -2011 be adopted by Common Council and further that the approved program be submitted to the Minister, Director of Design and the District Engineer for the New Brunswick Department of Transportation. 92 -564 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12.2 Programme quinquennal d'am6lioration des immobilisations relatif aux routes provinciales d6sign6es (2007 a 2011) Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par la mairesse suppleante Hooton RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general, le programme quinquennal d'amelioration des immobilisations relatif aux routes provinciales designees pour les annees 2007 a 2011, tel qu'il est presente, soit adopte par le conseil communal et que le programme approuve soit presente au ministre et au directeur de la conception du ministere des Transports du Nouveau - Brunswick. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12.3 Communication Services - Emergency Medical Services On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Deputy Mayor Hooton RESOLVED that: 1. The submitted report on Communications Services — Emergency Medical Services, be received for information. 2. Common Council approve the extension of the agreement with Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation relative to the provision of communications services for the emergency medical service, to November 30, 2007. 3. Common Council endorse and support the continued action of staff in promoting the PSCC as a centre of excellence in EMS communications, with the Province, and 4. Common Council write to the new Minister of Health, requesting an update on the government's intent related to the consolidation of communications services for EMS and indicating the expectations that there will not be a degradation quality of service to the citizens of Saint John as a result of any changes proposed. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12.3 Services de communications : Services m6dicaux d'urgence Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par la mairesse suppleante Hooton RESOLU QUE : 1. le rapport presente relatif aux Services de communications : Services medicaux d'urgence, soit accepte a titre informatif; 2. le conseil communal approuve la prorogation de la convention conclue avec la Corporation des sciences de la sante de I'Atlantique relativement a I'offre de services de communications visant les services medicaux d'urgence jusqu'au 30 novembre 2007; 3. le conseil communal appuie les demarches continues entreprises par les employes aupres de la Province relativement a la promotion du Centre des communications de la securite publique comme centre d'excellence de communications en cas d'urgence; 4. le conseil communal redige une lettre a I'attention du ministre de la Sante voulant que lui soit transmise une mise a jour sur ('intention du gouvernement en ce qui concerne la fusion des services de communication en cas d'urgence et indiquant qu'il prevoit aucune deterioration de la quality des services offerts aux citoyens de Saint John en raison des modifications proposees. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 92 -565 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 13. Committee Reports 13.1 Planning Advisory Committee - Proposed Subdivision 270 Cottage Rd. On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that: 1. Common Council assent to one or more subdivision plans, in one or more phases, in general accordance with the submitted photo- reduced tentative subdivision plan for Phase 1 of the Berryman Estates Subdivision. 2. Common Council assent to any necessary municipal services or public utility easements for this subdivision development, including any municipal services easements outside the limits of the proposed subdivision in order to provide municipal sewer, storm or water service. 3. Common Council not assent to the proposed Land for Public Purposes dedications, but instead assent to one dedication having an approximate area of 2,500 square metres (26,911 square feet or 0.62 acres), being a slight enlargement of the proposed "Phase 1 LFPP" dedication illustrated on the submitted tentative subdivision plan. 4. Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of one or more City /Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure provision of the required work and facilities, including detailed site and drainage plans for the approval of the Chief City Engineer. 5. Common Council authorize cost - sharing outside the limits of the proposed subdivision in accordance with Section 26 of the Subdivision By -law. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 13. Rapports d6pos6s par les comites 13.1 Comite consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le projet de lotissement situe au 270, chemin Cottage Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU QUE : 1. que le conseil communal accorde son consentement a un ou plusieurs plans de lotissement, sur une ou plusieurs phases, conformement, de maniere generale, au plan de lotissement provisoire presente sur photo reduite, visant la premiere phase de lotissement de Berryman Estates; 2. le conseil communal accorde son consentement a toute servitude aux fins de services municipaux ou d'utilite publique requise relativement a cet amenagement de lotissement, y compris toute servitude aux fins de services municipaux situee a 1'exterieur des limites du lotissement propose afin d'amenager le reseau d'eau et d'egouts et des eaux pluviales; 3. le conseil communal refuse d'accorder son consentement a ('affectation d'un terrain d'utilite publique, mais qu'il approuve plutot une affectation de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 2 500 metres carres (26 911 pieds carres ou 0,62 acres), soit une augmentation de la superficie de ('affection du terrain d'utilite publique proposee pour la premiere phase, telle qu'elle est delimitee sur le plan de lotissement provisoire presente; 4. le conseil communal autorise la redaction et la signature de contrats de lotissement entre la ville et le promoteur afin de permettre 1'execution des travaux requis et la mise en place des installations necessaires, y compris 1'e1aboration de plans de situation et de drainage detailles soumis a I'approbation de l'ingenieur municipal en chef; 5. le conseil communal autorise le partage des couts s'elevant au -dela des limites prevues en vertu du projet de lotissement conformement a I'article 26 de 1'arrete concernant le lotissement. 92 -566 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 13.2 By -law Review Committee Request for New Postering By -law On motion of Councillor Chase Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the By -law Review Committee's recommendation that it investigate the authority and the feasibility and the desirability of having a postering by -law, and subsequently make a recommendation to Council, be received for information. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 13.2 Comit6 de revision des arret6s municipaux relativement a la demande d'un nouvel arret6 relatif a I'affichage Proposition du conseiller Chase Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que la recommandation presentee par le Comit6 de revision des arret6s municipaux voulant que soit examines les droits, la faisabilite et les avantages lies a un arret6 concernant I'affichage et par la suite que des recommandations soient formulees et presentees au conseil, soit acceptee a titre informatif. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 13.3 Vision 2015 - Community Consultation On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that Common Council endorse and support the initiation of a community consultation process regarding the long -term vision for our community as detailed in the submitted report, Vision 2015 — Community Consultation. Question being taken, the motion was carried. (Councillor Titus withdrew from the meeting.) 13.3 Consultations communautaires present6es par le Comit6 sur la Vision 2015 Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que le conseil communal appuie la creation d'un processus de consultation communautaire relatif a la vision a long terme de notre collectivite telle qu'elle est soulignee dans le rapport presente intitule Vision 2015 — Consultations communautaires. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. (Le conseiller Titus quitte la reunion.) 13.4 Vision 2015 Report - System for Election to Common Council On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the report from the Vision 2015 Steering Committee regarding the on -going governance component of Council's operation, be referred to the next open meeting of Committee of the Whole. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 13.4 Rapport sur la Vision 2015: systeme Electoral pour le conseil communal Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le rapport presente par le Comit6 92 -567 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 directeur de la Vision 2015 relatif a I'administration du secteur des exploitations du conseil, soit reporte a la prochaine seance publique du Comite plenier. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 14.2 Friends of St. Joseph's Thanks to Fire Department On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Ferguson RESOLVED that the letter from the Friends of St. Joseph's thanking the Saint John Fire Department for its support and active representation, be received for information, and that a letter be sent to the Minister of Health with a copy to Saint Joseph's urging the Province to fulfill their commitment to retain the emergency department at St. Joseph's Hospital in the event of minor illnesses or injuries. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 14.2 Lettre de remerciements adressee au Service d'incendie reque de I'organisme Amis de St. Joseph's Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Ferguson RESOLU que la lettre reque des Amis de St. Joseph's remerciant le Service d'incendie de Saint John de son soutien et de sa representation active, soit acceptee a titre informatif et qu'une lettre soit expediee au ministre de la Sante, avec copie conforme transmise a St. Joseph's, priant la Province de respecter ses engagements visant a maintenir le service d'urgence a I'hopital St. Joseph's afin de traiter les maladies et les blessures mineures. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 14.3 2006 Debenture Issue On motion of Councillor Ferguson Seconded by Deputy Mayor Hooton RESOLVED that: Whereas occasion having arisen in the public interest for the following public civic works and needed civic improvements, that is to say: GENERALFUND General Government Transportation Services Environmental Development Recreation and Culture WATER & SEWERAGE UTILITY Water System Sewer System SAINT JOHN TRANSIT TOTAL $ 1,250,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 2,250,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 6,500,000 $ 1,500,000 8,000,000 900,000 $19,900,000 Therefore resolved that debentures be issued under provisions of the Acts of Assembly 52, Victoria, Chapter 27, Section 29 and amendments thereto to the amount of $19,900,000. 2. Commissioner of Finance be authorized to issue and to sell to the New Brunswick Municipal Finance Corporation (the "Corporation ") a City of Saint John 92 -568 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 bond or debenture in the principal amount of $19,900,000 at such terms and conditions as are recommended by the Corporation. 3. And further that the City of Saint John agrees to issue post -dated cheques to the Corporation, or other such arrangements as the Corporation may from time to time accept, in payment of principal and interest charges on the above bond or debenture as and when they are required by the Corporation. 4. And further that the Commissioner of Finance be hereby authorized to receive an offer in connection with the foregoing debentures at a price not less than $98 per $100 of debenture, at interest rates not to exceed an average of 6.50% and at a term not to exceed 15 years for the issue related to the General Fund and Transit and not to exceed 20 years for the Water & Sewerage Utility. 5. And further that the Commissioner of Finance report to Common Council the exact values for price per $100 of debenture, interest rate and term in years, together with the date of the issue." Question being taken, the motion was carried. 14.3 Emission d'obligations en 2006 Proposition du conseiller Ferguson Appuyee par la mairesse suppleante Hooton RESOLU que: Considerant la necessite, dans l'interet public, de proceder a 1'execution de travaux publics et d'apporter certaines ameliorations municipales, relativement aux elements enumeres ci- dessous : FONDS D'ADMINISTRATION Administration generale 1 250 000 $ Services de transport 6 000 000 $ Mise en valeur de 1'environnement 2 250 000 $ Services de loisirs et culture 1 500 000 $ 11 000 000 $ RESEAU D'AQUEDUC ET D'EGOUTS Reseau d'aqueduc 6 500 000 $ Reseau d'egouts 1 500 000 $ 8 000 000 $ COMMISSION DES TRANSPORTS DE SAINT JOHN TOTAL $19,900,000 EN CONSEQUENCE, IL EST RESOLU que soient emises des obligations en vertu des dispositions des Lois de la Chambre d'assemb /ee, 52 Victoria, chapitre 27, article 29, et des modifications afferentes, pour la somme de 19 900 000 $; 3. que le commissaire aux finances soit autorise a emettre et a vendre a la Corporation de financement des municipalites du Nouveau - Brunswick (la Corporation ») une obligation ou une debenture de The City of Saint John au montant principal de 19 900 000 $ aux modalites et conditions recommandees par la Corporation; 3. que The City of Saint John accorde son assentiment a 1'emission de cheques post -dates au nom de la Corporation, ou a toute autre disposition que la Corporation peut accepter a tout moment, pour le paiement du principal et des interets relatifs a ('obligation ou a la debenture susmentionnees au moment requis et dans la forme exigee par la Corporation; 92 -569 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 6, 2006 /LE 6 NOVEMBRE 2006 4. que le commissaire aux finances soit autorise, par les presentes, a accepter une offre, relativement aux debentures susmentionnees, a un tarif egal a au moins 98 $ pour 100 $ d'obligations, a un taux d'interet maximal de 6,5 % en moyenne et pour une duree maximale de 15 ans pour 1'emission relative au fonds d'administration et au service de transport et une duree maximale de 20 ans pour le reseau d'aqueduc et d'egouts; 5. et, de plus, que le commissaire aux finances presente un rapport au conseil communal, indiquant la valeur exacte du tarif pour 100 $ en debentures, le taux d'interet, et la duree en annees, ainsi que la date d'emission. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 15. General Correspondence 15.1 Canadian Union of Postal Workers - Moratorium on Post Office Closures and Rural Delivery On motion of Deputy Mayor Hooton Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the letter from CUPW requesting that The City of Saint John support and endorse the submitted resolution regarding the moratorium on post office closures, be received for information. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Farren voting nay. 15. Correspondance generale 15.1 Obtention d'un moratoire par le Syndicat des travailleurs et travailleuses des postes du Canada visant la fermeture de comptoirs postaux et ('interruption de la livraison en region Proposition de la mairesse suppleante Hooton Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que la lettre reque du STTP voulant que The City of Saint John appuie la resolution presentee relative a I'obtention d'un moratoire visant la fermeture de comptoirs postaux, soit acceptee a titre informatif. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Le conseiller Farren vote contre la proposition. 16. Adjournment The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. 16. Cloture de la seance Le maire declare que la seance est levee a 22 h 30. Mayor /maire Common Clerk /greffier communal Eric L. Teed, O.C., C.D., .C. 127 Prince Wil, iam Street, Saint John, New Brunswick, E2L 2B4 Tel: (506) 634.7324 Fax: (506) 634 -7423 i NovemNr 15th, 2006 Common Council City of Saint John Your Worship and Councillors, I recently learned in a news article that Jhe City of Montreal may see a 28 storey office tower being constructed. However, what attracted my attention ii' the story was the comment "it will be the first privately built commercial tower in the city to leek certification for energy efficiency environmental standards." I ask does the City of Saint John have y energy efficiency and environmental standards in its present bylaws governing new constructs n? i Its not possibly this could be referred to the Committee on standards being established pursuant to a recent Council resolution to determine what benefit or value is the City or its citizens. i '• Yours truly-- if ri t r St, Pius X Roman Catholic Church 316 Somerset Street, Saintlohn, New Brunswick E2K 2Y4 Tel: (506) 653 -6830 Fax: (506) 653 -6864 November 14th, 2oo6 Mayor Norman MacFarlane Members of Common Council Post Office Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Your Worship and Members of Common Council:- I am writing this letter on behalf of the Bishop's Advisory Committee of the Catholic Cemeteries for the Diocese of Saint John with regard to St. Joseph's Cemetery which was opened in 1878 on Westmorland Road in East Saint John. St. Joseph's Cemetery is one of the main cemeteries for the Saint John area. For a number of years, the advisory committee, with the approval of the Bishop of the Diocese, has been expending a large amount of money on its beautification. Both the Catholic faithful as well as the larger community have been most complimentary on the general appearance of the Cemetery and the contribution to the beautification of the general Westmorland Road area resulting from these improvements. Of course, when the Cemetery was established and the beautification project was undertaken almost two decades ago, the committee never foresaw the extensive retail development that has occurred during these past few years across from our property. The widening of Westmorland Road to four lanes, ending just above the gates near the cemetery's office complex, has dramatically impacted the roadside appearance of St. Joseph's. Recently, I, along with the Manager and the assistant of the Cemetery operation met with your representative, the road foreman and the landscaper. I was more than appalled that the lower hill had been removed completely, with little concern for the deceased who are interred closest to Westmorland Road. We recommended immediately that a covering be placed over the endangered site because of the potential erosion and possible resultant disengagement of the caskets from their burial sites. Thankfully a tarpaulin was placed over the threatened sites, thus alleviating any potential distress for family members of the deceased. On that day, as well, we discussed at length the repairs to our frontage gardens and the other concerns that both the cemetery management and the advisory committee have resulting from the installation of the new curbing and sidewalks. As you may know, a retaining wall has been installed at the lower end of our cemetery property, for which we are grateful. However, the necessary elevation of the retaining wall installation, while supporting the lower end of the frontage, has created a "ledge" effect between the cemetery ground just above the newly installed wall and the sidewalk below. In short, we now have an accident waiting to happen because there is a pathway in that area of the Cemetery, and people in wheelchairs or motorized vehicles could find themselves losing control and going over the wall. City staff indicated that a "chain link" fence might be installed. Such a fence would be totally unacceptable to the advisory committee and the cemetery management because, as mentioned above, we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in beautification, and a chain link fence would detract markedly from the aesthetic look of the resting place of our loved ones. We ask that a wrought iron fence, which would tie in with our main entrance, be installed. We are not opposed to cost sharing this installation. In addition, realizing that the landscape artist can only accomplish so much during the remaining planting season, we request that our road side gardens be restored to their pre -road widening appearance by the Spring of 2007 at the latest. At the same time, we ask that the contractor(s) meet with our Cemetery staff so that all work, particularly that which is safety related, is done to ensure the safety of the cemetery maintenance workers and visitors to the cemetery. As a committee, we thank you for your consideration and look forward to a timely reply to our letter. Very sincerely, Rev.) ouglVReill Chair — Cemetery Committee Pc: Mr. Bert Steeves — City Engineer Debly Construction Ltd. Bishop's Advisory Committee: Dr. Elizabeth McGahan Mr. William Leahy Mr. Paul Daigle Mr. Fred Whalen Mr. Herbert Doucet Mr. Joe Flynn 5. Village Neighbourhood Association C/o 36 Richmond Street Saint John NB CANADA E21, 3B2 Reference: Union Street Crossing and Traffic Problems TO: Norm McFarlane, Mayor, City of Saint John Michelle Hooton, Deputy Mayor, City of Saint John Jay -Young Chang, Councillor Stephen Chase, Councillor Ivan Court, Councillor Bill Farren, Councillor John Ferguson, Councillor Peter McGuire, Councillor Glen Tait, Councillor Christopher T. Titus, Councillor Carl White, Councillor 14 Nov 2006 The Village Neighbourhood Association (VNA) of Saint John has asked me to compose a letter requesting your assistance. We have agreed to advocate the addition of another traffic light on Union Street. We wish to see a traffic light at the corner of Carmarthen and Union Streets at the crosswalk between the J.D. Irving Limited building and the Prince Edward Square apartment building. Too many drivers fail to yield to pedestrians in this crosswalk. That fact can be observed and experienced on a daily basis. Many of us have had difficulty crossing Union Street on numerous occasions. Too often cars and trucks race down this street as if it were a speedway. In late October I witnessed the damage done to a car that hit a pedestrian alongside the Sunshine Market. The pedestrian was hurled into the windshield of the vehicle smashing and crushing the glass. In spite of three police cars blocking the scene of the accident some drivers still tried to travel down Union Street when it was obviously closed due to the accident. Our neighbourhood in general has a very serious problem with traffic. Too many drivers of vehicles large and small use the Village as a cut through. Often these vehicles are skirting the lights on Crown and Union Streets. Hence, these vehicles speed through our streets and fail to provide cautious restraint while doing so. We still suffer from too many trucks using the Village as a cut through especially on Richmond Street. Although "No Truck" signs have been posted, there is virtually no enforcement. We need greater enforcement especially if another traffic light is placed on Union Street. We have been patient and we have requested changes to the traffic patterns for a long time. It is time to act. We want to live in safety. We want increased security in order to be free of the thought that as pedestrians we can get killed walking across streets inside and surrounding our neighbourhood. We are flexible on how this increased safety can be obtained. For instance, if another traffic light will be too expensive to obtain this year, please provide a stop sign on both sides of Union Street in the meantime. if trucks must use Richmond Street please place no left hand turn signs on Richmond at Prince Edward and at Richmond and Waterloo. This action will reduce the number of cut through vehicles. We thank you for your attention to this pro" and hope that we can see changes as soon as possible. Sincerely BiLL Br cc: Terry Totten Burt Steeves The Village Neighbourhood Associa ' n 657 -2665 or 635 -5827 sden@nbnet.nb.ca M &C- 2006 -309 November 15, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Public Hearing Date 450 Ashburn Road BACKGROUND: As provided in Common Council's resolution of August 3, 2004, this report indicates the Rezoning and Section 39 applications received and recommends an appropriate public hearing date. The full applications are available in the Common Clerk's office and will form part of the documentation presented at the Public Hearing. The following application has been received. Name of Location Existing Proposed Reason Applicant Zone Zone Alpine Auto Gruppe 450 Ashburn "I -1" Sec. 39 To permit Inc. Road automobile sales RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council schedule the Public Hearing for the Section 39 amendment application of Alpine Auto Gruppe Inc., 450 Ashburn Road, for Monday, December 18, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. Respectfully submitted, Jim R. Baird, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development ':© Terrence Totten, F.C.A. City Manager REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2006 -307 November 16, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm M °Farlane & Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: LOCH LOMOND WATERSHED STRUCTURES - EVALUATION AND DESIGN BACKGROUND The City of Saint john The approved 2006 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program — Watershed Protection category includes funding necessary to engage engineering services to complete the following: • Evaluation of the Loch Lomond Watershed Structures based on the Canadian Dam Association "Dam Safety Guidelines ". The purpose of this project is to provide a condition assessment, dam safety assessment and conceptual design of remedial measures required for all earth and concrete structures in the Loch Lomond Watershed. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT The purpose of this report is to make a recommendation for consulting engineering services for this project. M & C 2006 — 307 November 16, 2006 Page 2 ANALYSIS On August 29, 2006, with a comprehensive and detailed scope of work document developed by staff, a proposal for consulting engineering services was requested from SGE Acres Limited. In response to this request, SGE Acres Limited submitted a proposal on September 26, 2006. Staff was previously authorized to conduct negotiations with this consultant for engineering services for the following project: • Watershed Structures — Evaluation and Design A Review Committee of staff completed an analysis of the submission: Brian Keenan, P. Eng. Engineering Manager, Municipal Engineering Kendall Mason, P. Eng. Municipal Engineer, Municipal Engineering Brent McGovern, P. Eng. Manager, Water & Wastewater Operations Dave Logan, CPPB Purchasing Agent / Manager, Materials and Fleet Management Each member completed a review of the submission, and a subsequent meeting of the Review Committee was held to jointly discuss the information presented in the SGE Acres Limited proposal. The upset price contained in the proposal was also evaluated and the committee agreed that the consultant's requested fee was appropriate for submission to Council for approval. The submission from SGE Acres Limited met all of the requirements of the request for proposal, in a manner acceptable to the committee, with a cost - effective bid for the project. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS An amount of $100,000 was included in the 2006 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program for engineering services. The proposed cost of the work from SGE Acres Limited to provide engineering design services is $101,704.99 including the City's eligible HST rebate — a negative difference of $1,704.99 in the Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program. M & C 2006 — 307 November 16, 2006 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the proposal of SGE Acres Limited for engineering services for the Loch Lomond Watershed Structures— Evaluation and Design be accepted and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the appropriate documentation in that regard. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Commissioner, Municipal Operations & Engineering Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A. City Manager November 16, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: Subject: ACCESS AGREEMENT FAIRVILLE BOULEVARD With respect to the City of Saint John's ongoing discussion related to the possible sale of lands on Fairville Boulevard, it would now be appropriate for Common Council to adopt the following resolution. "Authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the Agreement between the City of Saint John and Plaza BNG Inc., so as to permit Plaza access to the city owned lands on Fairville Boulevard to carry out inspections, surveys and testing . Respectfully submitted, Terrence L. Totten, FCA CITY MANAGER M &C- 2006 -308 November 15, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Rescheduling of Public Hearing Saint John Non Profit Housing Inc. Rezoning Application 53 -75 Leinster Street BACKGROUND: On October 23, 2006 Common Council scheduled a public hearing for the above - noted rezoning application for Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. The Planning Advisory Committee was scheduled to consider the application at its meeting on Tuesday, November 14, 2006. ANALYSIS: On November 7, 2006 the applicant advised Planning and Development that further discussions with neighbourhood residents were about to take place. As these further discussions may result in modifications to the proposal, the applicant requested that the public hearing on the matter be postponed. RECOMMENDATION: That the November 20, 2006 public hearing for the rezoning application of Saint John Non Profit Housing Inc., 53 -75 Leinster Street, be cancelled, and that Common Council schedule a new public hearing for Monday, December 18, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. Respectfully submitted, Jim R. Baird, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development JRB /r Project No. 06 -349 Terrence Totten, C.A. City Manager So& Horticu rades Association Aiio� Iptlon Horticulhurs � N_g Thursday, November 16, 2006 P.O. Box 742 Saint John NB EM -M 1- 866 - PLANTNB (752 -6862) fax 1 -866- 595 -5467 e -mail nbhta(a,nbnet.nb.ca Web: www.nbhta.ca The New B Hvi tiiculi-ral- Trades Assocat ion For: The Mayor and Members of Saint John City Council From Jim Landry Executive Director, NBHTA - ° 4Fti�tktiS1 YtkJi �N Growing Strong .... ��.`RFMOIT �� 14 Landscape New Brunswick Horticultural Trades Association AIMI City of Saint John Re: Pesticide usage in the urban environment. November 5, 2006 P.O. Box 742 Saint John NB E2L -4B3 1- 866 - PLANTNB (752 -6862) fax 1- 866 -595 -5467 e -mail nbhta(u nbnet.iib.ca Web: www.nbhta.ca The New Brunswick Horticultural Trades Association (NBHTA) represents the "Green Industry" whose primary purpose is to work with plants in the landscape in order to reinstate disturbed natural areas caused by urban development, and to maintain those sites for the benefit of the people as well as the environment. The NBHTA has been a longtime supporter and advocate of reduced pesticide usage in order to safely address the public concern on the perceived risks associated with the use of pest control products in the urban environment. To that end, NBHTA has adopted an IPM Accreditation Program whereby participating companies are forced to comply with a more strict "code of practice" that ensures a much greater level of safety and reduced usage of pest control products in the urban environment. Under the IPM Accreditation Program, participating companies are subjected to internal audits performed routinely by third party certified environmental auditors. Their role is to ensure that pest control products are used safely and for plant health care reasons other than just for pure cosmetic reasons. This program has demonstrated that pest control product usage can be reduced by 80% or more over a reasonably short period of time. The NBHTA is of the strong opinion that pesticide bans are counter - productive and do not accomplish what they are intended to do which is a reduction in pesticide usage and /or risk. Instead, with the difficulty of enforcement, a ban simply removes pesticides from the professional and leaves them in the hands of amateurs. Pesticides will still be accessible from retail store shelves and applied by homeowners and novice gardeners. Pesticide usage and /or risk will actually increase with the domestic usage of combination products (fertilizer and pesticide blend). These products are currently banned for use by professionals due to their high potency, while the less potent products used by professionals will be eliminated. Furthermore, pesticide usage by the professional lawn and landscape industry is a small fraction of the total usage representing approximately 2% of the total usage. The remaining 98% is made up of domestic users, forestry, agriculture, structural pest control and other industries. With IPM accreditation as a mandatory operating requirement, the percentage of pesticides used by lawn and landscape professionals would be less than 1% of the total usage! From this standpoint, a pesticide ban that targets the landscape industry does not make sense. The NBHTA considers an exemption for IPM Accredited companies to a pesticide ban bylaw to make more sense by minimizing the number of people using pest control products and enabling a safer, reduced usage and reduced risk approach. NBHTA recognizes that the issue of pesticide safety is a highly charged and emotional issue to many people, and in the absence of much of a defense in favour of using pesticides, it would appear to be a very simple and easy exercise to conclude that pesticides should not be used. Unfortunately, there is a lot of misinformation, and propaganda being presented about the assertions that lawn care pesticides have been "linked to" all kinds of health problems. Many of these claims are misleading but unfortunately are relied heavily upon in an effort to find evidence that pesticides for lawn care are Jim Landry Page I of 2 16/Nov /06 ig responsible for various health problems. Statements that claim that there is "overwhelming evidence" about such health claims are not verifiable from within the larger scientific and authoritative community on this subject. An example of this would be the Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) report. Attached, you will find reviews of that report with many findings of error and misrepresentation of information all geared to mislead the reader to a wrong but desired conclusion on their part. NBHTA predicts that the pesticide debate will continue for some time with each side presenting evidence that supports their position. At the end of the day, the side that puts forward the best propaganda and is superior at debating the issue will probably have their way. Unfortunately, this may not necessarily bring to light what is true or scientifically correct but instead bring forward only the information that supports their ideology. At one point mankind thought that the world was flat and that the sun revolved the earth because of the popular opinion of that time. With modern technology in today's world, everything that we do has risks. We cannot go backwards just because of that, but instead manage those risks with the utilization of all of the technology that we have at our disposal. The NBHTA believes that IPM Accreditation is the mcans by which we can manage those risks with respect to pesticide usage for the landscape and lawn care industry in urban environments. Many municipalities from other parts of Canada have reviewed this issue and decided not to ban pesticides, but rather to support an IPM approach such as IPM Accreditation. Cities that have not decided to pass a ban include Calgary, Edmonton, Kelowna, Oakville, London, Caledon and Guelph to name a few. They have reviewed all of the information from both sides of the issue and have reached an educated and logical conclusion that IPM works and is safe for their citizens and their environment. The goal of NBHTA is to see that all companies providing lawn care services in New Brunswick become IPM Accredited as an operating requirement mandated by the Province of New Brunswick. It is the opinion of the NBHTA that the Province of New Brunswick should take the responsibility for this and not burden individual municipalities with this task. NBHTA would therefore like the City of Saint John to support us in our effort to make IPM Accreditation an operating requirement from within the Province of New Brunswick and request that the New Brunswick Department of Environment and Local Government make the required regulatory changes to make this happen at the provincial level. By working together, we can achieve the common goal of increased pesticide reduction and safety with more responsible and accountable usage. At this time, NBHTA would like to request an opportunity to present our views and discuss with the City of Saint John, the benefits of supporting IPM Accreditation as an alternative to enacting a pesticide by -law that removes their usage from the professionals. -J I Plft- 1-0- —� T- -� Jim Landry Executive Director NBHTA Jim Landry Page 2 of 2 16/Nov /06 ,I. P.O. Box 742 Saint John NB E2L -4B3 Landscape New Brunswick 1- 866 - PLANTNB (752 -6862) Horticultural Trades Association fax 1- 866 -595 -5467 e -mail nbhta(a�nbnet.aib.ca Web: www.nbhta.ca The Ontario College of Family Physicians' Report on Pesticides -2004 A Review by the United Kingdom Advisory Committee on Pesticides The ACP is a statutory body set up by Ministers under section 16(7) of the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 to advise on all matters relating to the control of pesticides. The Committee is established by the Control of Pesticides (Advisory Committee on Pesticides) Order 1985. 51 No 1985/1516. In 2004, the Ontario College of Family Physicians released a report on the health effects and risks associated with pesticide use. This paper has raised significant concern throughout the general public, about the use of pesticides and their effects on health. Inspite of a Health Canada review on the OCFP report, public health staff, municipal staff and politicians, as well as other associations related to the issue, have voiced increasing support for the need for additional regulatory bylaws restricting the use of pesticides for "non- essential" purposes. The United Kingdom Advisory Committee of Pesticides (ACP) reviewed the Physicians' report and reached markedly different conclusions to those of the Physicians' report. The following excerpts have been taken from the ACP review: 0 The ACP feels the OCFP report has "serious flaws in the methods employed in the review ". Most important are: • "Its failure to take account of all, or even most of the relevant epidemiological evidence, and the biases inherent in the way in which material was picked for inclusion;" • "Inadequate attention to exposure characteristics and relevant toxicology when interpreting reported associations" (between pesticides and health effects) • Its superficial synthesis of evidence, which inadequately explores the impact of the strengths and weaknesses of individual studies" "Overall, the ACP has concluded that the report does not raise any new concerns about pesticide safety that were already not being addressed, and does not indicate any need for additional regulatory action in the UK." The full text of the document can be found on Aiv,1, v. pesticides.�ov.ul( /acp.asLi?id =1 387 Page 1 of 2 16 /Nov /06 ACP Chairman's review of Ontario College of Family Physicians' report • "The main reason for the difference in conclusions appears to be the failure of the Ontario group to take proper account of all or even most of the available scientific evidence" • "The authors' discussion(OCFP) of the research findings that they do consider is superficial and naFve." • "Furthermore, where the report does touch on toxicological issues, it tends to be simplistic and misleading." • "In my view, the report overall is scientifically weak, its main flaw being to draw inappropriate conclusions and make impractical recommendations for risk management on the basis of superficial consideration of an incomplete and biased selection of the relevant scientific evidence." • The entire review can be found on the website www,pesticides.,,.Yov.uk/ao.asp?id=--l')89 Excerpts of the Ontario College of Family Physicians' response to ACP review: • "Reviewers were a mix of family physicians with considerable clinical" (not toxicological experience) "and graduate students with limited experience in epidemiology and two of us with more extensive training and experience, ie no toxicologists, and hence our lack of review of that literature." • "We had a relatively small budget(about $CDN 40,000) over a relatively brief time period {just over one year) on a part -time basis to cover a wide set of review questions.... if more resources were available." "Overall, we are saddened by the overwhelming negative tone of your criticisms." The entire response can be found on the website www_ pesticides .gov.uk /acp.asp ?id =1462 Page 2 of 2 16/Nov /06 Pest Management Regulatory Agency Information Note 4 August 2044 Ontario College of Family Physicians Report On April 23, 2004, the Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) released a literature review on epidemiology studies on pesticides. The review linked pesticides to various illnesses, and stated that children are especially vulnerable to pesticides. In light of the public interest in this report, Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) prepared this document to help Canadians better understand how human health and the environment are considered by the pesticide regulatory system in Canada. PMRA is the federal regulatory body responsible for the regulation of pesticides in Canada. Pesticide Regulation in Canada Pesticides are stringently regulated in Canada. Before a product is registered for use, it must undergo a comprehensive and rigorous scientific assessment to ensure the product does not pose unacceptable risks to human health or the environment and to assess its efficacy to ensure that the lowest rate possible is used. If the assessment does not indicate that a product can be used safely it is not registered for use in Canada. Currently, all pesticides registered prior to 1995 are being re- evaluated by using the most modern scientific risk assessment approaches to ensure they remain safe and effective for use. The human health risk assessment looks for the short- and long -term potential of a pesticide to cause adverse health effects such as cancer, birth defects and endocrine disruption. All sources and routes (oral, dermal, inhalation) of potential exposure are assessed, including exposure from the diet, drinking water and from contact with treated areas like lawns and gardens. As well, occupational exposures, both during and after pesticide application, are specifically considered. Pesticides are only registered if there is a wide enough margin of safety between what people are exposed to and the highest dose that causes no effects according to scientific research. As the OCFP report notes, some population groups, such as children and pregnant women, may be more susceptible to potential effects of pesticides. This is why PMRA assessments include the application of extra safety factors to ensure that the most sensitive sub - populations are protected. For example, the PMRA pays special attention to the unique exposures and physiological characteristics of children, ensuring that factors such as their unique behaviours, different diets and lower body weights are considered. Information Service: 1 800 267 -6315 or (613) 736-3799 �® C ana Sante Canada Canada Internet: www.hc- sc.ec.cainmra- arla,; s Scientific Approaches to Understanding Pesticide Risk The OCFP report is a review of epidemiology studies selected from the public scientific literature. There are many such studies published which suggest that there may or may not be associations between adverse health effects and pesticide exposure. As the report acknowledges. epidemiology studies are hard to interpret because of biases and confounding factors that make it very difficult to either establish or definitively rule out links between pesticide exposures and effects. For example, other chemical and physical environment effects are usually encountered at the same time as pesticide exposures and biases in the exposures remembered by study participants may affect the result. Without an actual exposure calculation, it is difficult to assess whether pesticides could have been responsible for an adverse health outcome. When determining the acceptability of a pesticide, PMRA scientists critically examine the totality of the scientific database for pesticide active ingredients and end -use products, including the types of studies in the OCFP report. When new studies in the public literature are released, the PMRA examines them to determine if further regulatory action is required on the pesticides mentioned in the study. Currently, much of the information submitted to the PMRA for pesticide risk assessments is protected under the Access to Information Act as confidential business information. Under the new Pest Control Products Act, the public will be able to view the data used in making pesticide registration decisions. Responsible Pest Management The PMRA agrees with the recommendation of the OCFP report that Canadians can and should seek opportunities to minimise their exposure to and reduce their reliance on pesticides. As such, the PMRA supports Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices. IPM is an approach that combines biological, cultural, physical and chemical tools to manage pests so that benefits of pest control are maximized and health and environmental risks are minimized. If Canadians choose to use pesticides, they should use products only for their intended and registered use while following all instructions on the label. The label instructions specify the conditions by which products can be used safely. The PMRA also agrees that, to prevent accidents, pesticides must always be stored out of the reach of children. The PMRA is working with provincial and territorial governments on the Action Plan for Urban Use Pesticides that includes a Healthy Lawns Strategy (www.health lawns.net). This website provides information on IPM approaches to lawn and garden care. The PMRA also distributes a number of publications, including Pest Notes, that provide information on the safe use of pesticides and on controlling common household pests using the principles of IPM. These can be found on the Pest Notes page of www.hc- sc.gc.ca /t)mra- aria /, in the Responsible Pesticide Use section. Information Service: 1 800 267 -6315 or (613) 736 -3799 14&1 Health Sante Canada Canada Internet: www.hc- sc.ec.carpmra -aria (0 Need more information? The following links on the PMRA website provide further information on the topics discussed in this document: Risk assessment process: Fact Sheet on The Regulation of Pesticides in Canada www.hc- se.&c.caipmra- arla /en lg ish/12df %fact /fs �estreg -e.pdf or in HTML format: www. he-s c. gc .ca /l)mra- arla/enalish /aboutl2mra /about- e.html Children's Health Priorities within the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (SPN2002 -01) www.he-sc.jzc.ca/pmra-aria/enalish/Xdf/spil!sl2n2OO2-01 -e. df A Decision Framework for Risk Assessment and Risk Management in the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (SPN2000 -01) www.hc-sc.p-c.ca/pmra-arla/englisli/gdf/spn/sl2n2OOO-Ol -e. df Responsible Pest Management: Healthy Lawns Strategy www.healtliyiawns.net Pest Notes www.he-sc.ac.ca/12mra-arla/english/consum/ pnotes-e.html Action Plan on Urban Use Pesticides www.hc-sc.&c.ca/12mra-arla/en lish /pdf /hlawns /hl- ActionPlan -e_pdf Neagh Sante Information Service: 1 800 267 -6315 or (613) 736 -3799 Canada Canada Internet: www.hc- ac.ec.ca /nmra -aria' (*—, Advisory Committee on Pesticides Print Version Advisory Committee on Pesticides Statement on the Pesticides Literature Review published by the Ontario College of Family Physicians In April 2004, the Ontario College of Family Physicians published a systematic review of the epidemiological literature on possible chronic health effects of pesticides. The review, which focused on papers published during 1992 -2003, concluded that "it can be clearly stated that at least some pesticides are carcinogens" and recommended that pesticide use should be reduced. The Advisory Committee on Pesticides (ACP) considered the report at its meeting in May 2004_ when the epidemiologist on the Committee (the Chairman) presented his assessment of the review. He proposed that, in case his views were unrepresentative of wider scientific thinking, opinions should be sought also from a number of other independent epidemiologists. Accordingly, comments were requested from five epidemiological experts who were current or recent members of other Government advisory committees (the Committee on Toxicity, Committee on Carcinogenicity and Advisory Group on Non - Ionising Radiation). To avoid prejudicing their evaluations, they were not shown the Chairman's assessment of the review. The ACP reconsidered the Ontario report at its September 2004 meeting, along with the feedback from the invited experts. This statement summarises the conclusions of ACP's discussions to date. For some years, the ACP Medical and Toxicology Panel has annually scrutinised the abstracts of published papers on pesticides and human health to check for findings that might have implications for pesticide regulation in the UK. The material covered by the Ontario review overlaps substantially with that which has already been examined by the Panel, but with some differences (the review covers a somewhat longer time period and includes a few papers written in languages other than English, but is restricted to 16 specified health outcomes). Some of the conclusions of the report accord with those reached by the Medical and Toxicology Panel. Thus, the Panel has previously noted an apparent consistency of epidemiological reports linking Parkinson's disease with pesticide exposure, and this led to the commissioning of a detailed review of the topic. (See Set 2001 minutes.) Similarly, we have recently asked the Committee on Mutagenicity to review the literature on biomarkers of genotoxicity in pesticide - exposed workers, in which the frequent report of positive findings seems at odds with the absence of in vivo genotoxicity for almost all pesticides when tested individually for regulatory purposes. Other conclusions differ markedly from those of the Panel. For example, the report concludes that "large well- designed cohort studies consistently show statistically significant positive associations" between solid tumours and pesticide exposure, an assertion with which we strongly disagree. These discrepancies arise from serious flaws in the methods employed in the review. Most important are • its failure to take account of all or even most of the relevant epidemiological evidence, and the biases inherent in the way in which material was picked out for inclusion; • inadequate attention to exposure characteristics and relevant toxicology when interpreting reported associations; and • its superficial synthesis of evidence, which inadequately explores the impact of the strengths and weaknesses of individual studies. Overall, the ACP has concluded that the report does not raise any new concerns about pesticide safety that were not already being addressed, and does not indicate any need for additional regulatory action in the UK. 5� CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Safety Evaluation of Pesticides — An Analysis of the Ontario College of Family Physicians Pesticide Literature Review Prepared for: CropLife Canada 21 Four Seasons Place, Suite 627 Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada M9B 6J8 Prepared by: CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL 2233 Argentia Road, Suite 308 Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5N 2X7 November 12, 2004 Mississauga, ON, Canada Bridgewater, NJ, USA Reading, Berkshire, UK 905 - 542 -2900 908 -429 -9202 +44 (0 )118 935 7162 I CANTOR NEAM MEMM INTEpNE71ONA1 SAFETY EVALUATION OF PESTICIDES - AN ANALYSIS OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF FAMILY PHYSICIANS - PESTICIDE LITERATURE REVIEW Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 CLASSIFICATION OF PESTICIDES Page i 1 1 3.0 RISK ASSESSMENT 2 3.1 Risk Assessment 2 3.2 Evaluation of Pesticides 4 4.0 REGULATION OF PEST CONTROL PRODUCTS IN CANADA 4 4.1 Evaluation of Technical Grade Active Ingredients and End -Use Products 4 4.2 Special Consideration of Children 6 4.3 Product Labelling 6 5.0 CRITIQUE OF OCFP PESTICIDES LITERATURE REVIEW 7 5.1 Comments on Introduction 7 5.2 Comments on Methods 8 5.3 Comments on Solid Tumours 9 5.4 Comments on Non - Hodgkin's Lymphoma 15 5.5 Comments on Leukemia 17 5.6 Comments on Non - Cancer Endpoints 18 5.7 Comments on Pesticide Health Effects and Children 19 5.8 Comments on Implications for Family Doctors 21 6.0 CONCLUSION 22 7.0 REFERENCES 23 Table 1 Examples of Studies Showing Selective Reporting ii November 12, 2004 is CANTOX MFIIJM BCIERM IMIERNATONILL SAFETY EVALUATION OF PESTICIDES - AN ANALYSIS OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF FAMILY PHYSICIANS - PESTICIDE LITERATURE REVIEW EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary objective of this review was to comment on the scientific validity of conclusions reached by Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) Pesticide Literature Review, based on analysis of the cited literature according to standard risk assessment practices. The OCFP report included summaries of about 300 epidemiology studies, the results of which were organized into various cancer and non - cancer sections. Although it was beyond the scope of this review to conduct a detailed evaluation of all of the studies assessed by OCFP, a detailed review of many of the cancer studies was conducted to determine whether the OCFP authors accurately reported the findings of these studies. Significant flaws were found in the OCFP report including: the treatment of pesticides as one entity, • selectively reporting of data; and • no acknowledgement of Health Canada's role in pesticide registrations. Flaws in the Methodology of the Report The OCFP treated all pesticides as one entity. The greatest methodological flaw of the OCFP report was that pesticides were evaluated as if each pesticide was similar from a toxicologic standpoint. This type of generalization is not an acceptable approach. There are over 500 pesticide active ingredients currently registered in Canada that differ widely in terms of use, chemical composition, toxicity, and persistence. Assessing all pesticides as a single entity is as inappropriate as assessing all therapeutic drugs as a single product (it is well known that cold remedies or headache medicines differ considerably in toxicity compared to drugs for more serious indications such as cardiovascular disease or cancer). The OCFP report selectively reported data. There were many instances where OCFP authors selectively reported results only showing an increased risk of one cancer while ignoring findings showing no risk or a decreased risk in the same study. There were several other instances where the OCFP reported findings of November 12, 2004 IS CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL increased risks based on studies with too few cases to be meaningful. Reporting and evaluating all findings is vital for a credible scientific review. Because the OCFP report left out results that would provide balance in their findings, any conclusions made must be considered skewed and biased. Examples of the OCFP's biased representation of the available literature are summarized in the following table. Table 1 Examples of Studies Showing Selective Reporting Study Data Included in OCFP Report Data Excluded from OCFP Report Pogoda and Preston- Data showing association between risk of Did not specify the numerous pesticides Martin, 1997 paediatric brain tumours and prenatal use showing no association between paediatric of flea -tick sprays(foggers brain tumours which included pesticides for termites, lice and nuisance pests, yard and garden insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, and snail killer Kristensen et al., 1996 Data showing association between risk of Did not report decreased risk of breast and brain cancer in offspring of parents kidney cancer or data showing no engaged in agricultural activities in Norway association of pesticide exposure with NHL Leiss and Savitz, 1995 Data showing association between the use Did not report data showing no association of pest strips containing dichlorvos (an between risk of leukemia in children and insecticide) and leukemia in children exposure to pesticides from home extermination or yard treatment Ma et al., 2002 Data showing association between risk of Did not report data showing no association leukemia and insecticides between risk of leukemia and herbicides or flea control products Fear et al., 1998 Data showing elevated risk of kidney Did not report data showing significant cancer among offspring of fathers decreased risk of all cancers combined or occupationally exposed to pesticides data showing no association with brain cancer, leukemia, or NHL Alavanja et al.. 2003 Reported elevated risk of prostate cancer Did not report that cancer incidence from all sites was significantly reduced or that of the 45 pesticides evaluated, a statistically significant exposure response was seen with only one Fleming et al., 1999 Reported increased risk of prostate and Did not report data showing a decreased testicular cancer among a cohort of risk or no association for total cancers, or licensed pesticide applicators cancers of the breast, stomach, pancreas, lung, brain. or kidney Zahm, 1997 Reported increased risk of NHL among Did not report that the overall mortality rate lawn care cohort (Note: 4 cases were and total cancer deaths were significantly reported versus 3.5 expected) lower compared to the U.S. population The OCFP report ignored the role of Health Canada There is no acknowledgement in the OCFP report that pesticides are strictly regulated in Canada by Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA). Health Canada's Pest Control Products Act and Regulations are not even mentioned in the OCFP report section entitled "Laws in Canada" (page 2 of OCFP report). Health Canada has the mandate to protect human health and the environment from risks associated with pesticides. A pest control product November 12, 2004 k CANTOR HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATpNAI cannot be used in Canada until deemed to pose no unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. There are no exceptions to the rule regardless of the benefit. Every product used in Canada must undergo extensive testing including acute, short- and long -term toxicity, irritation, sensitization, neurotoxicity, carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, developmental toxicity, and reproductive studies. These studies serve a number of important health purposes, including: • to identify any possible effects on humans or any other organisms; and to determine any potential health risks to the environment or the public, including applicators or bystanders. PMRA's guidelines are among the strictest in the developed world. Furthermore, no acknowledgement was made in the OCFP report about the roles of other organizations around the world, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) or the World Health Organization (WHO), that also have conducted detailed safety evaluations of pesticides currently in use. Conclusion The conclusions drawn in the OCFP report are biased due to the lack of completeness with which the review was conducted. We found considerable evidence that the OCFP authors did not adequately review the available epidemiologic studies of pesticides. Furthermore, the lack of any acknowledgement of Health Canada's role in preventing unacceptable risks when registering a product in Canada means that the conclusions drawn in the OCFP report paint a very distorted picture of the likelihood of pesticide - related health risks in Canada. November 12, 2004 t3 CANTOx HEALTH faelc S IMtERNATONAL SAFETY EVALUATION OF PESTICIDES - AN ANALYSIS OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF FAMILY PHYSICIANS _ PESTICIDE LITERATURE REVIEW 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report reviews how pesticides are regulated and provides the results of our review of the OCFP report entitled: "Pesticides Literature Review'. CANTOX Health Sciences International prepared this report at the request of CropLife Canada. The Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) released a report April 23, 2004, a Pesticide Literature Review concluding that pesticide use represents an unacceptable health risk. The OCFP report contains many scientific flaws and the conclusions of Health Canada, who is responsible for ensuring that pest control products in Canada can be used safely when used according to label directions, are not considered by the OCFP. The main objective of this review was to comment on the scientific validity of conclusions reached by OCFP based on analysis of the cited literature according to standard risk assessment practices. Although it was beyond the scope of this review to conduct a detailed evaluation of all 295 review and primary studies assessed by OCFP, several of the cancer studies were reviewed in sufficient detail to determine whether the OCFP report accurately summarized the original journal articles. Section 2.0 of this report provides general information on the classification of pesticides. A discussion of risk assessment is provided in Section 3.0. An overview of Health Canada's process for the regulation of pest control products in Canada is included in Section 4.0 and the results of the review are presented in Section 5.0. Conclusions and references cited are provided in Section 6,0 and 7.0, respectively. 2.0 CLASSIFICATION OF PESTICIDES A pesticide, or "pest control product" (the term used in the Pest Control Products Act in Canada) is considered to be any product, organism, substance or mixture of substances that is used for controlling, preventing, destroying, mitigating, attracting, or repelling any pest. A pest could include an insect, fungus, weed, rodent or other plant or animal pest, or microorganisms such as bacteria and viruses. Types of pesticides include insecticides, insect growth regulators, insect repellents, herbicides, plant growth regulators, fungicides, rodenticides, animal repellents, disinfectants, sanitizers, slimicides, algicides, bactericides, wood preservatives, etc. All pest control products must be registered for use by the PMRA before they can be sold in Canada. November 12, 2004 iY CANTQX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL The active ingredient is the actual component(s) of the pest control product that is responsible for the pesticidal function. Other components of the pest control product may include solvents, diluents, emulsifiers or other formulants. Currently, there are over 500 different active ingredients registered for use in Canada under the Pest Control Products Act. Active ingredients of pesticides encompass a very diverse array of chemicals, as well as biological agents. Groups of pesticides may be classified based on target organism (e.g., fungicide, insecticide) and further subdivided on the basis of chemical structure (Plimmer, 2001). Major categories of insecticides include organochlorines (most of which have been phased out or restricted), organophosphates, carbarnates, pyrethroids, avermectins, nitro methylenes, chioronicotinyl, phenylpyrazoles, Bacillus thuringiensis, and insect juvenile hormones and analogues (Ecobichon, 2001; Plimmer, 2001). Botanical insecticides include pyrethrums, nicotine, and rotenoids (Ecobichon, 2001). Major categories of herbicides include chlorophenoxy compounds, bipyridyl derivatives, chloroacetanilides, phosphonomethyl amino acids, aryloxyphenoxy propionates, cyclohexanediones, sulfonylureas, and triazines. Fungicides include some inorganic compounds such as sulphur and copper, and organic compounds including organochlorines, phthalimides, dithiocarbamates, triazoles, dinitrophenols, sterol biosynthesis inhibitors, and strobulurins. Rodenticides include anticoagulants, zinc phosphide, fluoroacetic acid and derivatives, and a- naphthyl thiourea. Each subcategory of pesticide indicated above may include several structurally related chemicals. Benefits of pesticide use have included improved crop quality and crop yields from the use of insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides, and the control of diseases including malaria and West Nile virus with the use of insecticides (Ecobichon, 2001). Although all pesticides to be useful present an inherent degree of toxicity to some living organisms, pesticides can be used safely and/or present a low level of risk to human health and the environment when applied according to label instructions (Ecobichon, 2001). Risk is a function of hazard and exposure. Furthermore, knowledge of mechanisms of action has allowed scientists to create active ingredients that are selective or specific to certain pests without harming others. For example, glyphosate kills weeds by inhibiting an enzyme, enolpyruvylshikimate phosphate synthase, which is involved in the synthesis of aromatic amino acids in plants. This enzyme system is not present in humans or animals (Williams et al., 2000) and hence glyphosate is of low toxicity to humans. 3.0 RISK ASSESSMENT 3.1 Risk Assessment It is important to understand the risk assessment process when considering the human health effect of pesticides. The science of risk assessment, which involves the estimation of the likelihood of possible adverse events from specific chemical exposures, is well established and November 12, 2004 �S CANTOX HEALTH BCI£NCES IWMRNATIONa employed by government agencies worldwide (Stevens, 1997; Beck et al., 2001; PMRA, 2001). The components of a risk assessment include exposure assessment, toxicology assessment, and risk characterization (Stevens, 1997; Beck et al., 2001). The purpose of the exposure assessment is to determine the amount or dose of a chemical to which humans would be exposed. Factors considered in estimating exposure following pesticide use include quantity and frequency of application, and chemical- specific properties such as persistence (how long does it last in the environment before degrading) and bioavailability (how much is absorbed by the body following ingestion, inhalation or dermal contact). Exposure can be mitigated through safe handling practices and the use of personal protective equipment. The toxicology assessment encompasses hazard identification to determine target organs and adverse effects of a chemical, and the dose - response evaluation to determine the dose level below which adverse effects would not occur or which would be considered a de minimis risk or no significant risk level. This dose level is typically referred to in risk assessment as an "exposure limit ". The toxicology assessment is usually based on the results of toxicology studies in animals. Comprehensive guidelines for toxicology testing of chemicals have been developed by the Organisation for Economic Co- Operation and Development (OECD, 1996) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA, 1982). Adherence to the guidelines including good laboratory practices (GLP), allows researchers to determine potential hazards of chemicals under controlled conditions including known exposure doses. The exposure limit, which is an estimate of a daily exposure or dose that is not expected to be associated with any appreciable risk of adverse effects in humans can be derived from the dose - response assessment. An acceptable daily intake (ADI) and tolerable daily intake (TDI) are examples of daily intake levels, expressed on a body weight basis, not expected even with daily exposure over a lifetime to be associated with adverse effects in humans (WHO, 1987; Hayes, 2001). Traditional risk assessment practices involve the application of at least a 100 - fold safety or uncertainty factor to a no- observed- adverse -effect level (NOAEL) or a no- observed -effect level (NOEL) determined from animal studies to derive a human exposure limit (i.e., the animal NOAEL or NOEL is reduced by 100). This 100 -fold safety factor is to account for species differences between test animals and humans (10x), and for differences in sensitivity among humans (10x) (Beck et al., 1994; Thomas, 1997). Additional safety factors to account for uncertainties in the database, sensitivity of special subpopuiations, severity of effect, length of study, or the use of a lowest- observed - adverse -effect level (LOAEL) in the absence of a NOAEL or NOEL, may be applied as required. In the risk characterization step, potential exposures to a chemical determined from the exposure assessment are compared to the exposure limit to determine the likelihood of adverse effects occurring. Exposures below the exposure limit would not be expected to be associated with adverse effects in humans. November 12, 2004 CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL 3.2 Evaluation of Pesticides Canada, the United States, and other countries require that every pesticide product must be evaluated, including the assessment of health effects, and receive government registration before it can be sold. A more detailed discussion of the regulatory process for pest control products in Canada is provided in Section 4.0 below. Every pesticide also has been evaluated for potential risks to humans on an individual chemical basis by registrants of the pesticides and many pesticides have been evaluated by agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). In addition, individual chemical pesticides continue to be studied in universities and by other scientific researchers as well as industry. For example, there are over 5,000 records listed in Toxline for the herbicide 2,4 -D alone. Toxline is a database of published literature covering the biochemical, pharmacological, physiological, and toxicological effects of chemicals. In addition to published literature in scientific journals, there are often expert committee evaluations such as those supporting the safety of 2,4 -D as a herbicide by WHO (1997), the U.S. EPA (1997), and the European Commission (2001). All of these groups have found 2,4 -D to acceptable for its intended uses. 4.0 REGULATION OF PEST CONTROL PRODUCTS IN CANADA Pest control products in Canada are regulated by the PMRA under the authority of the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA). PMRA is an agency within Health Canada that is responsible for providing safe access to pest management tools, while minimizing risks to humans and the environment. The primary objective of the PMRA is to prevent unacceptable risks to people and the environment from the use of pest control products. The protection of public health from potential hazards associated with any pest control product is assured primarily through two processes. First, each product is reviewed for its potential to produce adverse effects on biological organisms other than the pest(s) it is expected to control. This review occurs before any product is allowed to be sold. Registration for sale in Canada is granted only when the PMRA has found all ingredients of a formulation both safe and appropriate for the intended use(s) of the product. Secondly, after release to the market, there is a constant review of studies and reports of any health and environmental effects, including studies involving people who manufacture and use the product. Registrants must periodically renew product registration and are obliged at any time to respond to any reports of alleged adverse effects. Once registered, the process of review continues and is always open to submission of new data. 4.1 Evaluation of Technical Grade Active Ingredients and End -Use Products In order for a pest control product to be sold in Canada, both the technical grade active ingredient (TGAI) and end -use product (EP) must first be registered for use by the PMRA. For November 12, 2004 4 1-7 CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL EP submissions, the registrant must identify all components of the formulation and provide additional studies supporting the safety of the final formulation (TGAI plus formulants). The PMRA registration process involves review of the required toxicology, chemistry, residue: metabolism, exposure, efficacy, and environmental fate studies to determine any human health and environmental effects, as well as evaluation of the product's value. Prior to a detailed review of a submission, it is first examined by Screening Officers who conduct a preliminary analysis of the submission, to determine that all required studies are included, and of the studies to ensure that they are of acceptable quality and comply with international protocols. If a submission meets the initial screening criteria it subsequently undergoes critical evaluation for health and environmental effects, and for its value (PMRA, 2001). The PMRA's Health Evaluation Division has three main areas including the Toxicological Evaluation Sections, the Occupational Exposure Assessment Section, the Food Residue Exposure Assessment Section and associated re- evaluation sections. The Toxicological Evaluation Sections identify potential human health effects and establish the levels at which humans can be exposed without harm. In order to make these assessments, required acute, short-term and long -term toxicity, neurotoxicity, carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, teratogenicity, reproduction and other specialized studies are reviewed. Based on the results of these studies, the Toxicology Sections set acceptable daily intakes (i.e., the amount of a compound that can be absorbed, via ingestion, inhalation or dermal contact routes of exposure, daily for a lifetime with no adverse effects). The acceptable daily intakes always have safety factors ranging from 100 to 1,000 built in to account for potential differences in response both within species and between species (PMRA, 2001). The Occupational Exposure Assessment Section conducts exposure assessments on each new pesticide based on all new uses of products containing the active ingredient. The purpose of these assessments is to determine how much exposure to a pesticide could occur in a typical day. Various populations are considered, including those who work with pesticides (formulators, applicators, farmers, golf superintendents) and bystanders (those who work or live near where a pesticide is used). Exposure data include residues found in air, on clothing, skin and surfaces indoors and outdoors following application in domestic, commercial, and agricultural situations. The Food Residue Exposure Assessment Section evaluates every submission for products that may come into contact with crops and food. The purpose of these assessments is to set the maximum residue limits for pesticides on food. Dietary risk assessments are carried out to assess the potential daily intake of pesticide residues from all possible food sources including water. The differences in eating patterns of all age groups are taken into consideration in the dietary risk assessments (PMRA, 2001). In terms of environmental effects of pesticides, the Environmental Assessment Division of the PMRA evaluates data on the environmental chemistry and toxicology of pesticides, as well as November 12, 2004 J� CANTOX MEAUH 90ENCES INTERNATIONAL their environmental fate. Recommendations are also made for restrictions on use that would lessen any risk to the environment, including the use of buffer zones, limits on timing and frequency of applications, limiting the rate at which the product can be applied, etc. (PMRA, _ 2001). In addition to the evaluation of health and environmental safety of a pesticide, it also must be shown to have value and merit (i.e., must be efficacious) for the intended use. The Efficacy and Sustainability Assessment Division conducts these assessments to determine the efficacy or effectiveness of the product at various doses and to establish the lowest effective rate of application required to control the targeted pest. This contributes to the minimizing of possible risks to health and the environment. Efficacy assessments also help protect users against misleading claims on labels (PMRA, 2001). Based on the scientific evidence required and included in submissions for registration, the PMRA will only grant registration if a product does not pose unacceptable health or environmental risks and if the product serves a useful purpose. In all cases, conditions of registration are specified and include detailed use instructions. A registered product may be re- evaluated at any time (PMRA, 2001). 4.2 Special Consideration of Children Acceptable daily intakes for pesticides established by toxicology reviewers at PMRA have at least a 100 -fold safety factor built in (PMRA, 2001). When there are potential exposures for children, a higher safety margin may be required to account for differences between adults and children. Compared to adults, children are in a state of rapid growth, have a higher ratio of skin surface area to body weight, and, on a body weight basis (i.e., per kg body weight), eat more food, drink more water, and breathe more air. In addition, higher chemical exposures in children may be contributed to as a result of unique pathways of exposure and activities, such as exposure through breast milk, skin contact while crawling or playing, and incidental ingestion from behaviours such as hand -to -mouth transfer. Thus, child- specific considerations include the possibility of additional safety factors (PMRA, 2002). 4.3 Product Labelling For further protection of consumers, all pesticides sold must provide information on the product label about the proper use of the product as well as warnings, protective equipment required during application, if any, and first aid instructions. The label must be approved by the PMRA before the product can be sold. Additionally, pest control products for agricultural, residential or other domestic uses must include a warning to keep out of the reach of children. Proper adherence to the label instructions, including use of protective equipment as required to limit dermal and inhalation exposures, protects against the occurrence of adverse effects. November 12, 2004 ( Z CANTOX . HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNAMONAL Incidences of unintentional poisoning may arise from improper use of pesticides. Thus, it is important that Canadians be educated to read the labels carefully, pay attention to the warnings, and follow all the included instructions. 5.0 CRITIQUE OF OCFP PESTICIDES LITERATURE REVIEW This section provides the results of a review of the report entitled: "Pesticides Literature Review", prepared by the Ontario College of Family Physicians (hereafter referred to as the OCFP report). The main objective of this review is to comment on the scientific validity of conclusions reached by OCFP based on analysis of the conclusions according to standard risk assessment practice as discussed in Section 3.0 above. In addressing the information presented in the OCFP report, this section is organized to correspond to the Table of Contents of the OCFP report. Although it was beyond the scope of this review to conduct a detailed evaluation of all the studies cited by OCFP, several of the cancer studies were reviewed to determine whether there are inconsistencies between the OCFP report and the original journal articles. 5.1 Comments on Introduction (Pages 2 to 5 of OCFP report) The stated objective of the OCFP report was to "try to elucidate the results of the many studies of pesticides and health, and draw conclusions as to the true health effects of pesticides." The reason the study was conducted was indicated to be in response to a complaint to the OCFP by a "pesticide lobby group" that an OCFP information pamphlet describing harmful effects of pesticides was inaccurate. The stated objective of identifying the "true health effects of pesticides" implies that the authors characterized risks of individual chemicals. In reality, the authors did not consider the diversity of pest control products (see Section 2.0) and considered pesticides as a single entity. This is surprising given the similarities between pesticides and pharmaceuticals in terms of diversity of chemical structure, mode of action and toxicity, of which physicians should be fully cognisant. The OCFP authors made mistakes in their mischaracterization of 2,4 -D as a chemical agent created to eradicate the Japanese rice crops, when in actuality 2,4 -D selectively eliminates broadleaf plants and is used commercially to control weeds in rice crops. In the introduction, the authors also included a short section entitled "Laws in Canada ". Absent from the "Laws in Canada" section is any mention of the federal and provincial laws, including the Health Canada's Pest Control Products Act and Regulations, which require that products used in Canada do not pose unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. This November 12, 2004 It � CANTOX HEA13M SCIENCES INTER1UT10NU section was limited to a discussion of the 2001 Supreme Court decision that the municipality of Hudson, Quebec had the right to pass a by -law restricting the use of pesticides for lawn care. As indicated in Section 4.0, pest control products are regulated by the PMRA and they are _ registered by the PMRA only if submissions demonstrate that proper uses of pesticides would not be harmful to human health or the environment. 5.2 Comments on Methods (Pages 6 to 11 of OCFP report) The literature searches were conducted by the OCFP using the search term "pesticides ". No individual chemicals were searched nor was there any indication that the authors searched subcategories of pesticides including insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc. The authors also organized the papers according to health effects rather than specific pesticide exposure on the basis that "most of the human health effect literature considers people exposed to cumulative or aggregate pesticide mixtures." Although individuals are exposed to many chemicals in their environment, exposures above trace levels would generally be limited to pesticide products that are actually used by the individual. Given that there are over 500 active ingredients currently registered in Canada for a wide variety of uses that differ widely in terms of toxicity, potency and persistence, some effort should have been made to define chemical- specific data. The fact that pesticides are not a single entity, but have been evaluated as such by the OCFP, as well as limiting the review to epidemiology studies, hinders this review's potential in terms of understanding the "true health effects" of pesticides. Limitations of epidemiology studies were noted by the authors including: (i) most studies examine occupational groups with higher exposures to pesticides than the general public; (ii) most studies are in adult males with exposures to more than one pesticide and other chemicals; (iii) confounding factors may not be adequately identified or controlled for; (iv) retail bias; (v) low participation rates; (vi) reduced statistical power due to loss of subjects to follow -up; and (vii) there is no consideration of individual exposures in ecological epidemiology studies. All epidemiology studies, whether they report increased or decreased trends, are subject to these same inherent limitations, which hinder the determination of accurate exposure data and prevent conclusions regarding causality. In spite of their recognition of limitations of epidemiology studies, the authors chose not to include any animal toxicology or mechanistic data including genotoxicity /mutagenicity, animal toxicology and mechanism of action studies, to discern the plausibility of any observed associations. This is a fundamental weakness of the OCFP report. The OCFP methodology described for the assessment of primary studies states that the reviewers ranked the studies on a scale of 1 to 7 and included only those studies with a ranking of 4 (adequate study) or above. However, the report did not give any description of what would constitute an adequate study or any examples of what significant methodological flaws would November 12, 2004 CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTENNLTIONAL1 result in a study being excluded. Any data extraction forms for the studies evaluated, which may have provided this information, were not included with the report. Several analytical methods were used to assess risk in the epidemiology studies reviewed by- OCFP. These included calculations of the relative risk (RR), odds ratio (OR), standardized mortality ratios (SMR), standardized incidence ratio (SIR), and proportional mortality ratio (PMR). The OCFP reported the data according to the method used by the journal authors. The lower and upper confidence intervals (CI) were also reported. 5.3 Comments on Solid Tumours (Page 12 of OCFP report) A cancer of any body tissue other than blood, bone marrow, or the lymphatic system is considered to be a solid tumour. The chapter on solid tumours included a separate section that provided a general discussion of the overall strengths and weaknesses in study design for all studies. As a result, it was not possible for the reader to know the specific weaknesses of the individual studies. It is also not clear if references to "the poorer quality papers" or the "weaker papers" refers to those papers that were excluded (rating of 3 or less) or to included papers given the lowest rating of ' An additional column in the summary tables for the discussion of study limitations would provide the necessary perspective. Brain Cancer (Pages 12 to 13; 22 to 25 of OCFP report) The authors identified 11 papers that investigated the association between pesticides and the risk of brain cancer, none of which was excluded. Review of some of the studies shows that the OCFP report emphasized findings indicating an increased incidence of tumours and ignored findings showing no associated or a decreased incidence oftumours. For example, the Pogoda and Preston -Martin (1997) study, considered by the OCFP to be a good quality study, is reported by the OCFP as finding a significant association between risk of paediatric brain tumours and prenatal use of flea -tick products (OR =1.7, Cl 1.1 -2.6). The OCFP did not report that elevated risks were not observed in this study for termite or lice treatments (head lice are a very common problem in school children), pesticides for nuisance pests, or yard and garden insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, or snail killer. In the summary table of the OCFP report, it is reported only that exposures were to °a variety of `nuisance' pesticides" and that "other prenatal pesticide exposures [were] non significant'. This is an example of where the OCFP has selectively reported data , and, it is important to note that the OCFP found only papers reporting an association between pesticide exposures and brain cancer, including Pogoda and Preston - Martin (1997); however, Pogoda and Preston -Martin (1997) reported that a conclusive relationship between pesticide exposure and brain tumour risk in adults has not been shown November 12, 2004 ,yti GANTOX HEALTH SaENCES INTERNATIONAL based on a review of 12 epidemiology studies, and that results of an additional 11 studies evaluating the association between pesticide exposures and paediatric brain tumours have been mixed. Another example of selective reporting appears to be the study by Kristensen et al. (1996), which evaluated cancer in offspring of parents engaged in agricultural activities in Norway. Under the brain cancer summary, this study is given a very high rating of "6" (out of 7), and an increased incidence is reported. However, the study also evaluated data for other cancers including liver, breast, cervical, uterine, ovarian, testicular, kidney, melanoma, eye, nervous system, thyroid, bone, connective tissue, Hodgkin's disease, Non- Hodgkin's lymphoma, leukemia and cancer of various endocrine organs. Interestingly, this study was not mentioned in the OCFP summaries of breast and kidney tumours, tumours which were observed at a lower incidence than expected by Kristensen et al. (1996). Testicular cancers were increased in certain regions of Norway but the authors found no association between testicular cancer and pesticide exposure. Although testicular cancer was initially selected for review by the OCFP, it is stated that "the one retrieved article was of such poor methodological quality that it was excluded from the review". To add to the confusion, this study, which was included under the section on leukemia was rated as only a 4 in that instance. The incidence rate for leukemia was not found to be elevated for pesticide exposure but was elevated for pig farming. Breast Cancer (Pages 13 to 14; 26 to 28 of OCFP report) The OCFP report evaluated six epidemiology studies including one cohort study, two case - control studies and three ecological studies. The Kristensen et al. (1996) study as discussed above was not considered. Following review of the case - control study based on the British Columbia Cancer Registry (Band et al., 2000), which interviewed women with breast cancer to identify occupational cancer risks, the OCFP reported the results for fruit and other vegetable farms workers. The tabular description of the study in the OCFP report implies that 1,018 cases exposed to mixed pesticide exposure were evaluated with no disclosure that the cases were actually distributed among about 100 different occupations (e.g., teachers, accountants, secretaries, insurance agents, cooks, bartenders, librarians, nurses, etc.). The odds ratio reported in the OCFP tabular summary for "fruit and other vegetable farms" (OR 3.11, Cl 1.24 -7.81) was based on only 11 cases (not 1,018) listed under "ever" not "usual" (job with the longest held lifetime employment). Only 3 cases were listed as "usual" under this category with a lower OR of 1.92 (Cl 0.42 - 8.76). Likewise, the data reported for "fruit farms only" (OR 2.94, Cl 0.90 -9.60) were based on 6 cases listed under "ever ". Only 2 cases were listed under "usual ", which was below the number of cases needed for the authors to calculate an OR. For "other vegetable farms" the reported OR (7.33, CI 1.16 -46.2) was based on only 5 cases under "ever ". Zero cases were reported under November 12, 2004 10 S4 CANTOR HEN7H BCIEHCES INTERH►71pNpL "usual ". Band et al. did not consider length of employment in any occupation in their evaluations. This could particularly skew the "ever" results. Furthermore, no attempt to actually characterize pesticide exposure was undertaken. It is noteworthy that the results for the 26 cases indicated as "ever being employed in agricultural industries" (OR 0.99, Cl 0.62 -1.57) were not reported in the OCFP study. For the 11 cases in this category listed under "usual ", the OR was 0.77 (0.40- 1.49). The second case control study discussed (Duel) et al.. 2000) did specifically examine farming and breast cancer risk among 862 cases and 790 controls in North Carolina. Although many different associations were evaluated by Duell et al. (2000), the OCFP authors chose to include only the results showing a weak elevated risk associated with being present in fields during or shortly after pesticide application and for reporting not using protective clothing while applying pesticides. Overall, the OR associated with >23 years of farming was 0.6 (Cl 0.4 -0.9) which indicates a decreased risk of breast cancer among farmers. The OR associated with being in a field during or shortly after pesticide application (1.8, Ci 1.1- 2.8) was based on a comparison to farming women who did not have this exposure; however, when compared to nonfarming women the OR was 0.9 (CI 0.6 -1.4), which does not indicate an elevated risk. Pesticides used were not determined. The OCFP summary did not report that farming during the time period when DDT would have been used was also not associated with an elevated breast cancer risk; however, the reason for this may have been the OCFP decision not to evaluate pesticides that have been phased out. The OCFP summary cites the authors' (Duel) et al., 2000) speculation that the reduced association with duration of farming may be due to a variety of protective effects such as physical activity, increased vitamin D levels or antiestrogenic effects of other chemical exposures, none of which were controlled for or evaluated. The OCFP does not site study observations by Duell et al. (2000) that: precision was low for the pesticide - related exposures and interaction effects because of small numbers; it was possible that recall bias inflated OR estimates for pesticide and laundry exposures because of publicity surrounding the possible link between pesticides and breast cancer; or the lack of a dose - response with increasing pesticide exposure suggests the potential for confounding by one or more unmeasured factors. Also, although in the methodology it is stated that the OCFP researchers examined the reference lists of each paper and added relevant articles missed by the initial search, the OCFP report did not include 11 studies that were cited by Duell et al. (2000) as showing no association between farming and breast cancer (including Kristensen et al., 1996). Even though most of these studies based exposure on job title or farm holding, they would have been just as relevant to include as Band et al. (2000), discussed above, which, in addition to suffering from the same flaws, only involved 11 cases who had ever worked on a fruit or vegetable farm. November 12, 2004 iE V CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Kidney Cancer (Pages 14; 28 to 29 of OCFP report) Seven epidemiology studies of kidney cancer, of which one was excluded, were evaluated in the OCFP report. Again all studies reported an association between pesticide exposure and kidney cancer. Again the Kristensen et al. (1996) study, which found no association, was not considered. All but one of the studies were given a rating of 'A" (out of 7) by the OCFP, which is the lowest rating for studies included. For the retrospective cohort (Fear et al., 1998), which evaluated 167,703 childhood deaths, the association between kidney cancer and potential paternal occupational pesticide exposure (PMR =1.59, CI 1.18 -2.15) was actually based on 42 deaths. Also, this type of study infers exposure based on occupation of the father. No efforts are made to determine exposure levels or to determine actual pesticides used. There is also no controlling of confounding factors in a study of this type. Also, the OCFP did not report that Fear et al. (1998) found a statistically significant reduced risk for all cancers combined (PMR =0.89, Cl 0.81 - 0.98), or that no association was found between potential paternal occupational pesticide exposures and brain cancer (PMR = 0.83, based on 109 cases), leukemia (PMR =0.87, based on 180 cases), or non - Hodgkin's lymphoma (PMR =0.87, based on 31 cases). Lung Cancer (Pages 14 to 15; 30 to 31 of OCFP report) Similar to the kidney studies, the four available lung cancer studies were rated mostly as a 4, which is the lowest rating of included studies. The cohort studies reported mixed results but neither controlled for smoking. One of the cohort studies, Kross et al. (1996), which reported an excess mortality from lung cancer among golf course superintendents compared to the general U.S. white male population also reported excess mortalities from other smoking - related diseases including arteriosclerotic heart disease and emphysema. However, it was not determined if golf course superintendents are more likely to smoke than the general populace. As correctly stated by the OCFP, it is difficult to assess a causal relationship between pesticide exposure and lung cancer if smoking or passive smoking exposure is not controlled for. Furthermore, given that smoking has been linked to so many health effects, it is our opinion that any studies not controlling for this confounding factor should probably have been excluded from evaluation. The recent U.S. Surgeon General report on smoking and health, which is based on more than 1,600 articles, has found that the list of diseases linked to smoking has increased and now includes cancers of the cervix, pancreas, kidneys, and stomach, as well as leukemia, cataracts, pneumonia, and gum disease (CDC, 2004). These are in addition to the well -known associations of smoking and lung cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and respiratory diseases. !November 12, 2004 12 z� CANTOR HEALTH SCIENCES INTEAlGT10NAL Other cancers that have been linked to smoking include cancers of the mouth, throat, larynx, oesophagus, and bladder. Increased risks of reproductive and foetal effects have also been reported to be associated with smoking (CDC, 2004). The case - control study by Pesatori et al. (1994) did control for smoking, however, the inflated OR values reported in the OCFP report for lung cancer risk and the use of carbamates or phenoxyacetic acid were based on 7 and 1 case(s), respectively. This number of cases is too small to draw any conclusions. Ovarian Cancer (Pages 15; 31 of OCFP report) One study was included in the OCFP report for ovarian cancer, which indicated a decreased risk of ovarian cancer with atrazine exposure (Hopenhayn -Rich et al., 2002). The OCFP is correct in stating that this suggested protective effect, in the context of an ecological study is of limited significance. However, the same limitations apply to ecological studies reported in other sections of the report that were taken to indicate an increased cancer risk. Pancreatic Cancer (Pages 15; 32 of OCFP report) The OCFP report included three epidemiology studies that reported an association between exposure to pesticides and pancreatic cancer. However, only one of the studies (Alguacil et al., 2000), controlled for smoking, which is a known risk factor for pancreatic cancer (CDC, 2004). Odds ratios of 3.4 (CI 0.9 -12.0) and 3.17 (1.1 -9.2) from the Alguacil et al. (2000) study were cited in the OCFP report for pancreatic cancer risk among cases with high intensity arsenical pesticide exposure and high intensity exposure to "other pesticides ". The OCFP report did not include the results for high intensity organophosphorous pesticides (OR =1.80, Cl 0.75- 4.30). The above results are for cases that were ever exposed for at least 6 months. Alguacil et al. (2000) also evaluated the data based on cases that were exposed to the indicated pesticides for at least 10 years. Contrary to what would be expected, the OR was reduced with longer exposure although still above 1 (OR= 1.20 for organophosphates; 1.92 for arsenicals; 1.95 or "other" pesticides). However, all results were based on a very small number of cases (9 to 16). Numerous other studies cited by Alguacil et al. (2000) (some of which suggested an association between pesticide exposure and pancreatic cancer and others that found no association) were not acknowledged by OCFP. There was also no mention of these studies as being excluded. Six of the studies cited as finding no association between pesticide exposure and pancreatic cancer risk were among workers manufacturing pesticides. Unlike most studies of farmers, for studies involving manufacturers, the identity of the pesticide should be known and exposures would be expected to occur every workday. November 12, 2004 13 s CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES WrERMAnomu Prostate Cancer (Pages 16; 33 to 34 of OCFP report) The OCFP report included summaries of 8 studies that evaluated the risk of prostate cancer with pesticide exposure. Two other studies were excluded based on methodology. The prostate study given the highest rating by OCFP and stated as being an excellent study was Alavanja et al. (2003), which is a cohort study of 55,332 male pesticide applicators. During the follow -up period of 4.3 years, 566 prostate cancers were observed among applicators with no history of prostate cancer compared to 494.5 cases expected (SIR = 1.14, Cl 1.05- 1.24). This result was reported in the OCFP report as well as the OR of 3.47 for methyl bromide indicating an increased risk of prostate cancer. The OCFP summary also indicated that Alavanja et al. (2003) found an increase in prostate cancer in those with a family history of prostate cancer with use of several insecticides and butylate (OR 2.58). The OCFP did not report that Alavanja et al. (2003) also found that for the same period, total cancer incidence from all sites was significantly less than expected (SIR = 0.80, CI 0.76 - 0.83). The OCFP also did not report that among the 45 specific pesticides evaluated, the only statistically significant exposure - response trend observed was with methyl bromide. Most pesticides were not associated with prostrate cancer. Likewise, the standardized incidence ratio results that OCFP reported from a retrospective cohort study of 33,658 licensed pesticide applicators conducted by Fleming et al. (1999) were limited to prostate cancer (SIR 1.91) and testicular cancer (SIR 2.48) but there was no mention by OCFP of other cancers assessed for which the authors found a decreased risk or no significant difference compared to the general Florida population. These other cancers included: total cancers (males SIR = 0.71; females SIR 0.72); breast cancer (females SIR 0.61); stomach cancer (males SIR = 0.53; 0 cases observed among female applicators); pancreatic cancer (males SIR = 0.85; females SIR = 0.36); total digestive tract cancers (males SIR = 0.76; females SIR 0.55); lung cancer (males SIR = 0.80; females SIR = 0.62); total respiratory tract cancers (males SIR = 0.77; females SIR= 0.56); brain /central nervous system cancers (males SIR = 1.09; females SIR = 0.92); kidney cancer (males SIR = 0,74; females SIR = 0.31); total lymphopoietic cancers (males SIR = 0.90; females SIR = 0.74). However, it should be noted that the results for females were based on a small number of cases (only 107 total cancers versus 1159 total cancers for males). No significant exposure- response association with prostate cancer was demonstrated for chlorimuron- ethyl, cyanazine, 2,4 -D, glyphosate, imazethapyr, metachlor, trifluralin, permethrin for crop use, chlorothalonil, metribuzin, paraquat, pendimehalin, petroleum oil used as herbicide, 2,4,5 - trichlorophenoxyacetic acid, 2,4,5- trichlorophenoxypropionic acid, aldrin, carbaryl, chlordane, diazinon, dieldrin, dichlorodiphenyltrichlorethane, heptachlor, lindane, malathion, parathion, toxaphene, benomyl, captan, maneb(macozeb, methylaxyl. This study clearly demonstrates that not all pesticides will be associated with the same health risks and, therefore, should not be evaluated as a single entity. November 12, 2004 14 'L � CANTOX HEALTH SWENCES INTENHA710%ALL General Conclusions (Solid Tumours} (Page 16 of OCFP report) The OCFP report authors concluded that there are many studies showing associations between solid tumours and pesticide exposure including large well- designed cohort studies. A closer look at some of these studies demonstrates that on an individual chemical basis, a larger number of pesticide active ingredients were not associated with an increased risk of tumours (Pogoda and Preston - Martin, 1997; Alavanja et al., 2003). Furthermore, in many of these studies, only the data suggesting an association were used while data showing no increase in the risk of specific tumours were ignored (Kristensen et al., 1996; Fear et al., 1998). Also, six studies showing no association between pesticide exposure and pancreatic cancer risk among workers manufacturing pesticides, cited in one of the studies, were ignored. Some of the OR values indicating an association that were included in the OCFP report were based on as few as 5 cases (Band et al., 2000). Even with reporting generally only increased incidence data, the OR or RR values were frequently less than 2.0, indicating only a weak association (Kristensen et al., 1996; Kettles et al., 1997; Pogoda and Preston - Martin, 1997; Fear et al., 1998; Viel et al., 1998; Duell et al., 2000; Ji et al., 2001; Buzio et al., 2002; Hu et al., 2002; Alavanja et al., 2003; Mills and Yang, 2003; Van Wijngaarden et al., 2003). Based on the criteria for establishing cause and effect relationships, the significance of numerous studies showing a weak association would be notable if the same chemical were always evaluated. As it is, most of the studies were based on occupational exposures to non - specific pesticides. Scientists do not generally claim a protective effect on the basis of a weak but statistically significant decreased cancer incidence in the absence of other supporting data. Similar caution should be exercised in suggesting a cause and effect relationship on the basis of weak but statistically significant associations from epidemiology studies alone. 5.4 Comments on Non - Hodgkin's Lymphoma (Pages 36 to 38; 42 to 48 of OCFP report) In the chapter on Non - Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL), the authors evaluated 32 papers and included 27 in the summary table. Five studies were excluded on "quality criteria ". The reason for excluding two of the studies, Burns et al. (2001) and Bloeman et al. (1993), was given as "methodological reasons; moreover, Dow Chemical funded both studies ". Burns et al. (2001) was available for review for this report and it appears that the main reason it was excluded was that Dow Chemical funded the study. The study evaluated a cohort of 1,517 chemical workers potentially exposed to 2,4 -D between 1945 and 1994 of which 330 deaths were observed compared to 365 expected. The study included estimates of dose levels (determined as very low, low, moderate, high) and duration of exposure ( <1 year, 1 to 4.9 years, 5 to 14.9 years, and >15 years) and was published in Occupational and Environmental Medicine (OEM) which is an international, peer- reviewed journal of high standing. No significant risk due to NHL was found. November 12, 2004 15 CANTOX HEALTH SGENCES INTE mmoNAL This study was similar in its limitations to other studies that were included (e.g., Lynge, 1988; Hansen et a1., 1992; Kross et a/., 1996; Sathiakumar et al., 1996). It is interesting that the OCFP authors did not feel the need to exclude the Dow funded study- Ramlow et al. (1996) (rated as a 4 out of 7) which evaluated only 770 employees as opposed to 1,517 in the Burns et al. (2001) study. As Ramlow et al. (1996) and Burns et al. (2001) used a similar methodology [although fewer subjects were included by Ramlow et al. (1996)], it seems that the finding of an elevated kidney cancer incidence with cumulative exposure in the Ramlow et al. (1996) overrode "methodological reasons" for exclusion. This gives the impression that studies showing an increased cancer risk were not scrutinized to the same extent with respect to methodology as studies showing no association. In describing the overall results of the NHL studies, the OCFP authors considered studies with an OR, or RR greater than 1 as exhibiting an association even if the difference was not statistically significant. For example, for the 11 cohort studies, 9 were indicated as having an association, 3 with statistical significance, and 2 showed no association. This erroneously implies that there are greater consistency and reproducibility among the studies than actually exist and ignores the importance of strength of association. Given that marginally statistically significant associations can occur by chance, inferring an association from a non - statistically significant finding is highly misleading. The reality is that only 3 of the 11 cohort studies found a statistically significant association. Furthermore, although all cohort studies were indicated as having included statistical analyses, the OCFP authors did not indicate in the summary table which studies actually observed statistically significant results. For certain studies, the OCFP authors are quick to point out that it is not possible to draw any conclusions, e.g., a study by Asp et al. (1994) that found no increase in NHL among a group of Finnish chlorophenoxy herbicide applicators, because of a low number of deaths (384 in total). For other studies showing an association, the OCFP authors admit that the number of NHL deaths was small (e.g., Kross et al., 1996 and Sathiakumar et al., 1996) but do not implicitly state that it is impossible to draw conclusions from these studies. Although there were only 384 deaths reported in the Asp et al. (1994), the size of the cohort was 1,909 men, and the follow -up period was for 18 years. Asp et al. (1994) also found no association between chlorophenoxy herbicide exposure and cancers of the stomach, pancreas, and prostate, but these findings showing no increased cancer risk were not reported in the OCFP report chapter on solid tumours. It could be argued that the observed numbers of cancers were too small to consider (3 to 4 at 15 years latency; 4 to 6 at 10 years latency); however, small sample size did not prevent the OCFP from including results from: Kross et al. (1996) for brain tumours based on only 8 deaths; Hansen et al. (1992) who observed 6 NHL cases among males and 2 among females; the results reported from MacLennan et al. (2003) based on only 4 cases; and the results from Zahm (1997), also based on only 4 observed cases of NHL. November 12. 2004 i& y� CANTOX NE,►Lni SCICNCCS iNTERIL710NA1 The association reported by Zahm (1997), based on a cohort of lawn -care employees, is particularly weak (SMR =1.14, Cl 0.31 -2.91) with 4 cases of NHL reported versus 3.5 expected. Cancer deaths (SMR =0.76, Cl 0.55 -1.01) and mortality rate overall (SMR =0.69, Cl 0.62 -0.77) were significantly lower among the lawn -care employees in comparison to the U.S. population. The small number of cases observed in many of the studies stresses the importance of statistical significance. However, even if an association is statistically significant, that does not necessarily mean that the observation is biologically significant. There is no indication that biological plausibility or any potential mechanisms of action was considered in the OCFP report. The OCFP also did not mention that the incidence of NHL was not increased in the . retrospective cohort study of 33,658 licensed pesticide applicators conducted by Fleming et a/. (1999). This study was given a rating of 5 and 6 by the OCFP reviewers under the prostate cancer section. It was also mentioned in the abstract of this study that the incidence of breast cancer was significantly decreased. These results also were not reported by the OCFP under the section on breast cancer. Incidentally, Fleming et a1. (1999) found that the standardized incidence ratio for total cancers (ail sites) was decreased for the pesticide applicators compared to that of the general Florida population for both males (SIR 0.71, Cl 0.67 — 0.76) and females (0.72, Cl 0.59 — 0.87). Other cancers evaluated by Fleming et al. (1999) included stomach, liver, pancreas, lung, kidney, brain, and leukemia. For all of these cancers, the SIR for the pesticide applicators was either significantly decreased compared to the general population or not significantly different. 5.5 Comments on Leukemia (Pages 49 to 51.; 55 to 60 of OCFP report) The OCFP included summaries for 16 leukemia studies. An additional 7 were excluded. Most of the studies selected by the OCFP for this section reported increased tumour incidences. The study Fleming et al. (1999), discussed in the preceding section, which did not observe an increased incidence of leukemia among a cohort of 33,658 licensed pesticide applicators was not mentioned in this section. In the chapter on NHL, the OCFP reported that the incidence of leukemia was declining; this information was not stated in the actual leukemia chapter. The OCFP considered the cohort study by Kristensen et a/. (1996) as a study showing an increased cancer risk based on an increased incidence of leukemia in children of farming parents engaged in pig farming (RR 2.26); however, the study authors and even the OCFP summary indicate that the leukemia incidence was not elevated for pesticide exposure. Given the lack of association with pesticides, the study should not be considered to indicate an increased cancer risk with pesticide exposure. The OCFP reported that Leiss and Savitz (1995) found a strong association (OR 1.7 to 3.0) between use of pest strips containing dichlorvos (an insecticide) and leukemia in children. The OCFP does not bother to report that a decreased November 12, 2004 17 CANTOX MELON SODOM INTERNATIONAL tumour incidence was found for leukemia and exposure to pesticides from home extermination (OR 0.3 to 0.9) or that exposure to pesticides from yard treatment also was not associated with an increased risk of leukemia (OR 0.9 to 1.1). The study by Ma et al. (2002) is yet another example where the OCFP authors did not report findings on an individual product basis, even though that information was available, and only reported the findings showing an increased association. Ma et al. (2002) evaluated data for insecticides, flea control products, herbicides, indoor pesticides, and outdoor pesticides. The ORs for exposure to insecticides at different exposure periods (3 months before pregnancy to year 3) ranged from 1.2 (at year 3) to 2.1 (during pregnancy). The highest risk was associated with professional pest control or extermination at year 2 (OR = 3.6). No significant association was found between risk of leukemia and exposure to either herbicides or flea control products. A weak association was observed for exposure to indoor pesticides but not outdoor pesticide exposure. Ma et al. (2002) also evaluated the association between risk of leukemia and exposure during a child's first year for a variety of products, The OR was over 2 only for professional pest control or extermination (OR = 2.3). The OR was less than one (0.6 to 0.9) for professional lawn service, plant/tree insect or disease control products, weed control products, indoor foggers for fleas, flea collars, and flea soaps or shampoos. The OR for ant, fly, or cockroach control products was 1.1. The ORs for insecticides for exposures during year 1 was 1.7 versus 0.8 for flea control products, and 0.7 for herbicides. Given that there were so many examples of cancer studies found in which the OCFP ignored data showing a reduced risk or lack of association, it is not possible to conduct a weight of evidence assessment of the "true health effects of pesticides" based on this report even if the OCFP had presented the data on a chemical specific basis. 5.6 Comments on Non - Cancer Endpoints (Pages 61 to 157 of OCFP report) In addition to solid tumours, NHL and leukemia, the OCFP included epidemiology studies evaluating non - cancer endpoints. The non - cancer endpoints selected by OCFP for evaluation included reproductive effects, immunotoxic, dermatologic effects, and neurotoxic effects. The OCFP also categorized genotoxicity as non - cancer, although typically in risk assessment genotoxicity data are considered in evaluation of carcinogenic potential. Studies for non - cancer endpoints have not been evaluated in this peer- review; however, it should be noted that non - cancer endpoints are threshold dependent; i.e., exposures below threshold doses (i.e., NOAELs) are not associated with adverse effects. As discussed previously, studies conducted in support of pesticide applications, in addition to carcinogenicity assays, include short- and long -term toxicity, teratogenicity, reproduction and other specialized studies. Exposures from use of a pesticide must be below levels associated with adverse November 12, 2004 iEs3 7� CANTOX NELlTH SCIENCES IMTEi1MAT10tLL� effects (adjusted for humans by the application of safety factors) in order for the pesticide to be registered for use by the PMRA for the general population. As with the cancer studies, the non - cancer studies reviewed typically did not characterize exposures and in most cases, subjects were exposed to chemical mixtures. Regarding dermatologic effects (page 79 to 80 of OCFP report), it should be noted that some pesticides as well as numerous other commercial chemicals and various household cleaning agents could cause skin irritation. The labelling for corrosive pesticides as with other chemicals would instruct the user to wear gloves and other protective equipment as necessary. It must be understood that pest control products are closely regulated with detailed instructions required on the labels to protect the health of individuals using the products. Also, these products are in existence because they provide a benefit whether it is to kill cockroaches (the feces of which may trigger asthma), or to control ragweed or prevent turf destruction. All pest control products should be used responsibly and kept out of reach of children as instructed on the label. 5.7 Comments on Pesticide Health Effects and Children (Pages 158 to 159 of OCFP report) The OCFP states that children are ubiquitously exposed to low levels of pesticides in their food and environment, yet there has been a paucity of studies on the long -term health effects of these exposures. This statement gives the impression that pesticides used for food or other uses are not evaluated for safety. There are very stringent testing requirements for pesticides. In Canada, before the PMRA will register a pest control product for crop or food - related uses, the toxicology database, including developmental and reproductive toxicology studies, must demonstrate that consumption of any residues in or on the food when the pesticide is used according to label directions will not pose an unacceptable health risk. This residue level is then legally established as a maximum residue limit (MRL) under the Food and Drugs Act (FDA). If residues exceeding an MRL are found, the food is considered adulterated and is prohibited from sale in Canada (PMRA, 2002). Similar tolerances are established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and United Nations FAO /WHO CODEX. The MRL is based on the results of a dietary risk assessment conducted by the PMRA (2002). The manufacturer must conduct extensive toxicology studies in laboratory animals designed to allow for the assessment of acute, short-term and long -term toxicity. These studies allow for the evaluation of the potential of a chemical to cause cancer, genetic alterations, neurotoxicity, reproductive effects, and effects on pre -natal and post -natal development. To determine the latter effects, animals are studied from pre- conception to adulthood, and reproductive studies are conducted over at least two generations to assess effects on fertility (PMRA, 2002). The studies are designed to determine any toxic effects of pesticides and generally involve doses several orders of magnitude higher than potential human exposures. The NOAEL determined from the studies, which is the highest dose at which no adverse effects were observed in the November 12. 2004 19 •; -W CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL animals, is used to estimate a reference dose for humans. The reference dose (RfD) is the level that could be ingested safely by humans (PMRA, 2002). A chronic RfD is also called an ADI. The PMRA calculates the RfD based on standard risk assessment practices as discussed in Section 3.1. A safety factor of at least 100 is applied to the NOAEL (i.e., the NOAEL is reduced by 100), 10 -fold each to account for extrapolation from animals to humans, and for variation among humans. Thus, the calculated safe dose for humans is at least 100 times lower than the dose that caused no adverse effects in animals. An additional 10 -fold safety factor may be applied where necessary to account for the severity of the toxicology endpoint, sensitive populations, or any uncertainties in the data. The residues that may remain on foods from use of a pest control product are determined from residue trials. Residue levels typically range from undetectable to a few parts per million (ppm). The amount of pesticide that a human may consume is calculated using the measured residue levels and current food consumption data. This exposure level is then compared to the RfD. Exposures that are below the RfD "are considered to provide sufficient margins of safety and are unlikely to be associated with unacceptable risk to health" (PMRA, 2002). The OCFP review makes the point that environmental contaminants may pose a greater risk to children than adults because children have a longer life expectancy in which to develop diseases. However, since synthetic pesticides were introduced in the 1930's, life expectancy has increased in the U.S. from 60 to 75 years. This increase is largely attributed to the availability of an adequate and healthy food supply (Stevens, 1997). The life expectancy of Canadians also has increased over that time period from 61 years in 1930 -1932 (males: 60; females: 62) to 78 years in 1990 -1992 (males: 75; females: 81) (Statistics Canada, 2004). It must be understood that exposure is not equivalent to hazard or risk. It is not unexpected that trace levels of commonly used pesticides may be detected in products or even in humans. As stated by the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH): "Because living organisms, including humans, are part of the environment they reflect what is in their surroundings" (Kamrin, 2003). However, detecting trace amounts of a substance in human tissue is not equivalent to detecting an adverse health effect (Kamrin, 2003). Likewise, detecting trace amounts of a substance in a food or beverage (the detection of which has likely been greatly facilitated through technological advances in analytical testing) does not mean that consuming the product will result in adverse health effects. The results of some of the studies in children identified by the OCFP, which were detailed in previous sections of their report, were revisited in this chapter of their report. From these studies, at least four are examples of studies where results showing an association were reported by the OCFP and data indicating a decreased cancer risk or lack of association were ignored. Pogoda and Preston - Martin (1997) found a significant association between risk of paediatric brain tumours and prenatal use of flea -tick sprayslfogger but not for exposures to termite or lice November 12, 2004 20 3'. CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES IHTERHATIOHAL treatments, pesticides for nuisance pests, or yard and garden insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, or snail killer. Only the flea -tick association was reported by the OCFP. Kristensen et al. (1996) evaluated cancer in offspring of parents engaged in agricultural -- activities in Norway and found an association with brain cancer (reported by OCFP) but not with breast cancer, or kidney cancer, which were observed at a lower incidence than expected. OCFP did not report the findings showing a decreased cancer risk. Leiss and Savitz (1995) found an association between the use of pest strips containing dichiorvos (an insecticide) and leukemia in children but no association between risk of leukemia and exposure to pesticides from home extermination or yard treatment. The latter were not reported by the OCFP. Ma et al. (2002) found no association between risk of leukemia and exposure to either herbicides or flea controls products. The OCFP report included only the results for insecticides for which an association was found. It is possible that there are other studies for which findings reported by the OCFP were limited to those showing an increased risk while ignoring results showing no association; however, it is beyond the scope of this review to evaluate all of the studies identified by the OCFP. Regardless, due primarily to the inability to establish sufficient exposure information, a cause and effect relationship could not be determined from any of the studies in the absence of chemical- specific supporting toxicology data. 5.8 Comments on Implications for Family Doctors (Pages 163 to 166 of OCFP report) The final chapter of the OCFP poses the question: Which pesticides are most harmful? The answer given is that the results of their review do not help indicate which pesticides are particularly harmful. They go on to say that "the literature does not support the concept that some pesticides are safer than others; it simply points to different health effects with different latency periods for the different classes." This suggests that all pesticides have been found to cause adverse health effects in humans and implies that the literature demonstrates cause and effect. Neither is true. The OCFP states that patients trust family doctors and also that "information about pesticide health effects is not common knowledge, and we [family physicians] are in an excellent position to make it so. Strong one -to -one messages from health care providers about the potential harm from pesticide exposure are an effective way to inform our patients. The evidence for harm is strong, and just as the public became aware of the health risks of smoking over decades of education, we now have an important role in heightening awareness of the risks of pesticide exposure." Family doctors have a responsibility not to be alarmist or let their personal agendas November 12, 2004 21 CANTOX pfuum BaKw S IMERIYTONa<L influence their treatment of patients, particularly in the absence of scientific evidence. Furthermore, if a physician declares that the cause of a patient's disease is due to pesticide exposures on the basis of weak or flawed evidence, the actual cause may remain undiscovered and untreated. Physicians could help educate patients by emphasizing that they adhere to the label instructions to reduce risk. Pesticides offer many benefits including repellency of mosquitos that may carry West -Nile virus, treatment of head lice, management of ragweed for the relief of allergy sufferers and protecting a safe affordable food supply. Risk is not the same as harm or toxicity. All chemicals, natural or man -made may be toxic or cause harm at high enough doses. Risk is a function of both toxicity and exposure, both of which will be highly variable for individual products. However, patients should certainly be encouraged to limit exposure to pesticides by using proper precautions as instructed on the label. Also, all pest control products should be kept out of reach of children as stated on the label. The risk of a pest control product to cause harm is closely evaluated by Health Canada. The PMRA will only grant registration if a product does not pose unacceptable health or environmental risks and if the product serves a useful purpose. Finally, pest control products do not have the same toxicities or risks or uses any more than drugs do. A physician is expected to know the difference between tamoxifen and acetaminophen, one of which is certainly considered safer than the other. In their final paragraph, the OCFP reports on the Hardell and Erikson (2003) research commentary indicating that these authors conducted a careful analysis of the decline in NHL in countries, such as Sweden, where the herbicide 2,4 -D has been banned for over 10 years. In actuality, 2,4,5 -T was banned not 2,4 -D which is a different chemical. However, Hardell and Erikson (2003) also report that the incidence of NHL has also declined in men in the United States, which has not banned the use of 2,4 -D. This latter fact was not reported by the OCFP. Furthermore, Hardell and Erikson (2003) state that the quantitative effect of an individual agent [on the decline in incidence] cannot be defined. Several organizations including the National Cancer Institute of Canada (Ritter, 1997), the U.S. EPA (1997), and the WHO (1997) have concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that 2,4 -D poses a risk to human health under its intended conditions of use (Kennepohl and Munro, 2001). 6.0 CONCLUSION There is considerable evidence to suggest that OCFP has not adequately conducted a weight of evidence assessment of the epidemiology studies identified and that the OCFP evaluation was not conducted objectively based on methodology and reporting. Furthermore, there is no acknowledgement that pesticides are strictly regulated by PMRA or that other organizations such as the World Health Organization have conducted detailed safety evaluations of pesticides currently in use. November 12, 2004 22 CANTOX HE L SCIENCES IMTERNATIONRL There were several instances, of selective reporting by the OCFP report authors and ignoring evidence from where the majority of pesticides evaluated showed no cancer risk. The greatest flaw of this report in terms of assessing health risks is that pesticides were -- evaluated as if they were a single entity. This is not an acceptable approach for assessing health risks of chemicals. For an assessment of risk to be meaningful, pest control products must be evaluated on an individual basis with consideration of human studies and standard toxicology studies such as genotoxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, and carcinogenicity bioassays. A worthy contribution of physicians to their patients may be to educate them as to the importance of adhering to the instructions on the label when using pest control products. Like therapeutic drugs, pest control products are regulated substances which are expected to be used according to labelled instructions. 7.0 REFERENCES Alavanja, M.C.; Samanic, C.; Dosemeci, M.; Lubin, J.; Tarone, R.; Lynch, C.F.; Knott, C.; Thomas, K.; Hoppin, J.A.; Barker, J.; Coble, J.; Sandler, D.P.; Blair, A. 2003. Use of agricultural pesticides and prostate cancer risk in the Agricultural Health Study cohort. Am J Epidemiol 157(9):800 -814. Alguacil, J.; Kauppinen, T.; Porta, M.; Partanen, T.; Malats, N.; Kogevinas, M.; Benavides, F.G.; Obiols, J.; Bernal, F.; Rifa, J.; Carrato, A. 2000. Risk of pancreatic cancer and occupational exposures in Spain. Ann Occup Hyg 44(5):391 -403. Arbuckle, T.E.; Savitz, D.A.; Mery, L.S.; Curtis, K.M. 1999. Exposure to phenoxy herbicides and the risk of spontaneous abortion. Epidemiology 10(6):752 -760. Asp, S., Riihimaki, V., Hernberg, S.; Pukkala, E. 1994. Mortality and cancer morbidity of Finnish chlorophenoxy herbicide applicators: An 18 -year prospective follow -up. Am J Ind Med 26(2):243 -253. Band, P.R.; Le, N.D.; Fang, R.; Deschamps, M.; Gallagher, R.P.; Yang, P. 2000. Identification of occupational cancer risks in British Columbia. A population- based case - control study of 995 incident breast cancer cases by menopausal status, controlling for confounding factors. J Occup Environ Med 42(3):284 -310. Beck, B.D., Rudel, R., and Calabrese, E.J. 1994. The Use of Toxicology in the Regulatory Process. In: Hayes, A.W. (Ed.) Principles and Methods of Toxicology, Third Edition, Raven Press, Ltd. New York, pp. 19 -58. Beck, B.D.; Slayton, T.M.; Calabrese, E.J.; Baldwin, L.; Rudel, R. 2001. The use of toxicology in the regulatory process. In: Hayes, A.W. (Ed.). Principles and Methods of Toxicology (0 Ed.). Raven Press, Ltd.; New York, pp. 23 -75. November 12, 2004 23 3� CANTOX MEALM SUENCES iNTERMATIOMAL Bloemen, L.J.; Mandel, J.S.; Bond, G.G.; Pollock, A.F. 1993. An update of mortality among chemical workers potentially exposed to the herbicide 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and its derivatives. J Occup Med 35(12):1208 -1212. Burns, CJ; Beard, K.K.; Cartmill, J.B. 2001. Mortality in chemical workers potentially exposed to 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4 -D) 1945 -94: An update. Occup Environ Med 58(1):24 -30. Buzio, L.; Tondel, M.; De Palma, G.; Buzio, C.; Franchini, I.; Mutti, A.; Axelson, O. 2002. Occupational risk factors for renal cell cancer. An Italian case - control study. Med Lav 93(4):303 -309. Cantor, K.P.; Silberman, W. 1999. Mortality among aerial pesticide applicators and flight instructors: Follow -up from 1965 -1988. Am J Ind Med 36:239 -247. CDC. 2004. The 2004 Surgeon General's Report. The Health Consequences of Smoking. What It Means to You. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). fhtti)://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/scir/sqr 20041 consumerpiece /SGR2004 Whatitmeanstovou.pdfl. Cole, D.C.; Carpio, F.; Math, J.J.; Leon, N. 1997. Dermatitis in Ecuadorean farm workers. Contact Dermatitis 37(1):1 -8. De Roos, A.J.; Zahm, S.H.; Cantor, K.P.; Weisenburger, D.D.; Holmes, F.F.; Burmeister, L.F.; Blair, A. 2003. Integrative assessment of multiple pesticides as risk factors for non - Hodgkin's lymphoma among men. Occup Environ Med. 60(9):E11. Duell, E.J.; Millikan, R.C.; Savitz, D.A.; Newman, B.; Smith, J.C.; Schell, M.J.; Sandler, D.P. 2000. A population -based case - control study of farming and breast cancer in North Carolina. Epidemiology 11:523 -531. Ecobichon, D.J. 2001. Toxic effects of pesticides. In: Klaassen, C.D. (Ed.) Casarett and Doull's Toxicology. The Basis Science of Poisons (6t' Ed.). McGraw -Hill; New York, pp. 763 -810. European Commission. 2001. Review Report for the Active Substances. Finalised in the Standing Committee on Plant Health at its Meeting on 2 October 2001 in View of the Inclusion of 2,4 -D in Annex I of Directive 91/414/EEC. European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate - General, Directorate E — Food Safety: Plant Health, Animal Health and Welfare, International Questions, E1 — Plant Health. Commission Working Document No. 7599 /VI /97- final, 1 October 2001. Fear, N.T.; Roman, E.; Reeves, G.; Pannett, B. 1998. Childhood cancer and paternal employment in agriculture: The role of pesticides. Br J Cancer 77(5):825 -829. Fleming, L.E.; Bean, J.A,; Rudolph, M.; Hamilton, K. 1999. Cancer incidence in a cohort of licensed pesticide applicators in Florida. J Occup Environ Med 41(4):279 -288. Fox, G,A, 1991. Practical casual inference for ecoepidemiologists. J Toxicol Environ Health 33:359 -373. November 12, 2404 24 II CANTOX HEALTH SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Hansen, E.S.; Hasle, H.; Lander, F. 1992. A cohort study on cancer incidence among Danish gardners. Am J Ind Med 21(5):651 -660. Hardell L.; Eriksson M. 2003. Is the decline of the increasing incidence of non- Hodgkin — lymphoma in Sweden and other countries a result of cancer preventive measures? Environ Health Perspect 111(14):1704 -1706. Hayes, W. (Ed.). 2001. Principles and Methods of Toxicology. (4" Ed.). Taylor and Francis. Philadelphia, Penn., pp. 1807 -1833. Hill, A.B. 1965. The environment and disease: Association or causation? J R Soc Med 58(5):295 -300. Hopenhayn -Rich, C.; Stump, M.L.; Browning, S.R. 2002. Regional assessment of atrazine exposure and incidence of breast and ovarian cancers in Kentucky. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 42(1):127 -136. Hu, J.; Mao, Y.; White, K. 2002. Renal cell carcinoma and occupational exposure to chemicals in Canada. Occup Med (Lond) 52(3) :157 -164. IARC. 1980. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 1: The Analysis of Case - Control Studies. World Health Organisation (WHO), International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC); Lyon, France, pp. 84 -121. Infante - Rivard, C.; Labuda, D.; Krajinovic, M.; Sinnett, D. 1999. Risk of childhood leukemia associated with exposure to pesticides and with gene polymorphisms. Epidemiology 10(5):481 -487. Ji, B.T.; Silverman, D.T.; Stewart, P.A.; Blair, A.; Swanson, G.M.; Baris, D.; Greenberg, R.S.; Hayes, R.B.; Brown, L.M.; Lillemoe, K.D.; Schoenberg, J.B.; Pattern, L.M.; Schwartz, A.G.; Hoover, R.N. 2001. Occupational exposure to pesticides and pancreatic cancer. Am J Ind Med 39(1):92 -99 [Erratum, 40(2):225 -226]. Kamrin, M. 2003. Traces of Environmental Chemicals in the Human Body: Are They a Risk to Health? Prepared for: The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH); New York. Kennepohl, E.; Munro, 1. 2001. Phenoxy herbicides (2,4 -D). In: Krieger, R.; Doull, J.; Ecobichon, D.; Gammon, D.; Hodgson, E.; Reiter, E.; Ross, J. (Eds.). Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology: Volume 2: Agents (2nd Ed.). Academic Press; San Diego, Calif pp. 1623 -1638. Kettles, M.A.; Browning, S.R.; Prince, T.S.; Horstman, S.W. 1997. Triazine herbicide exposure and breast cancer incidence: An ecologic study of Kentucky counties. Environ Health Perspect 105(11):1222 -1227. Kristensen, P.; Andersen, A.; Irgens, L.M.; Bye, A.S.; Sundheim, L. 1996. Cancer in offspring of parents engaged in agricultural activities in Norway: Incidence and risk factors in the farm environment. Int J Cancer 65(1) :39 -50. Kross, B.C.; Burmeister, L.F.; Ogilvie, L.K.; Fuortes, L.J.; Fu, C.M. 1996. Proportionate mortality study of golf course superintendents. Am J Ind Med 29(5):501 -506. November 12, 2004 25 q(- CANTOR HEALTH SQUIC" 1WER""OMLL Leiss, J.K.; Savitz, D.A. 1995. Home pesticide use and childhood cancer: A case - control study. Am J Public Health 85(2):249 -252. Lynge, E. 1998. Cancer incidence in Danish phenoxy herbicide workers, 1947 -1993. Enviro4+- Health Perspect 106(Suppl. 2):683 -688. Ma, X.; Buffler, P.A.; Gunier, R.B.; Dahl, G.; Smith, M.T.; Reinier, K.; Reynolds, P. 2002. Critical windows of exposure to household pesticides and risk of childhood leukemia. Environ Health Perspect 110(9):955 -960. MacLennan, P.A.; Delzell, E.; Sathiakumar, N.; Myers, S.L. 2003. Mortality among triazine herbicide manufacturing workers. J Toxicol Environ Health A 66(6):501 -517. Mills, P.K.; Yang, R. 2003. Prostate cancer risk in California farm workers. J Occup Environ Med 45(3):249 -258. OECD. 1996. OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals. Organisations for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD); Paris. Paulsen, E. 1998. Occupational dermatitis in Danish gardeners and greenhouse workers (II). Etiological factors. Contact Dermatitis 38(1):14 -19. Pesatori AC.; Sontag JM.; Lubin JH.; Consonni D.; Blair A. 1994. Cohort mortality and nested case - control study of lung cancer among structural pest control workers in Florida (United States). Cancer Causes Control 5(4) :310 -318. Plimmer, J.R. 2001. Chemistry of pesticides. In: Krieger. R. (Ed.). Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology: Principles (2nd Ed.). Academic Press, San Diego, Calif., pp. 95 -107. PMRA. 2001, Fact Sheet on the Regulation of Pesticides in Canada. Health Canada, Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA). [http://www.hc-sc.qc.ca/pmra- arla/en.glish/pdf/fact/fs estre -e. df]. PMRA. 2002. Children's Health Priorities within the Pest Management Regulatory Agency. Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), January 3, 2002. fhttp: / /www.hc- sc.gc.ca /pmra- arla /english /pdf /spn /spn 2002- 01- e.pdf]. Pogoda, J.M.; Preston - Martin, S. 1997. Household pesticides and risk of pediatric brain tumors. Environ Health Perspect 105(11):1214 -1220. Rademaker, M. 1998. Occupational contact dermatitis among New Zealand farmers. Australas J Dermatol 39(3):164 -167. Ritter, L. [for the Ad Hoc Panel on Pesticides and Cancer]. 1997. Report of a panel on the relationship between public exposure to pesticides and cancer. Cancer 80(10):2019- 2033. Sathiakumar, N.; Delzell, E.; Cale, P. 1996. Mortality among workers at two triazine herbicide manufacturing plants. Am J Ind Med 29(2):143 -151. November 12, 2004 26 -T 11 CANTOX HUM SOENCES 1MRNAMONAL Statistics Canada. 2004. Canadian Statistics. Life Expectancy at Birth. Statistics Canada: Ottawa. fhttp:// www. statcan .ca /english /Ppdb /health26,html. Stevens, J.T. 1997. Principles of pesticide risk assessment. In: Sipes, I.G., McQueen, C.A., Gandolfi, A.J. (Eds.), Comprehensive Toxicology. Volume 2. Toxicological Testing and Evaluation. Elsevier Science Ltd. /Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, Engl., pp. 17-26. Thomas, R.D. 1997. Assessing risks to human Health. In: Sipes, E.G., McQueen, C.A., Gandolfi, A.J. (Eds.). Comprehensive Toxicology. Volume 2. Toxicological Testing and Evaluation. Elsevier Science Ltd. /Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, Engl., pp.59 -74. U.S. EPA. 1982. Pesticide Assessment Guidelines, Subdivision F. Hazard Evaluation: Human and Domestic Animals, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). [EPA- 540/9- 82 -025]. U.S. EPA. 1997. Memorandum - Subject: Carcinogenicity Peer Review (4th) of 2,4- Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4 -D) from Jess Rowland, Review Section 1, Toxicology Branch II and Esther Rinde, Manager, Carcinogenicity Peer Review Committee, Science Analysis Branch through Stephanie R. Irene, Deputy Director, Health Effects Division to Joanne Miller, Product Manager #23, Registration Division (7505C) and Walter Waldrop Product Manager #71, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508W). [includes Report of Health Effects Division Carcinogenicity Peer Review Committee (CPRC) Meting of July 17, 1996]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Health Effects Division, Carcinogenicity Peer Review Committee of 2,4 -D; Washington, DC. van Wijngaarden, E.; Stewart, P.A,; Olshan, A.F.; Savitz, D.A.; Bunin, G.R. 2003. Parental occupational exposure to pesticides and childhood brain cancer. Am J Epidemiol 157(11):989 -997. Viel, J.F.; Challier, B.; Pitard, A.; Pobel, D. 1998. Brain cancer mortality among French farmers: The vineyard pesticide hypothesis. Arch Environ Health 53(1):65 -70. WHO. 1987. Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Additives and Contaminants in Food. World Health Organization (WHO), International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS); Geneva. Environmental Health Criteria, No. 70. htt : / /www.who.int/ cs /*ecfa /ehc70.html. WHO. 1997. 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4 -D) In: Pesticide Residues in Food - 1996: Toxicological Evaluations, Sep. 16 -25, 1996, Rome. Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the WHO Core Assessment Group. World Health Organization (WHO), International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS); Rome, Vol. WHO /PCS /97 1, pp, 45 -96. Willes, R.F.; Nestmann, E.R.; Miller, P.A.; Orr, J.C.; Munro, I.C. 1993. Scientific principles for evaluating the potential for adverse effects from chlorinated organic chemicals in the environment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 18(2):313 -356. November 12, 2004 27 4e CANTOX MEAL7N SCIEXCE6 iNTERMATIONLL Williams, G.M.; Kroes, R.; Munro, I.C. 2000. Safety evaluation and risk assessment of the herbicide roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, for humans. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 31(2 ):117 -165. Zahm, S.H. 1997. Mortality study of pesticide applicators and other employees of a lawn care service company. J Occup Environ Med 39(11).1055-1067. November 12, 2004 04.1 CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE November 17, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Grants for Heritage Conservation Program BACKGROUND: During the heritage presentation to Common Council on November 6, 2006 additional information on categories of grants, amounts approved and eligibility criteria was requested. ANALYSIS: In 1988, Common Council approved a grant program to assist with the conservation of buildings in designated heritage development areas within the City of Saint John. This program provides a financial incentive for property owners to carry out conservation work which is in keeping with the architectural character of the building. This incentive program is a commitment by Common Council to protect and enhance the built heritage of our city. Eligibility: In order to be eligible, the building must be in a designated heritage development area. Currently there are three areas and two stand -alone buildings: • Trinity Royal — commercial and residential buildings bounded by King Street, Water Street, Harding Street, Charlotte Street and including buildings fronting on King's Square and Queen's Square; • Orange Street — residential buildings on Orange Street between Sydney Street and Crown Streets (including all corner lot buildings); • Douglas Avenue — 50 individually designated heritage buildings; • Red Rose Tea building and the Quinton Farm House. Report to Common Council Page 2 November 17, 2006 The Preservation Areas By -law Review Committee recommended that additional buildings and areas be designated as heritage development areas. Currently property owners on King Street East, King Street West and a number of property owners in the Torryburn area have asked to be designated as heritage development areas. Recommendations from the Heritage Development Board will be brought to Council in a subsequent report. All property owners in designated heritage development areas are equally eligible to apply for funds allocated for the Grants for Heritage Conservation Program. Tenants are also eligible to receive grants provided the owner agrees. All grants are approved by the Heritage Development Board on behalf of the City of Saint John. The program is administered by heritage staff who: 1) provide recommendations to the Board on eligibility for approval; 2) monitor on -going work; 3) scrutinize documentation submitted with the claim for grant funds and 4) visit the site to ensure that work completed is consistent with the conditions of the approved Certificate of Appropriateness. Classification of Grants: Owners (or tenants with owner's permission) of properties in designated heritage development areas are eligible to receive grants towards: - Restoration (to a previous period in time) - Rehabilitation (continued or new utilization of building for current and future use) - Reconstruction (of missing character defining elements) or - Preservation/Maintenance of their buildings which use traditional materials and details There are three classifications of grants: Heritage Maintenance Grant — this grant is designed to help owners preserve and maintain the traditional materials and details on their buildings. Typical projects are usually small and include: signage, storefront repairs, awnings, paint schemes, thermal upgrading of existing windows, entry door repair or replacement, etc. This grant pays 20% of the cost of work done on the exterior of the building. To be eligible for the $1,000.00 maximum amount available, an owner must invest $5,000.00. In 2005, the Board approved 34 grants in this category. To the end of October 2006, the Board approved an additional 34 grants in this category. Heritage Conservation Grant — This grant is designed to help owners restore their building to a previous period in time, or rehabilitate it for continued existing use or for a new use into the future. Typically these projects are larger and include: storefront rehabilitation/reconstruction including all of its component parts; masonry repointing, window replacement, wood clapboard replacement, Report to Common Council Page 3 November 17, 2006 reconstruction of verandas and entries, entry doors, sandstone steps, etc. In 2005, the Board approved 6 grants in this category. This grant also pays 20% of costs of work done on the exterior of a building. To be eligible for the $5,000.00 maximum amount available, an owner must invest $25,000.00. To the end of October 2006, the Board approved an additional 14 grants in this category. Heritage Conservation Plans Defining the scope of work - Several years ago, the Board recognized that frequently property owners were not getting what they expected when hiring contractors. Following investigation and discussion on a number of projects, it was determined that the scope of work was not being clearly defined. Details on the quality of materials to be used, the amount of work to be completed and appropriate detailing to be incorporated in the project were often poorly defined by the owner when requesting a bid from contractors. In the absence of adequate information, contractors were being selected based on lowest bid rather than best value for money to be invested. This frequently resulted in unhappy contractual relationships and "extras" being charged by contractors which helped to perpetuate the "old buildings are too expensive" myth. Conservation Plan: In order to help owners define what scope of work was needed and define the quality and quantity of materials to be used, the Board established the Heritage Conservation Plan Program. Under this component of the grant program, the property owner retains the services of a design professional who: - determines the areas of the building where work is needed and appropriate heritage conservation techniques to be used; - prioritizes the work so that it can be phased over time enabling owners to do the most important work first with the money available; - provides a budget estimate to assist owners to plan for required investments; and - prepares a drawing with notes which enables the property owners to get a quality job at a fair and competitive cost, because all contractors are bidding on the same amount of work and the same quality of job. In order to ensure that the tax payers of Saint John are getting good value from the funds approved by Council, the Board has made it a requirement that all property owners requesting a Heritage Conservation Grant (between $1,000.00 and $5,000.00) must first have a Heritage Conservation Plan in place for their building. This approach allows property owners to: 1) get good value through the competitive bid process; 2) plan the work for several years in advance and budget accordingly; and 3) provides contractors with necessary information to make informed decisions which reduce their level of risk, enabling them to stay in Report to Common Council November 17, 2006 Page 4 business profitably and provide good value for money invested, as they work on more old buildings. The Board pays up to 50% of the cost of preparing Heritage Conservation Plans in accordance with the following scale relative to the size of the building and the complexity of the work involved: - $500. single family $750. two or three units $1,000. over four units or entire storefront rehabilitation/restoration - $1,250. over four units or commercial building with additional technical requirements In 2005, the Board approved 3 grants in this category. To the end of October 2006, the Board approved an additional 8 grants in this category. Application Process: The application for the grant is included on the Certificate of Appropriateness application form. The Heritage Development Board reviews applications for grants at the same meeting as applications for Certificates of Appropriateness are reviewed. All meetings of the Heritage Development Board are open to the public. All applicants are encouraged to attend the bi- weekly meetings and are invited to participate in the discussion when the application is considered. Receiving the Grant: After the Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work and the grant are approved, the applicant or contractor undertakes the work. If significant changes to the work approved are necessary, the owner is expected to discuss these with staff and the Board. Upon completion of the project, owners must submit copies of receipts or invoices marked paid or copies of cancelled cheques to verify the amount claimed. These are examined by staff and if everything is in order, cheques are issued by Finance Department in favour of the property owner. Policies: Over the years, a number of policies relative to approval of Grants for Heritage Conservation Pro r am have been established: 1) Grants are only approved if the project has not yet commenced, and a Certificate of Appropriateness has been approved by the Heritage Development Board; Report to Common Council Page 5 November 17, 2006 2) Grants are only approved if there are no outstanding violations of any city by -laws. This effort is coordinated with Building & Technical Services; 3) Heritage Conservation Grants will only be approved if a Heritage Conservation Plan has been prepared by a design professional; 4) Grants will not be approved for use of contemporary or alternate materials; 5) Grants will only be approved for roof work if traditional materials are being used (slate, cedar shingles, etc.) 3 in 1 shingles, T &G, etc. are not eligible; 6) Grants will only be released if work is completed as indicated on an approved Certificate of Appropriateness; and 7) Grants will only be released if work is completed in a professional manner using good craftsmanship and attention to detail. Revision to the Grant Program: The By -law Review Committee recommended that the percentage of eligible costs (currently 20 %) be increased to 40% for masonry and structural openings including doors and windows. The Board has agreed and will revise the program accordingly should Council approve the requested budget. RECOMMENDATION: Receive the information and refer to it during deliberation on the 2007 Capital Budget for the Grants for Heritage Conservation Program. Respectfully submitted, Jim R. Baird, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development Terrence Totten, C.A. City Manager Attachment JHB:111 CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE November 17, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Rural Road Upgrade Project BACKGROUND: In February of this year, Common Council considered and approved a report from Municipal Operations and Engineering, regarding new policies respecting the procedure to be followed to facilitate Rural Road Upgrade projects (see attached). In general, it is Council's policy that the City must acquire all of the portions of land necessary for each road right -of -way, as well as any necessary easements for municipal services to ensure service to these streets are viable and can be sustained. In return, the property owners will receive a Municipal Donation Receipt for income tax purposes in the amount equal to the market value of the land required. Reconstruction of the road will not occur until all of the necessary interests in the properties have been acquired by the City. In March of this year, The City of Saint John held an Open House in the Martinon area to provide information and to welcome input from the area residents affected by the reconstruction of By -Road No. 5, Poplar Lane and Olsen Road. These road reconstruction projects are intended to allow the City to provide better access to those individuals with frontage on this road and to improve snow removal and surface water drainage. In addition, better access for emergency vehicles will be achieved. ANALYSIS: Subsequent to the above mentioned Open House, Real Estate Services staff initiated discussions with the property owners whose land abuts Olsen Road. It was anticipated the lands required to facilitate the reconstruction of this road would be relatively easy as there are only three properties involved. However, these negotiations extended longer than anticipated and extended over this past summer, ending just recently at the end of September. The result being that staff Report to Common Council Page 2 November 17, 2006 was unsuccessful in obtaining all of the necessary agreements to acquire the land needed for the reconstruction of Olsen Road. Therefore, based on the policies adopted by Council regarding the Rural Road Upgrade project, the City will not be moving forward to have this road upgraded. Real Estate Services are currently in the process of contacting and meeting with the property owners whose land abuts By -Road No. 5 and Poplar Lane for the purpose of acquiring the individual parcels required to proceed with the reconstruction of these two roads. To date, staff has met with 10 of the 15 property owners. Their response has been very positive. It is anticipated staff will have met with all of the property owners on or before the end of this month. If all of the property owners are agreeable, one report will be prepared by staff to encompass all parcels of land required for this project, to be considered by Council. Respectfully submitted, Jim R. Baird, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development Terrence Totten, C.A. City Manager CL /c The City of Saint John RURAL ROADS UPGRADES PROGRAM: LAND ACQUISITION POLICY 1. Where land is required for road construction and/or the installation of municipal services under the Rural Roads Upgrades Program, The City of Saint John (the City) will acquire from each land owner along the road to be upgraded, for road construction, the fee simple absolute interest in the land required and for the installation of municipal services, an easement which shall be a first charge against the land owners' title to his/her land. The City shall: 1. issue to the land owner a Municipal Donation Receipt for Income Tax Purposes in the amount equal to the market value of the land required; 2. at its cost, obtain and record a subdivision plan; 3. reimburse /pay the land owner's legal fees to a maximum of $500.00 plus HST; and 4. pay all Registry /Land Titles Office fees. In consideration the land owner shall: 1. where land is required for road construction, give to the City fee simple absolute interest in the land required and where land is required for the installation of municipal services only, an easement which shall be a first charge against the land owner's title to his/her land; 2. sign all documentation required to transfer title in the land to the City; 3. pay all real property taxes levied against the lands to be acquired by the City; and 4. where land is required for road construction, to obtain discharges of all encumbrances registered against the lands to be acquired by the City and where an easement is required, to obtain postponements of all encumbrances registered against the lands subject to the easement. II. Road construction and/or installation of municipal services shall not commence until all land acquisitions, fee simple and/or easement, for a particular road upgrade have been completed. M & C — 2006 -313 November 17, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Agreement - King William Road Vesting BACKGROUND: By resolution dated January 30, 2006 Common Council resolved; "...the City Manager advise Business New Brunswick to proceed to secure the necessary Cabinet approval and finalize the Agreement to facilitate the vesting of a 5.5 km +/- portion of King William Road as generally shown on the attached sketch..." Business New Brunswick indicated it will seek Cabinet approval once the Agreement has been executed by the parties to it (N.B. Power and City). Staff negotiated with the Province of New Brunswick, represented by Business New Brunswick and the New Brunswick Coleson Cove Corporation over the past 9 months to secure an agreement which reflected prior negotiations and discussion. Support has been garnered from Municipal Operations in the matter to ensure the Agreement is acceptable from their perspective. The agreement is attached for consideration. In the event Council supports the Agreement, the conveyance of the right of way lands will be registered. A final subdivision plan will then be created to vest the road as public, once PAC approves and Council assents to the vesting. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That The City of Saint John enter into the Agreement (as attached), and 2. upon registration of conveyance, Common Council authorizes a subdivision plan to vest the lands as a public street, and 3. that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign the agreement. Respectfully submitted, Jim R. Baird, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development Terrence Totten, F.C.A. City Manager Attachment CL /c AGREEMENT This agreement made this day of 52006 between: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK, as represented by the Minister of Business New Brunswick (hereinafter called the "Minister ") OF THE FIRST PART and: THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN a body corporate by Royal Charter, confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of New Brunswick (hereafter called the "The City ") OF THE SECOND PART and: NEW BRUNSWICK POWER COLESON COVE CORPORATION a body corporate, duly incorporated under and by virtue of the laws of the Province of New Brunswick, having its registered office at the City of Fredericton, in the County of York, and Province of New Brunswick, (hereafter called the "NB Power Coleson Cove ") OF THE THIRD PART WHEREAS the Minister is the owner of a road identified as "King William Road" which road is used, inter alia, for access to Coleson Cove thermal generating station and also for access to communities in the vicinity thereof and which road is identified as "King William Road"qn the sul?c(iyiston plan dated the da. of z, and file etc etc (hereinafter referred to as "The Road ") a description of which road is attached as Schedule `A "; AND WHEREAS under the authority of the The Economic Development Act of New Brunswick, Chapter E -1.11 ,Statutes of New Brunswick and of the Regulations, the Minister has made or agreed to convey title to the road to the City of Saint John for dedication and use as a public highway; AND WHEREAS NB Power Coleson Cove has agreed to participate in the transaction through the contribution of certain funds as set out in clause 3 and 4 herein for the improvement and maintenance of The Road. r Now therefore: 9 1. The Minister shall convey the fee simple title in The Road identified as "King William Road" to The City in accordance with the terms and conditions contained herein. 2. The City shall fully maintain The Road to its municipal standards in order to meet existing requirements of use and to allow for future development of the area. 3. NB Power Coleson Cove will contribute to the City up to a total of four hundred and thirty -five thousand dollars ($435,000) plus HST for the upgrading and/or improvement of The Road whenever such costs are incurred by The City; contributions shall be paid to The City in payments, against paid invoices within sixty (60) days of submission of such paid invoices by the City to NB Power Coleson Cove or its successor in title. 4. NB Power Coleson Cove will also pay an initial thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) contribution to The City for maintenance of The Road which initial payment will reduce by three thousand ($3,000) annually to a zero ($0) contribution after ten (10) years as set out below. At the end of this ten (10) year period NB Power Coleson Cove shall not have any further obligation, financial or otherwise, in relation to The Road and this transaction and its obligation is limited to the payments as set out in clause 3 and 4 herein. Year 1.........$30,000.00 plus HST Year 2.........$27,000.00 plus HST Year 3..........$24,000.00 plus HST Year 4..........$21,000.00 plus HST Year 5......... $18,000.00 plus HST Year 6.........$15,000.00 plus HST Year 7.........$12,000.00 plus HST Year 8.........$ 9,000.00 plus HST Year 9......... $ 6,000.00 plus HST Year 10....:...$ 3,000.00 plus HST Year 1 I........$ 0.00 5. Clause 3 & 4 herein contain the sole obligations of NB Power Coleson Cove in this transaction. 6. The vesting and/or conveyance of The Road shall be concluded within thirty (30) days of the later of (a) the execution of this agreement or (b) confirmation by each of the Parties of compliance with each party's respective procedure necessary to authorize; or (c) finalization of the subdivision plans. 7. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with regard to matters dealt with herein, and cancels and supersedes any prior agreements, undertakings, declarations or representations, written or verbal, in respect of such matters. 8. No amendment, supplement or waiver of any provision of this Agreement or any other agreements provided for or contemplated, nor any consent to any departure by any of the Parties shall be effective unless it shall be in writing and signed by the Parties and then such amendment, waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance for the specific purpose for which it has been given. 9. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and all of these counterparts shall for all purposes constitute one agreement, binding on the Parties, notwithstanding that all Parties are not signatory to the same counterpart. In witness whereof the Parties have duly signed and executed this agreement. Signed, Sealed and Delivered in the presence of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK, as represented by the Minister of Business New Brunswick Witness Witness Per: Witness Witness And: Common Council Resolution: on NEW BRUNSWICK POWER COLESON COVE CORPORATION Per: Darrell Bishop, Vice President Wanda Harrison, Secretary The City of Saint John Norm McFarlane Mayor's Office Bureau du maire WHEREAS: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: PROCLAMATION the consequences of addiction affect all of us; and addiction i cludes forms (alcohol, drugs and gambling); and addiction affects all age groups -youth and adults; and addiction is a widespread social issue; and PASAGE SAINT JOHN is a charitable organization whose mission is the prevention of adolescent addiction; NOW THEREFORE: I, of week of November 20 as "Addict, In witness whereof I have set r of the Mayor of the City of Sain Mayor Norm McFarlane, Saint John do hereby proclaim the ons Awareness Week ". y hand and affixed the official seal : John. lr _ SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 46 1 www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. I FROM :BEAVERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX N0. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:28RN P2 l� Se 0 L L Q� �P Y•'h. lo- �i9 Aill. f k ro f -1` J �❑ `�"3SSF'¢r�'� �,. i; 7fy_t�lpl - .. :... ::.... -' Aw U C� m 0 cn 0 0 W 0 CD 0 c� 0 ao V ■ Q a c� a� co LJ c� 0 c� Cl co O O N L C 0 Z FROM :BEAUERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX NO. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:00AM P2 �rt ` V 0 Mm 2:% 0 -6-ma W s 0 E 0 CL m V♦ C: a 0 Lro cn �Vn V 0 c 0 4-a cu 73 0 U- 0 0 Ca a) m c� c� a� M-1 a) rQ C: m mo _(1) �u 00 N O (D �w LL N O Cn ' °- 'P1 +PJ•�a'p4�� x..,'1..7: 5 ,••jfj_a'. ;;r�.�.�,• , as •c�rart:s:nrdts,l:t:•��:;:h�'T '�A�I •;• .. .�'. ^;}fir, .�il. Vi,..4..i. ��I � ••J'_ •�Nt' 'Ir _ }. w;:t.v •'`'i;�.�.;'. ::f11... ' rt 'r;1:�F7t�'��'^?Ma�11�,••F�'•. '!$,•. �. � ;t: Not ;'tip �� ,ya':: ^:•!� ,:t Z: �,•l.��:..- .r. :1f `,� ':e• - +', :. ,.. I ��q' �ui• � "IM •ter FROM :BEAVERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX N0. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:01AN P4 :N 0 2 ;r �''i it �'n;.�.:j;j'�j; }`',�•; �,; },;�" IiI.,V >' R.•Ilf�. Amn.tea . ! �,:; ; �`• "i5�,''j, Yy,..., µ,,.,;1 :1 r '.1 "iG" r��FF'L'r ". 3 ,rJ '.: 4• :Yi.N. r fi.':i. AS••.ri[:�;I'. "rAl .d 'l1iC tf, �i:,?;'i, "iy ,ty� js .- i.':7 +�rj2`'',. ,4;!•'•`: ^��`:,: i; 1_ ?Sa* il� y��•:�1,1,�ffy Y}�l�'.'+' •a�{I[r+ �hyl� ... ._ :Yf.. - .. . ,'} � 4{M11- 'f.'y._if .•��li.��.f�rill�, tMNf{:;..'1' ':�^ . .'.Y;:1 'f'y/r:.til, :�' .. �: � a �'jir,tti:Ca� r'.' fir''• ...., ... —.... ..y.Y : . : r. :•. A. 11]' { '. :' �r' :'.f .. r �• 'SrAy�� .'.t ,b7iir -p. Sri, ': f ' .. ... ,,'lei',`:':: .,w. , •.:r,'�!;j�..! ".', .., ,! ,� A,R W f, .m r ,.: ' •fir . S' Y <1!•.... .. ..... -. ... "1'. „l.. ,._• ;fir_ � . "iG" r��FF'L'r ". 3 wi .:•.n tyr.:,' Z�,�r�pi' r w � . , i� '•f...,. 4{M11- .'.Y;:1 'f'y/r:.til, :�' .. �: � a �'jir,tti:Ca� r'.' fir''• -� 1 r. :•. A. 11]' { '. :' -•fir` '''�i-:!},if ^: :�,::� r�i[�$e �,• ,! ,.: . Y FROM :BEAVERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX NO. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:04RM P7 C CU � cn G � O W� "Ina U O N �- 0 U FROM :BEAUERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX NO. :586 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:04RM PB (n U) C O t� C O LL 0 W LU n� VYOR� ", Ve 14. Ile, all E womi q'r N k. 7n,", FROM :BEAVERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX NO. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:06AM P10 W „L ♦r W W ♦D W co L- Q 0 a FROM :BEAVERBROOK ART GALLERY l9 0 CD �a CD Lo p m m FAX NO. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:06AM P11 O O O O O O O O Cz ct 0 0 Ci o a C �Q R U2 O u i eauepue=;v GC m g N N m C C� � m m N Y e Q 9 O N w O O N So 4 N FROM :EEAUEREROOK ART GALLERY FAX NO. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:07AM P12 L ULM a� H FROM :BEAUERBROOK ART GALLERY FAX NO. :506 459 7450 Nov. 17 2006 10:09AM P13 �■ s L (D 0 U N fr Q 0 -1-r L 0 � o '' o Y — c cu Application for a Zoning By -law Amendment Demande de modification a Parretti sur le nonage Applicant Related Information / Renseignements sur le demandeur Name of Applicant / Nom du demandeur �G t r1 O r b n n � V J A N ok: - t r-) -L f) C- Mailing Address of applicant / Addresse postale du demandeur c3 C\ 1 n �YG 6 r) Postal Code / Code postal Telephone Number / Numro de tOdphone 6 5�< _ 1g1 Z15 Home / Domicile Work / Travail Fax Number / Numdro de tdldcopieur Name of Property Owner (if different) / Nom du propridtaire (si dif Brent) Address / Adresse Postal Code / Code postal _ Property Information / Rentseeiignements sur Ca propri&e r n �f:nn J �nonlarPtnPnt �/ ' -"c,, / L.c'tr -ts �1'-� 1S50-5i0q Civic # / No de voirie Street / Rue PID / Nip Lot Area / Superficie du lot 0 1-4f E. tY1�o-,Street Frontage / Fagade sur rue -]'�-,(�5 Existing Use of Property / Utilisation actuelle de la propriete V o r c n C 1 to r t ne-c can r Vi t Municipal Plan land Use Designation Designation de utilization des terres sur le plan municipal M 7 CA ti U 12D Amendment Requested 1 Modification demandee Present Toning / Zonage actuel t`_J - Change Zoning to/ Modification du zomge a 6,D a t L , j e and/or / on ❑ Text Amendment (indicate particulars) / Modification due texte (indiquez les details) Development Proposal / Proposition d'amenagement Description of Proposal 1 Description de la proposition i 1 L L PL C eel h � ib C n t t rn 1 , �s��i (lq_ .� -c�� V�..11, t��.5 �i�c�, �i 2Z 5�nc c� `��,. c �c�� c ;�r ►r�, � r,r�� 1C A . N cc. ,\ �ecv-' bo►�'- You must provide a scaled site plan that illustrates your proposal. You may also provide photographs, building plans, elevation drawings and any other farm of information. The plan must show the dimensions of the property, the location of all buildings, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and signs_ It is important that the distance between the property boundary and buildings are shown. Vous devez fournir un plan du site a 1'echelle illusrrant votre proposition. Vous pouvez egalement fournir des photograph ies, des plans de bdtiment des dessins de plan d'elevation et toute autre forme de renseignement. Le plan doit indiquer les dimensions de 1a propriete, Pemplacement de la totalite des bdtiments, des allees, des aires de stationnement, des amenagements paysagers et des panneaux de signalisation. Il est important d'indiquer la distance entre les limites de la propriete et les bdtiments. Provide reasons why these amendments should be approved. I Fournir tout acme renseignement concernant votre proposition qw pourrait titre approuvees. cco' ruc k%oc) 5� y e- L.,-; 16& Provide any other inform your ation =ut proposal that would be helpfhL / Fournir tout autre renseignement concernaut votre proposition qui pourrait Etre Mile. Signature of Applicant / Signature du demandeirr I , l Date 3- Cp6 1/ $400 Application Fee Enclosed / Ci -joint les frais de demande de 404 $ `.'i i '-\rI h . G If you are not the owner ofthe land in question Si vous n' @tes pas le propri&aire du terrain en question, please have the owner sign below. The signature of veuillez obtenir la signature du propri&aire dans la partie the owner is authorizing this application to proceed ci- dessous. La signature du proprietaire autorisant le for consideration by Common Council traitement de la presente demande pour que cette dernie're soil examinee par le coned communal. Signature of Owner (if applicable) Signature due propri&aire (s'il y a lieu) Date: Provide any other information about your proposal that would be helpful. The current edition of Saint John's zoning by -law will mark its twenty -fifth anniversary this year. Since 1981, the city has amended it hundreds of time in an attempt to keep the document relevant. Still, the bylaw was created in the early 1980s by authors who could not foresee the unique challenges and opportunities of 2446. The city should exercise its authority in making relevant and future - looking zoning decisions. Leinster Court is a demonstration development that will show how one can include those living in poverty in the renewal of South /Central Saint John. Leinster Court is a landmark project that is unique to Uptown Saint John and deserves special consideration. The gentrification of the southern peninsula, with people of higher incomes moving back, risks forcing people of lower incomes out of the very community where they have lived for generations. Projects such as Leinster Court will help to minimize this effect and are critical to the true growth of Saint John. This development will stand out as one of the premier apartment addresses in the city. It will be a place people of all income levels and backgrounds will desire to live, maintaining and increasing the diversity of the area. Leinster Court will enhance the neighborhood. The building architect has been sensitive to the surrounding buildings and has designed a quality apartment design of which Saint John can be proud. Leinster Court will be one of Saint John's future historic buildings, akin to its neighbors on Leinster, Carmarthen and King Street East. This project will demonstrate to other developers that there is a market for new quality units in Uptown Saint John. It will demonstrate how developers can build diverse healthy communities within their own developments and how government programs can assist in this regard. Leinster Court and similar projects will help reverse the population decline in Uptown /South End Saint John by increasing the unit density and help replace our aging unit stock. o `, n' o `4 sf wl It I 74 ---40 "Alm ol mmvn Rio CARMARTHEN STREET ri wm Cc T t < (L I z cl- LLJ -A N per. ipF Z S CL P4 TJ3 LO z < z ct < -D V) Z z 0 V) Z U 2 co z Ln i Q 7— Lij w Lj [Y- CD -J La Ln II V, li Ji Cti F iJ f 11 Rio CARMARTHEN STREET ri wm Cc T t < (L I z cl- LLJ N per. ipF Z S CL P4 TJ3 z lifiuifidl�il. I �N,�H�iiIJ4�il { �nfIlNVlI�"�I�illl'Jllll n,l>ti` MINI[ NN: i` �illiNl�' 1++NIIIfiNil' IN IIifNININf1fJiIIN:NNt"riNlNll`NI �i1NNilCC11Nlll'lI1iN NI�N HIn :: ■��':Ellii�l�l. « ■'lli��tl91: «■ Il�li�l «: ■I ul, 11 Jfl�ll�lill' Illlll�, I�CI�IN11Nsflllll111 l�Nllllil';lI�NlElll 111111 =JI':��.plbllYilhN�N?�P�' NII:NdI'I'Il1;IL11,N' `NkNI'sllllli NrB'IN =N. B�! IIGIN�I!IliEll)II!1��lllilHlllNfiN1 ..■, , MEN , - L!•• ,, 11 : :■ . ■I t� � ' I + I �i i III j fill ill N Nl Ai ■■ i I , 4 . I rr�u : : ■! ::■ I,lil :: IM11 �ill��;il III I Jlllil,r �t, � I � JI1111dIIVllull J'illl��si 11'.11��IJI��111l ��ii`��JI�II��? 'I'UIIII�IU'; •IN■ J � u 1. ii■EE ■IIII II pp �llill��l�!� J' INN�iNi��i ;; i��l�i��9'I � illpliu9�Illll N1�NNN'N!q II��I�IVfIiN! N, ��11111t�J !n!NI;�!1ilf��IIIIN�I�P 11�1111�Iptlli% hill i�l9�l IH�IpiUl�al�lilp' JII�I�iVigl ll�al!!11!Ji�iNVlgllll�i .. ■lil�ikl'Ii:E■ II'llli;lll:: ■lilhlfl::■ 6.■ 11 :1{II.. ■I'fil' ::. ■:�!fl� .. Jnilll' JPfAItJGlPn�lilli�l i�ltliilllNiiUdilliliM111111111 , Ill 1,111 M, NNbNIIIIIN,N I {E�I'INIININ91N,11C! iIIIIII'N�I Nily {js I N11ifN,91N!Illll lm tl « « I M L. JIM I ■i I «:■ .0 H1111111 : :■i q:.■I ::■ M -.-.NJ « « ■I = ■ ■ 1 ■I Ing «. ■' ■I ■i ..■' l.. e.■i Msl : :■ : :■i q:.■I .'.■ ..■i :: ■I .e■ Mlee ■I®ie «■IMIe.5 « « ■i le « ■I �:: ■I I:e ■° ■ 1 ■I Ing �q'lq'il:..i'q;�gwl" 1- -4 � k � \\ / f \ z \ \ / A ; °� �k z� l y � /� \� # } >a 1- -4 � k � \\ / f \ z \ \ / to C� < to ( 8 2 } }�J |ƒ § |&�} 2�( |) e / ¥ F- � R N U ) � \ LLI o z 2 ƒ \ ƒ ) §2 �§ K §j L) !7 $ }& 0.31 }!7 Si§ /20 �\ \I &, 2 §a BY -LAW NUMBER CY 110 - A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: ARRETE No C.P.110- ARRETE MODIFIANT VARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors d'une r6union du Conseil communal, The City of Saint John a d6cr6t6 cc qui suit : The Zoning By -law of The City of L'arret6 sur le zonage de The City Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of of Saint John, d6cr6td le dix -neuf (19) December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: d6cembre 2005, est modifi6 par: 1. Adding the following to the list of 1 zones in Section 30(1): "special zones SZ -21" 2. Adding the following as Section 2. 740(21): "Special Zone #21 SZ -21 a) Uses Any land, building or structure may be used for the purpose of, and for no other purpose than, i) the following uses: - a multiple dwelling, provided that Council has approved a specific proposal pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act. b) Zone Standards Standards for development in Special Zone #21 shall not be subject to General Sections 810 to 870 but shall be limited by the proposal which is approved by Council pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act." Amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of 'Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land with an area of approximately 2770 square metres, located at 53 -75 Leinster Street, also identified as being PID Nos. 00009431 and 55059992, from `B -2" General Business to "SZ -21" Special Zone #21. - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 2006 and signed by: L'ajout de 1'616ment suivant i3 la liste de zones du paragraphe 30(l): << zones sp6ciales SZ -21 L'ajout du paragraphe 740(21) qui se lit comme suit : << Zone sp6ciale Y 21 SZ-21 a) Usages Les terrains, batiments ou constructions ne peuvent titre affectds qu'aux fins : i) des usages suivants - une habitation multifamiliale, a la condition que le Conseil ait approuvd une proposition particuliere en vertu de Particle 39 de la Loi sur 1 'urbanisme. b) Normes applicables Les normes d'am6nagement daps la zone sp6ciale if 21 ne sont pas assujetties aux dispositions g6n6rales des articles 810 a 870, mais elles sont assujetties A la proposition approuv6e par le Conseil en vertu de Particle 39 de la Loi sur Purbanisme. La modification de Fannexe «A», Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la d6signation d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 2 770 metres carrels, situ6e au 53 -75, rue Leinster, et portant les NID 00009431 et 55059992, de zone Commerciale g6n6rale o B -2 >> a zone sp6ciale n° 21 SZ -21 ». - toutes les modifications sont indiqu6es sur le plan ci joint et font partie du pr6sent arrdt6. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le pr6sent arret6 le 2006, avec les signatures suivantes : Mayor Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - DeuxiBme lecture Third Reading - Troisi�me lecture PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 53 -75 LEINSTER STREET Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETt SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 53 -75, RUE LEINSTER Avis public est donn6, par la prelsente, que le Conseil communal de The City of Saint John a Pintention d'eltudier la modification suivante de Parretd sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la rdunion ordinaire du conseil prelvue le lundi, 20 novembre 2006 a 19 h dans la salle du conseil : 1. Adding the following to the list of zones in 1. Section 30(1): "special zones SZ -21" 2. Adding the following as Section 740(21): 2. "Special Zone #21(SZ -21) a) Uses b) Any land, building or structure may be used for the purpose of, and for no other purpose than, i) the following uses: - a multiple dwelling, provided that Council has approved a specific proposal pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act. Zone Standards Standards for development in Special Zone #21 shall not be subject to General Sections 810 to 870 but shall be limited by the proposal which is approved by Council pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act." Rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 2770 square metres, located at 53 -75 Leinster Street, also identified as being PD) Nos. 00009431 and 55059992, from "B -2" General Business to 11SZ -21" Special Zone #21, as illustrated below. L'ajout de 1'616ment suivant h la liste de zones du paragraphe 30(1): « zones speciales SZ -21 » L'ajout du paragraphe 740(21) qui se lit comme suit : Zone spdciaie n° 21 (SZ -21) a) Usages Les terrains, batiments ou constructions ne peuvent We affectels qu'aux fins i) des usages suivants - une habitation multifamiliale, a la condition que le Conseil ait approuvel une proposition particulielre en vertu de Particle 39 de la Loi sur l'urbanisme. b) Normes applicables Les normes d'amelnagement dans la zone spelciale n° 21 ne sont pas assujetties aux dispositions gelnelrales des articles 810 a 870, mais elles sont assujetties a la proposition approuvele par le Conseil en vertu de Particle 39 de la Loi sur 1 'urbanisme. >> Modification du zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 2 770 metres carrels, situele au 53 -75, rue Leinster, et portant les NID 00009431 et 55059992, de zone Commerciale gen$rale << B-2 » a zone speciale n° 21 « SZ-21 >>, comme Pindique la carte ci- dessous. (INSERT MAP) (INSERER LA CARTE) REASON FOR CHANGE RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION To permit a four- storey, 52 -unit apartment Permettre une habitation multifamiliale de quatre building. stages et de 52 logements. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any: interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted, Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall, J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 Toute personne int6ressee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de l'urbanisme et du ddveloppement � 116tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours ferids. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par dcrit a Pattention du soussigne A 1'h6te1 de ville. J. Patrick Woods, Greffier communal 658 -2862 is - �' f SOO rye -------- - - V�ept�N�rt� �� 40. 0 \ % ro \ silo t. wow st • collos, Tue. lV til PROPOSED ZONING $Y -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 53 -75 LEINSTER STREET Public notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at ;its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m,, by: 1. Adding the following to the list of zones in Section 30(1): "special zones SZ -21" 2. Adding the following as Section 740(21): "Special Zone #21 (SZ -21) a) Uses Any land, building or structure may be used for the purpose of, and for no other purpose than, i) the following uses: - a multiple dwelling, provided that Council has approved a specific proposal pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act. b) Zone Standards Standards for development in Special Zone #21 shall not be subject to General Sections 810 to 870 but shall be limited by the proposal which is approved by Council pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act." 3. Rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 2770 square metres, located at 53 -75 Leinster Street, also identified as being PID Nos, 00009431 and 55059992, from "B -2" General Business to "SZ -21" Special Zone #21, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit a four - storey, 52 -unit apartment building. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 -------------------------- - - -- -- ---------------------------------- PROJET DE MODIFICATION' DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 53 -7$, RUE LEINSTER Avis public est donne, par la presente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a Vintention d'etudier la modification suivante de Farrete sur;le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la reunion ordinaire du conseil prevue le lundi, 20 ngvembre 2006 A 19 h dans la saile du conseil 1. L'ajout de 1'dldment suivant a la liste de zones du paragraphe 30(1) zones sp6ciales SZ -21 » 2. L'ajout du paragraphe 740(2 1) qui se lit comme�suit o Zone sn6ciale n° 21 (SZ -211 a) Usages Les terrains, batiments ou constructions ne geuvent titre affect6s qu'aux fins i) des usages suivants - une habitation multi familiale, A la� condition que le conseil ait approuv6 une proposition particuliere en vertu de Particle 39 de la Loi sur l'urbanisme. b) Normes applicables Les normes d'am6nagement dans la zone speciale n° 21 ne sont pas assujetties aux dispositions g6n6rales des articles 810 1 870, mais ell{es sont assujetties a la proposition approuvde par le conseil en vertu de Particle 39 de la Loi surll;l'urbanisme. 3. Modification du zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 2 770 m6tres carr6s, situde au 53 -75, rue Leinster, et portant les NID 00009431 et 55059992, de zone commerciale g6nerale «B -2» A zone speciale n° 21 « SZ-21 >>, comme l'indique la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre une habitation multifamiliale de quatre dthges et de 52 logements. Toute personne int6ress6e peut examiner le projet 4e modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de Purbanisme et du d6veloppement a 1'hgtel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf le jours f6d6s. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par dcrit a 1'attention du soussign6 a 1'h6tel de ville. J. Patrick Woods, Greffier communal 658 -2862 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Bud et Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office (Account # 71206) Contact: J. Patrick Woods lerk/Greffier communal Phone: (506) 658 -2862 Fax: (506) 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): Newspaper (Check a applicable) (SJTJ= Saint Joho Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad Dat$(s): Tuesday, October 24, 2006 Tuesday, November 14, 2006 SJTJ Independent Placement Dato(s): SJTJ Classifieds Dat0s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you wan Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑General Not ce ❑Tender ❑Proposal 0 Public Noti e Sub - Headline (if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED i Call to Action: J. Patrick Woods, Common lerk/Greffier communal Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 02/18/2002 84:32 1 PLANNING AND DEVELOP PAGE 04/05 Application for a Zoning By-law Amendment Demande de modification i Parson sur le zonage Applicant Related Inform boo / Renseignements sur It ders"denr Name of Apphem / Nom du dcmandew % _ 5 3 l A, iJ ( z- A -S iI i/ FI-�) Mtlmg Addrzss of Wbmo I Addcsse posts* do damamdmr .T , .,�' G s° Posa Code / code posa Tdepbone MWAW / Nam ko de timphane 3 Home I Domicile - - iG -?�z - 72 �/- C) Wofk / Travail Fax Number / Ntprofto de tWoapieor - ( 0 Name of Property Owner (if different) / Nom du proMie 9re (si &ft en ) Address I Adreme T Pbstal Code 1 Code postal Property information / Reaseignentents sur In proprWO Lo:stion / EzVLxemern 0 4 l' 4 ( / i7 Pc, ,X C114 D SS / 7 Civic 0 / No de voinie Street / ,Rue FID / NIP W Ara 1 Supufm ie du lot -lo c, l4u(1 t7- 5 ( sum FMMF I Facade sur ra Existing Use of Property / Utilisatkm actueUc d€ to proptiEtb _ _ y 'se.17F t•� �, o�°c��7 ,� •4 Muracipal no bad Use Desipstian Dbipadm de Wlintion des tesres sur lcpbe opal 2 E 2) E"-, Amendment Requested /Modification demand6e Prrseat zmvq I zonsp Sew L � ISY Change Z.oAnS to / Modi&z ion du zonsr 3 S S and/or / ou ❑ Tco Anwndmatt Cmdiane penicWm) / Modification due teaoe (h diqucz ks ddb&) 02/18/2002 04:32 1 PLANNING AND DEVELOP PAGE 05/05 Development Proposal / Proposition d'aminagement Dwcription of Propossl / Desaaiption de L prop� i 14 /a,iZ- y /- UT You must prowde a scaled site plat dwi ifinsowtes your proposal. Yon maya4w provide photog74 hs, building pk"g elewWon &awl w --d ary otlterform of rlrfmmalt7o'rJ. ?rte play► AWsr show the ditnensloas of the properly, the locotion of all bailafngx driveways, parking mess, 1m dw,Wing aad sib Iris h pmrant that the distance between the pmpem bowd6ry gmd buildings are shmm. Vows dev= joamir tat plan & site a 1'&ehelle illfts&=t w" proposition. Your powm 4gakreent fewrmr Ides ph- wgraphies, des plats gk b&ipw% des dens m ale plat d'4Mvadm et towle awtrr fomet dr mnwignemenL Le plan daft indigaer les dimrnsioris de to proprijef, 1'ernplawwnt de to lotadiN des bAttments, der alkt% des tags de Mfiannemmt drs 4rATctLretraettts paysagers et des pamwa a de signaB=hm A est lmpomvd Andigrer to distmc a entre les limites de /a prop 4ti; ei lss Wments, Provide tcmm MlP these should be app med. / Foomw tout ads rcnm*m=W conmnam vp;t+e p mposidoa qui poartait ftm approwft. w Provide any other u tout om about your proposal that wmM be helpful, I Fm= too rare retest canoptt at votes prgxxd m qui pamia &M odk. ..1 ( �:L 5- 3 i IV /_3 4 72 &.5 C e Q VE.S 7-e:,2 ,e -ZPW,7 //.V 0 ✓ 0 r Side of ApplicM / S*at= do dwasodenr 5400 Applic s6m Fee EnAowd / CW*ot ks Nis do demands de 400 s If yow arc not pine owrtor of #w lwrd in gwestiort Si vot<s WOW pas It p►oprtftdre du terrain on quesMm, pleUM have the Omer sign beJOW The sigetatWe of vadkz obtettir la slgff aftm dr p vprriftre daces la pwWe the owner is anthori mg this opplicadorr to Macred ci- alesaous. La M raW a elk prcpr &mac m[Mimrt k for oonsido"gon by Coewnon Cowrtdl traikmvW de la p iLwx* ae>r mY& paw que cette dernf6w soft e=nonEe par le Conseil CoAnr WW1 Sid owm of Owner (if app icabie) Sipatao due prgWWRkv ($ "I y alien) M i }p op 4 9� \ �P 4 i6 41 It 4 a4 ` ,rs p ry I �i •° kl " g �•' � rig+* �t Ap � qh l O LJ BY -LAW NUMBER C.P.110- A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: ARRATE No C.P. 110 - ARRETE MODIFIANT VARRATE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors dune r6union du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a decretd cc qui suit : The Zoning By -law of The City of Uarretd sur le zonage de The City Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of of Saint John, ddcrdte le dix -neuf (19) December, A.D, 2005, is amended by: d6cembre 2005, est modid par : 1 Amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re- zoning a parcel of land located at 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue, having an area of approximately 42 hectares, also identified as a portion of PID number 55180558 and a portion of PID number 55156954, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential. - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 2006 and signed by: Mayor/Maire 1 La modification de 1'annexe «A», Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la d6signation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 42 hectares, et representant une partie du NID 55180558 et une partie du NID 55156954, situ&e an 17, promenade Admiralty et 66, avenue Anchorage, de zone residentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales < <RS -2» a zone r6sidentielle de banlieue desservie - habitations unifamiliales <<RSS» - toutes les modifications sont indiqu&es sur le plan ci joint et font partie du present arrete. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arrdtd le 2006, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisi6me lecture PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 17 ADMIRALTY DRIVE and 66 ANCHORAGE AVENUE Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land located at 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue, having an area of approximately 42 hectares, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 55180558 and a portion of PID No. 55156954, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to 11RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit the development of a serviced suburban residential subdivision. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 17, PROMENADE ADMIRALTY et 66, AVENUE ANCHORAGE Avis public est donn6, par la pr6sente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a Fintention d'etudier la modification suivante de 1'arret6 sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la s6ance ordinaire du conseiI pr6vue le lundi 20 novembre 2006 a 19 h daps la salle du conseil: Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 42 hectares, situ&e au 17, promenade Admiralty ct 66, avenue Anchorage, et repr6sentant une partie du NID 55180558 et une partie du NID 55156954, de zone r6sidentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliaies «RS -2» a zone r6sidentielle de banlieue desservie - habitations unifamiliales <<RSS>> comme Findique la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre 1'amenagement d'une subdivision r6sidentielle de banlieue desservie. Toute personae int6ress6e peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de l'urbanisme et du d6veloppement a 1'h6te1 de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les fours f6ries. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par 6crit a Fattention du soussign6 a I'h6tel de ville. PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 17 ADMIRALTY DRIVE and 66 ANCHORAGE AVENUE Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land located at 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue, having an area of approximately 42 hectares, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 55180558 and a portion of PID No. 55156954, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit the development of a serviced suburban residential subdivision. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 17, PROMENADE ADMIRALTY et 66, AVENUE ANCHORAGE Avis public est donn6, par la pr6sente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John at l'intention d'etudier la modification suivante de l'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la seance ordinaire du conseil pr6vue le lundi 20 novembre 2006 a 19 h dans la salle du conseil: Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 42 hectares, situee au 17, promenade Admiralty et 66, avenue Anchorage, et representant une pantie du NID 55180558 et une partie du NID 55156954, de zone residentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales <<RS- 2» a zone residentielle de banlieue desservie - habitations unifamiliales «RSS» comae l'indique la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre l'amenagement d'une subdivision residentielle de banlieue desservie. Toute personae interestee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de Furbanisme et du developpement a Ph6te1 de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours feries. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par ecrit a 1'attention du soussigne a l'h6tel de ville. City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Bud et Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office (Account # 71206) Contact: J. Patrick Woods Phone. (506) 658 -2862 Fax: 506) 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) " SJTJ City Information Ad -SJTJ Independent Placement " SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, October 24, 2006 Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal ® Public Notice Sub - Headline if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk/Greffier communal Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 November 15, 2006 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Rezoning Application - 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue On October 23, 2006 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its November 14, 2006 meeting and adopted staff recommendation as set out below. Mr. Ladds Batten appeared in support of the application. No one appeared with concerns or questions; however, three letters were received from residents of Cedarwood Drive noting concerns over the proposed single access to the subdivision. Mr. Batten noted that the applicant is in discussion with City staff regarding the access and servicing concerns noted in the report and letters from residents. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council approve the requested rezoning of a parcel of land located at 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue, having an area of approximately 42 hectares, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 55180558 and a portion of PID No. 55156954, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential. Respectfully submitted, Philip Hovey Chairman SKH Attachments Project No. 06 -345 DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006 SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Name of Owner: Sarah Herring Planner 512531 N.B. Ltd c/o Ladds Batten 512531 N.B. Ltd. Location: portions of 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue (filed as Cedar Point Anchorage Estates — 554 Woodward Avenue) PID: 55180551 and 55156594 Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential Millidgeville Secondary Plan: Development Area C (Intensity 4 Residential Density) Zoning: "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential Proposal: "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential Type of Application: Rezoning 512531 N.B. Ltd. c/o Ladds Batten Page 2 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue November 10, 2006 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By -law. The Committee's recommendation will be considered by Common Council at a Public Hearing on Monday, November 20, 2006. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That Common Council approve the requested rezoning of a parcel of land located at 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue, having an area of approximately 42 hectares, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 55180558 and a portion of PID No. 55156954, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential. BACKGROUND: On July 21, 1986 Common Council approved the rezoning of a 55 acre parcel of land located west of Woodward Avenue from "R-113" One Family Residential and "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential to permit the first phase of development in the Cedar Point area. On June 2, 1986 the Planning Advisory Committee recommended the addition of a Section 39 resolution to the rezoning requiring that power, telephone and cable television lines be placed underground; however, Council did not adopt the recommended resolution. On January 4, 1994 Common Council approved the rezoning of approximately 30 acres of City - owned lands and approximately 39 acres of Provincially -owned lands located west of Cedarwood Drive from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential to permit the expansion of the subdivision development in the Cedar Point area. The Planning Advisory Committee recommended the rezoning with no additional conditions. Through numerous phases of subdivision development, a total of 179 building lots were developed from the 50 hectares (124 acres) of land at Cedar Point rezoned to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential in 1986 and 1994. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has noted that there have been many problems with the ditches in this subdivision. In this high quality area the property owners often want to landscape to the edge of the street and in the process partially fill in the ditches and raise the shoulders so water 512531 N.B. Ltd. c/o Ladds Batten Page 3 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue November 10, 2006 cannot drain off of the street and culverts are more easily blocked. Future phases of this subdivision should consider installing concrete curbs and storm sewers to facilitate the high quality of landscaping their customers wish to do. Building and Technical Services has noted that there are no Building Code issues at this time. Saint John Energy has advised that the existing three phase overhead lines will need to be extended to and through the proposed subdivision to provide adequate services. Easements will be required on this extension and costs will be addressed with the developer at a later date. Aliant Telecom has been notified of this application. Rogers has been notified of this application. Real Estate Services is in support of this proposal. Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and notes that there is no objection to the rezoning or subdivision application; however, the Fire Department requires that the street network adhere to the following National Building Code Standard 3.2.5.6 Access Route Design which provides that the road: a) have a clear width not less that 6 metres, unless it can be shown that lesser widths are satisfactory; b) have a centreline radius not less than 5 metres; c) have an overhead clearance not less than 5 metres; d) have a change in gradient no more than 1 in 12.5 over a minimum distance of 15 metres; e) be designed to support the expected loads imposed by fire fighting equipment and be surfaced with concrete, asphalt, or other material designed to permit accessibility under all climate conditions; f) have turnaround facilities for any dead -end portion of the access route more than 90 metres long; and g) be connected with a public thoroughfare. On the final point, the fire service is concerned that the proposed new subdivision only has one point of egress and access and is not connected with a public thoroughfare. This situation is further complicated in that the attached subdivision (the existing Cedar Point Anchorage Estates) also has one point of access and egress and as such there are two locations at which the new subdivision can be rendered inaccessible in the event of an emergency. N.B. Department of Environment and Local Government has been notified of this application. 512531 N.B. Ltd. c/o Ladds Batten 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue Page 4 November 10, 2006 N.B. Department of Transportation has no comments or concerns regarding this rezoning request. ANALYSIS: Subiect Site and Surrounding Areas The subject site is a 42 hectare (104 acre) parcel of land located south of Ragged Point Road and northwest of the existing Cedar Point Anchorage Estates Subdivision. Much of the undeveloped parcel is heavily treed and has rugged terrain with a steep ridge running through the approximate centre of the parcel northwest of the existing Admiralty Drive. Much of this rugged terrain is underlain by solid bedrock and will require blasting to facilitate development. The waterfront areas of the parcel are steeply sloped towards the water, topographically similar to waterfront of the existing Cedar Point Anchorage Estates Subdivision. The subject site was recently purchased from the Province, and it as well as the other undeveloped lands from Ragged Point Road south to the Saint John River are currently zoned "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential. The New Brunswick Department of Supply and Services owns a 27 hectare (67 acre) parcel of undeveloped land between the subject site and the privately- owned, partially developed parcels on the south side of Ragged Point Road. The applicant has requested that the Province ofNew Brunswick turn the aforementioned 27 hectare (67 acre) parcel of land into park land for the City of Saint John; however, no plans to this effect have been submitted to the City. The current Cedar Point Anchorage Estates lands from Woodward Avenue west to the Saint John River are currently zoned "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential, save for a property located at 23 Anchorage Avenue which pre- existed the afore - mentioned rezonings and subdivision development. The existing sections of the subdivision contain large lots, the "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential zone requires a minimum lot size of 1,400 square metres (15,000 square feet), and most developed lots contain large, executive style single family homes with high - quality landscaping and pleasing views of the Saint John River. Land for Public Purposes dedicated during previous phases of the subdivision extends along the waterfront from Woodward Avenue to the current edge of Anchorage Avenue, and a public park is located in the approximate centre of the Cedar Point Anchorage Estates subdivision but has not yet been developed. Municipal Plan and Secondary Plan Designation The Municipal Plan has designated the area as Low Density Residential which includes both the current "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential zone and the proposed "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential zone. The Millidgeville Secondary Plan identifies the area as DevelopmentArea C.• Cedar Point where a high - quality mix of single family and duplex dwellings on large, serviced lots is proposed. The Secondary Plan also addresses the preservation of view planes, important watercourses and the escarpment along the Saint John River, and the development of a recreation corridor along the shoreline in this area. 512531 N.B. Ltd. c/o Ladds Batten Page 5 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue November 10, 2006 Requested Zoning By -law Amendment The applicant has requested that the subject site be rezoned from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential to permit the development of a subdivision with approximately 166 large, single - family building lots. The proposed subdivision is intended to be an extension of the existing Cedar Point Anchorage Estates subdivision, and the applicant is thus seeking the same zoning. The "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential zone permits single family dwellings and, subject to conditions, a limited range of associated uses including a group home, a kindergarten, nursery or day care centre, a park or playground and a home occupation. The Subdivision By -law also provides more suburban servicing requirements for "RSS" subdivisions including streets with open ditches and no sidewalks or curbs. Street lighting is permitted on wooden poles, and utilities may be installed overhead at the front of residential lots. These standards will provide a consistent streetscape and neighbourhood character between the existing Cedar Point Anchorage Estates subdivision and the extension being proposed on the subject site. Future Subdivision Application Comments received from the Department of Operations and Engineering indicate concerns with the drainage system of open ditches and culverts permitted by the "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential zone and currently being used in the existing Cedar Point Anchorage Estates. The Fire Department has noted concerns with the proposed single access to the new subdivision via Cedarwood Drive. As well, several letters have been received from current residents of the Cedar Point Anchorage Estates subdivision expressing a desire for a second access to the subdivision. These issues will be addressed in discussions with the developer and when the final subdivision plans are submitted and brought forward to the Planning Advisory Committee and Common Council for recommendations and approval. A further report will be prepared at that time which will address the subdivision design, proposed streets, servicing upgrades, land for public purposes dedication and alternative emergency access routes. The proposed continuation of the "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential zoning through the next phases of subdivision development is in keeping with the approved plan for the area and specific design issues may be better dealt with during the detailed design phase, where City/Developer agreements may be made to resolve pertinent issues. 512531 N.B. Ltd. c/o Ladds Batten Page 6 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue November 10, 2006 CONCLUSION: Given that "RSS" One Family Serviced Suburban Residential zoning was applied to the original phases of the Cedar Point Anchorage Estates subdivision and that the subject site is intended to be developed as an extension to this subdivision, the requested rezoning is appropriate and can be supported as it will provide a consistent character and streetscape throughout the neighbourhood. SKH Project No. 06 -345 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT /URBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT RS- 2 r RS- 2 I Subject Site /site en question: Location: portions of 17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue Date: November 10; 2006 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a 1'echeile e RR .5 IL- 2 PID(s) /NIP(s): portions of 55180551 and 55156594 r 1 � d � *l%.j ZIP Y Ir Q O j tb e. � o 1 rE Vt 5. + i KXM3 2 ,y i G m a O r 1 � d � *l%.j ZIP Y Ir Q O j tb rE Vt + i ,y i 2 EI, 4 Y �y i4 b� t1 s' J'y ` la 0 • ►� � L � � � SY } � tL � .y ��' a t� i� {� EIl• .. + Ic ♦Y 1 L I � r� t E� ;;;�M EI, 4 ►EEC t1 s' L � � � SY } � tL f E' EL l r•t ��Y 1 L I � r� t E� ;;;�M r� Pierre & Laurel Comeau 90 Cedarwood Drive Saint John, NB E2K 5P4 Oct. 31, 2006 Planning and Development P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 4L 1 Re: Rezoning --17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue (portions thereof) Dear Sir/Madam; We are writing this letter to express our objection to the further development of the above noted parcel of land. We have lived at 90 Cedarwood Drive since September 2005 and have witnessed the continued development of lots in this area. Two concerns have been noted as this development continues. First, Cedarwood Drive is the principle street used for the continued movement of heavy construction equipment, and damage to the asphalt has already occurred. There has been no effort on the part of the developer, Pro Woodworking, to fix this damage. The continued movement of this equipment, as would be used in the further expansion of this parcel, would only further damage the street. Second, there are many small children on Cedarwood and the heavy equipment moving up and down the street poses a danger to them. There is no other access to this land so Cedarwood becomes the main thoroughfare for construction traffic, then followed by the coming and going of cars from 166 new homes. It would appear that the City has, to this point, permitted the developer to open new lots with no green space included in the plan, If this development is approved we feel the City should require the developer to open a new road, probably off of Boars Head Road, to give additional access to this site and to relieve the heavy traffic on Cedarwood Drive. The developer should also be required to provide green space, including the construction of a children's playground, in the new site development. Sincerely, Pierre & Laurel Comeau �oZ vpt,/ 00, 40 Ai _cE1tRE1f �- Nov 10 20 H At Planning Advisory Committee P.O Box 1971 Saint John NB E2L 4LI November 2, 2006 Re: Rezoning —17 Admiralty Drive and 66 Anchorage Avenue To Whom It May Concern: I wish to register my protest against the submitted rezoning proposal. Nov R 2006 . �oFSATO I was astounded to discover on the diagram attached to the advisory letter of October 18`h, that there is no provision for a second access road to the proposed new subdivision. The current access road, Cedarwood Drive, is already over utilized and showing signs of wear. I am convinced that the increase in traffic on Cedarwood, both residential and construction, will have a significant detrimental effect on the condition of the road, the overall tranquility of the existing subdivision and property values for those unfortunate enough to have a residence adjacent to this road. Traffic speed is another major issue for this road. There are no "STOP" signs on Cedarwood except for those at each end. This leads to many drivers significantly exceeding the speed limit. The neighbourhood has many families with younger children and most summers there are impromptu field hockey games on a flat section of the road. When entering the subdivision the road has an uphill gradient leading to a crest with limited visibility. It is at this crest that the hockey players set up their game. At a minimum, there should be additional "STOP" signs installed on Cedarwood Drive, at the intersections of Rivershore Drive, Whitetail Lane and Blanchard Lane, to slow traffic down. I do not believe Cedarwood Drive is adequate to deal with the increased demands that will be made upon it by the completion of a further 166 homes (most with multiple vehicles). As a home owner on Cedarwood I am appalled to think of the increase in traffic that this will bring and object to the plan in the strongest terms! Yours truly, Andrew Butcher 41 Cedarwood Drive Saint John NB E2K 4T4 Application for a Zoning By -law Amendment Demande de modification it 1'arrete sur le zonage Applicant Related Information / Renseignements sur le demandeur Name of Applicant / Nom du demandeur Hughes Surveys & Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Saint John Enemy Mailing Address of applicant / Addresse postale du demandeur 575 Crown Street Saint John, NB Postal Code / Code postal E2E 5E9 Telephone Number / Numero de telephone Home / Domicile Work / Travail 634 -1717 Fax Number / Numero de telecopieur 634 -0759 Name of Property Owner (if different) / Nom du propridtaire (si diffdrent) Fernhill Cernetga Cam an Address / Adresse 200 Westmorland Road Postal Code / Code postal E2J 2E7 Property Information / Renseignements sur la propriete Location / Emplacement Westmorland Road A portion of 415422 Civic # / No de voirie Street / Rue PID / NIP Lot Area / Superficie du lot 4,5 81 square metres Street Frontage / Fagade sur rue None Existing Use of Property / Utilisation actuelle de la propriete Vacant Municipal Plan Land Use Designation Designation de utilization des terres sur le plan municipal Low Density Residential Amendment Requested / Modification demandee Present Zoning / Zonage actuel RS -2 ❑X Change Zoning to / Modification du zonage a US and/or / ou Text Amendment (indicate particulars) / Modification due texte (indiquez les ddtails) Development Proposal / Proposition d'amenagement Description of Proposal / Description de la proposition Saint John Energy plans to build an electrical substation on the ro ert . The 12rol2ertY will gain access by an existing Ri t -of -Wa . Visual screening around the site will be provided as a buffer between the substation and the neighbouring residential ro erties. You must provide a scaled site plan that illustrates your proposal. You may also provide photographs, building plans, elevation drawings and any other form of information. The plan must show the dimensions of the property, the location of all buildings, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and signs. It is important that the distance between the property boundary and buildings are shown. Vous devez fournir un plan du site a Pechelle illustrant votre proposition. Vous pouvez egalement fournir des photographies, des plans de bdtiment, des dessins de plan d'elevation et toute autre forme de renseignement. Le plan dolt indiquer les dimensions de la propriete, /'emplacement de la totalite des bdtiments, des allies, des acres de stationnement, des amenagements paysagers et des panneaux de signalisation. 11 est important d'indiquer la distance entre les limites de la propriete et les bdtiments. Provide reasons why these amendments should be approved. / Fournir tout autre renseignement concernant votre proposition qui pourrait titre approuvdes. The rezonin will allow the installation of the substation which will provide additional c4pacijy capacity to support ongoing growth in the area The proximity to the existing electric power transmission lines makes this a logical location for the facility. Provide any other information about your proposal that would be helpful. / Fournir tout autre renseignement concernant votre proposition qui pourrait We utile. Saint John Energy has an excellent record and is working hard to ensure that they continue to provide the hi hest level of service to their customers. The new substation will hel to u hold that commitment. Signature of Applicant / Signature du demandeur Signature of Applicant / Signature du demandeur For Mughes Surveys & Consultants For Saint John Energy --*,�>a re �" L.-A,o 0 z Date 0 c_A 12- ^tao tQ ❑X $400 Application Fee Enclosed / Ci joint les frais de demande de 400 $ If you are not the owner of the land in question Si vous nVtes pas le proprietaire du terrain en question, please have the owner sign below. The signature of veuillez obtenir la signature du proprietaire dans la partie the owner is authorizing this application to proceed ci- dessous. La signature du proprietaire autorisant le for consideration by Common Council. traitement de la prisente demande pour que cette derniere soft examinee par le coned communal. Signature of Owner (if applicable) Signature due proprietaire (s'il y a lieu) See attached authorization M o m �Vf U Q P 0 c n N cc�3 - Y cc Z O V W V 00— C R CD 9 its U' !l r+ "' 0 s g u i D N 5 4 2 w U E fi N N Cy / 1 LO W 4 / W rD 4oQ�c dy r// r �`osG 4► eA a ONE 00-12. 2406 2:48PM FERPILL CEMETERY No.9622 P. 2 October 12, 2006 Mr. Jim Baird City of Saint John Comrnu ity Planning P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB EM 4L 1 Dear Mr. Baird: RE: Rezoning Application Lot #06 -01 With regard to the above matter, authority is granted to Saint John Encrgy and their representative Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. to make the application. please contact us if you require any further on the above_ Yours truly, FERNIML CEMETERY COMPANY Ann Maloughney General Manager "Caring Non -Profit Service to the Community Since 1848" BY -LAW NUMBER C.P. 110 - A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: ARRET9 No C.P.110- ARR)E'TE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors dune reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a decret6 cc qui suit: The Zoning By -law of The City of L'arr&6 sur le zonage de The City Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of of Saint John, decrete le dix -neuf (19) December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: d6cembre 2005, est modifie par: 1 Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re- zoning a parcel of land located at 304 Westmorland Road, having an area of approximately 6,980 square metres, also identified as being PID No. 55160113 and a portion of PID No. 00415422, from "RS- 2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "US" Utility and Service classification - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law, IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of ', A.D. 2006 and signed by: Mayor/ Maire 1 La modification de 1'annexe <<A>>, Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la d6signation d'une parcelle de terrain situde au 304, chemin Westmorland, d'une superficie d'environ 6 980 metres carres, et portant le NID 55160113 et 6tant aussi une partie du NID 00415422, de zone r6sidentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales «RS -2» a zone de services publics <<US>>. - toutes les modifications sont indiqu6es sur le plan ci joint et font partie du pr6sent arret6. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le pr6sent arret6 le 2006, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 304 WESTMORLAND ROAD Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 6980 square metres, located at 304 Westmorland Road, also identified as being PID No. 55160113 and a portion of PID No. 00415422, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "US" Utility and Service, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 304, CHEMIN WESTMORLAND Avis public est donne, par la prdsente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a 1'intention d'etudier la modification suivante de 1'arret6 sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la reunion ordinaire du conseil prevue le lundi 20 novembre 2006 A 19 h dans la Salle du conseil: le rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain dune superficie d'environ 6 980 metres carrels, situde au 304, chemin Westmorland, et portant le NH) 55160113 et etant aussi une partie du NM 00415422, de zone residentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales «RS -2>> A zone de services publics <<US>>, comme l'indique la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) REASON FOR CHANGE: RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: To permit the construction of an electrical Permettre la construction d'un poste electrique. substation. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall, J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 Toute personne interestee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du geffier communal ou au bureau de l'urbanisme et du ddveloppement a Ph6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours fdrids. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par dcrit a 1'attention du soussign6 a 116tel de ville, J. Patrick Woods, Greffier communal 658 -2862 /'�,, r� `:.- �` _, j` � �. i '�, _ T_ f ��ct'� �� .;:. r i 1 j �.....�, � ! j / �� i j !, r . ' , , �.._. i'� , �� f, � �,,� f, ��_- j \� � ;� � � ;� PROPOSED ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT RE: 304 WESTMORLAND ROAD Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 6980 square metres, Iocated at 304 Westmorland Road, also identified as being PID No. 55160113 and a portion of PID No. 00415422, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "US" Utility and Service, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit the construction of an electrical substation. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 304, CHEMIN WESTMORLAND Avis public est donne, par la presente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a 1'intention d'etudier la modification suivante de 1'arret6 sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la reunion ordinaire du conseil prevue le lundi 20 novembre 2006 1 19 h dans la salle du conseil : le rezonage dune parcelle de terrain dune superficie d'environ 6 980 metres carr6s, situ6e au 304, chemin Westmorland, et portant le NID 55160113 et 6tant aussi une partie du NID 00415422, de zone residentielle de banlieue — habitations unifamiiiales et bifamiliales «RS -2» a zone de services publics «US>>, comme l'indique la carte ci- dessous. (INStRER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre la construction d'un poste 6lectrique, Toute personne intdressee pent examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de 1'urbanisme et du developpement A Ph6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours fe i6s. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par ecrit a 1'attention du soussigne a 116tel de ville. J. Patrick Woods, Greffier communal 655 -2862 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Bud et Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office Account # 71206 Contact: J. Patrick Woods Phone: (506) 658 -2862 Fax: --(506)674-4214 Special Instructions (if any): Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) " SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, October 24, 2006 Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal © Public Notice Sub - Headline if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk/Greffier communal Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 November 16, 2006 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning 304 Westmorland Road On October 23, 2006 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its November 14, 2006 meeting. Rick Turner of Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc., along with Brian Fitzpatrick and Darin Lamont of Saint John Energy, attended the meeting on behalf of the proposal. Mr. Turner expressed agreement with the recommendation in the attached report. Mr. Turner and Mr. Lamont reviewed the details of the proposal for the Committee and answered questions raised by the Committee members and neighbouring property owners. Beatrice Latour and Mel Hannan, co- owners of 298 Westmorland Road, addressed the Committee in opposition to the proposal. Their concerns included traffic, visual and noise impacts of the substation. They suggested that the applicant and Committee explore an alternative location for the facility. Carmel McCaig, 300 Westmorland Road, also spoke against the application, indicating that she agreed with the comments of Ms. Latour. Mrs. McCaig also summarized her concerns contained in the letter that she had submitted to the Committee. Yi Xiao Chi, 289 Westmorland Road, attended the meeting and expressed concerns about the effect of electromagnetic fields on the health of people living near such facilities. In addition to the report and presentations, the Committee received two letters in opposition to the proposal. Copies of these letters are attached. After considering the matter, the Committee decided to adopt that the proposed rezoning be approved. However, the Committee further recommends that the rezoning of the proposed Lot 06 -01 be subject to a condition, pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, that the site be developed in accordance with a detailed site plan showing landscaping features that would obscure the view of the proposed substation from surrounding residential properties. Planning Advisory Committee Page 2 November 17, 2006 The Committee also approved the creation of the proposed lot with access via the existing right -of -way from Westmorland Road, and granted the required variance to permit the lot to be unserviced, on condition that the use is restricted to an electrical substation and a note to this effect is included on the final subdivision plan. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 6980 square metres, located at 304 Westmorland Road, also identified as being PID No. 55160113 and a portion of PID No. 00415422, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "US" Utility and Service. 2. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of the proposed Lot 06 -01, having an area of approximately 4851 square metres, located at 304 Westmorland Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00415422, with an electrical substation be subject to the condition that the site be developed in accordance with a detailed site plan, to be prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, showing landscaping features that would obscure the view of the proposed substation from surrounding residential properties, and further that, upon the rezoning, the land and any building or structure thereon must be developed and used in conformity with the proposal and condition identified herein. Respectfully submitted, Philip Hovey Chairman RGP /r Attachments Project No. 06 -350 DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: Randall G. Pollock, MCIP Planner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. (for Saint John Energy) Name of Owner: Fernhill Cemetery Company (PID 415422) and Clayton Estate (PID 55160113) Location: 304 Westmorland Road PID: 55160113 and a portion of PID 415422 Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: Existing: "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential Proposed: "US" Utility and Service Proposal: To create a lot for development of an electrical substation Type of Application: Rezoning and Subdivision JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. (for Saint John Energy) Page 2 304 Westmorland Road November 10, 2006 The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By -law. Common Council will consider the Committee's recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, November 20, 2006. The Act also authorizes the Committee to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the Subdivision By -law. Conditions can be imposed by the Committee. The Subdivision By -law authorizes the Committee to approve the creation of a lot with access other than a public street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 6980 square metres, located at 304 Westmorland Road, also identified as being PID No. 55160113 and a portion of PID No. 00415422, from "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "US" Utility and Service. 2. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant a variance from the requirements of the Subdivision By -law to permit the creation of the proposed Lot 06 -01 with no municipal water and sewer services on condition that the use of the lot is restricted to an electrical substation and a note to this effect is placed on the final subdivision plan. 3. That the Planning Advisory Committee approve the creation of Lot 06 -01 having access via the existing right -of -way from Westmorland Road. BACKGROUND: On August 6, 1996 the Committee considered a conditional use, subdivision and variance application from NBTel to create a one -acre lot from the Fernhill Cemetery property for construction of a cellular communication tower and utility building. A utility service building or structure is a conditional use in the "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential zone. The Committee approved the necessary variance to permit the lot to have no municipal water or sewer and approved the proposed access by means other than a public street. In addition, the Committee granted a variance from the maximum height requirement of the "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential zone to permit a tower height of 55 metres (180 feet). Conditions were imposed with respect to fencing, location and access to the tower. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. (for Saint John Energy) Page 3 304 Westmorland Road November 10, 2006 Municipal Operations and Engineering has no objection to the rezoning and subdivision. Building and Technical Services advises that it has no Building Code concerns at this point in the process. Saint John Transit advises that the proposal has no direct impact on Saint John Transit. Saint John Energy is the applicant in this matter. Aliant Telecom advises that it has no issues with the rezoning at this time. However, if the substation is built Aliant will require a zone of influence study to determine if any Aliant facilities will be impacted. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline has no objection to the proposal. Fire Department has been advised of this application. ANALYSIS: Site and Neighbourhood The subject site is located off Westmorland Road on the edge of the recently- expanded boundary of the Westmorland/McAllister Regional Centre area. The majority of the site, including where the actual development is proposed, consists of land owned by the Fernhill Cemetery Company. The site also includes a long - existing, 66- foot -wide right -of -way parcel, which is situated between the residential properties at 300 and 306 Westmorland Road. The right -of -way parcel does not have a tax account, and its ownership is not indicated by Service New Brunswick records, other than the words "Clayton Grace" with no address indicated. It appears that this is a remnant parcel that probably is owned by the heirs of the Clayton estate, none of whom now own any adjoining lands. According to the solicitor for Saint John Energy, Registry Office records indicate that the right -of -way parcel was part of a larger land parcel that Fernhill conveyed to Roy E. Clayton in 1946, reserving out the 66 -foot right -of -way for access to the land retained by Fernhill (including the area now being proposed for the development). The site is currently undeveloped, as is the balance of the Fernhill Cemetery property in this area. The major NB Power overhead high voltage power lines cross the site. One of the parcels to the west of the site contains the Aliant cell tower mentioned in the Background. There is a second communication tower further to the southwest of the site, located on one of the lots abutting the undeveloped Sunnyside Avenue street right -of -way. Also adjacent to the main part of the subject site is a parcel of land that was rezoned some time ago to "RS -1" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to permit the construction of a barn for keeping of horses. The properties fronting directly on Westmorland Road are developed with residential uses, including 298, 300 and 306 Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. (for Saint John Energy) Page 4 304 Westmorland Road November 10, 2006 Westmorland Road. Immediately across Westmorland Road from the right -of -way entrance is an optometrist's office. Proposal Saint John Energy proposes to develop an electrical substation on a 4851- square -metre (approximately 1.2 -acre) lot that would be subdivided from the Fernhill Cemetery property. The applicant indicates that the proposed substation will provide additional electrical capacity to support the ongoing growth in this area of the City. The proposed lot would be subdivided from the corner of the Fernhill Cemetery property that is directly behind the property at 306 Westmorland Road. The lot would be directly underneath the large NB Power transmission lines and would be accessed by the existing right -of -way from Westmorland Road. The attached tentative plan shows the proposed lot and its relationship to the surrounding area. The development will be similar to the substation development below the transmission lines off Millidge Avenue near Boar's Head Road, between the women's health club and the residential lots fronting on Boar's Head. The applicant has provided a number of photographic images to illustrate the proposal and how it will look from various vantage points. The applicant indicates that visual screening around the site will be provided as a buffer between the substation and the neighbouring residential properties. One possible method would be a solid fence, as illustrated on the submitted photographs. Proposed Rezoning The subject site is currently zoned "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential. It is proposed that the site be rezoned to "US" Utility and Service, a zone which would permit the development. The access is considered to be part of the use and, therefore, also requires rezoning to "US" Utility and Service'. The "US" Utility and Service zone category was created in 1990 to provide for various uses that are needed to deliver utilities and services in non - industrial areas of the City. The uses permitted in this zone include facilities such as the proposed electrical substation, fire stations, police stations, municipal buildings, water treatment and storage facilities and sewage treatment facilities. These are uses that are important to the operation of the City, but are considered to be of such a scale that they should not be permitted without rezoning. Over the past decade and a half, most existing facilities that were not properly zoned, and all new or expanded facilities, have been rezoned to the "US" Utility and Service zone. 1 Due to the ownership of the right -of -way parcel, the proposed rezoning of this portion of the subject site was initiated by Common Council rather than by the applicant. Although no actual development on the right -of -way parcel is proposed, the access is considered to be a part of the use and, therefore, also requires rezoning. Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. (for Saint John Energy) Page 5 304 Westmorland Road November 10, 2006 As noted by the applicant, the proposed substation will provide additional electrical capacity to support the ongoing growth in this area of the City. The site has been selected as it is directly below the high voltage transmission lines which provide the electrical power for distribution. Once constructed and operating, the facility will not generate excessive traffic or otherwise impact on the adjoining residential area on Westmorland Road (other than being visible), as there would be only periodic visits to the site for maintenance and monitoring purposes. There would also be no adverse impact on the commercial and cemetery uses to the northwest and east of the site. Approval of the proposed rezoning can be recommended. Other Approvals Although the site will not front on a public street nor be served by municipal sewer and water, the required approvals in this regard are considered appropriate given the nature of the use. While Section 40 of the Zoning By -law would prevent the future use of the proposed lot for some other permitted use, it is recommended that a note be included on the final subdivision plan indicating that the lot is to be used for an electrical substation only. CONCLUSION: The proposed facility will provide a service that is essential for the continuing growth and development of East Saint John. The site is in a location that is ideal for the use and will have a minimal impact on the nearby residential area. Saint John Energy has done an excellent job of landscaping and otherwise improving the aesthetics of its existing substation facilities. Approval of the rezoning and creation of an unserviced lot with access other than a public street is recommended. RGP /r Project No. 06 -350 } ;f PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/URBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT ., 0 SC ae RS- 1" B- 1 ; ID- IL - 1 • . '.y t-ern1�► l ! P D ' d Subject Site /site en question: 55160113 Part of /partie du 00415422 Location: 304, chemin Westmorland Road Date: October 25 octobre, 2006 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a Mchelle M Ad 0 it CL + s^ ? AI aSat: $ s � 0- s � I � p � nnnnnnrnr+ S aY 8 fill i nanaaaaaa r / 461 c� ,% �& �1 g� a e� Y re y � 8 J y � M t 'An icy 4 �e a. KA", IN IAII iffis—, I IA -I. tr 1 pi —0 1 P/1t c. Chale. may I 19AIn colmIm riff« /M cnn M Mr rs CCA rn-M 3ara �s A:tnng? AN . tZ 11 la If hl IA. /n vA) RrJ . Wow /y,2oa6 916 ,rd r. ► .VXOT.M. NOV 14 2000 A o ne- — TeI euraRh -7-440 2I--_ i ct'hcr F�o�m: �1r�.yd d/ i4sk )ycr Fall T1� Ure uJs o Nor AA7 Quo ,S ZA 9)" ecc - d9 Phe 0 r- I IM) g s1.!v-- daxcdy behl& -1 3 eoa' ANA 3d� a Nn ubttft l of �K4 A&?A obcr- oil rtght. ICI MI Pcc .n,DAolp fl"iJ 4- 11 1) x., n, i n1 Th L° c1 �S�uYCtt — _3C�rf l5 D�NL°u k3 r a a - u1 U t � s�.stD Td 11� „ 1� r1/Qc�1 La► S O F � i� 15 /5 a ,aiOr cotVcprx) -- NO c=a A) Sd/h?r�o•U� e122�� t f • --. - -T�I�s shdald Sc.MOUc /ti/ b e, Codlleao i�✓ty b /U Td T c- a� Thr s f' Aa e ) tt s -,v e txto rocshea eve-x, HAP- - Ah � /V I- - 0. %Nx a ox, tat- Ili P-o %e- E 0', 1 xwo Log h, JAI), )Z .... ..... ..... rd qol iujhv.--w 0-g! nJo .6 c - co-, S-41 ri Dal Ae) kOND M AJ A'tAi-Yt SICIZ* , 49L t.L-.wjoA—lcj4 T-- --Pcq -has Q, 0 ic e." ,,9NS&)e.sq 9 fo �eR;e7rg Nov 14 2W6 City of Saint John Planning and Development Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Re: Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision of 304 Westmorland Road We are the owners of the property at 298 Westmorland Road. The non - residential use of the properties in the vicinity of ours over the past few years has been a growing concern. Beatrice has appeared before this Committee and Common Council on several occasions regarding such development as the 2 cellular towers now located on top of the hill behind our property; the Home Depot and CAA Regional Office, both located just down Westmorland Road; and just last year, the Horizon Management project to locate huge box retail outlets and a hotel within view of our property. In addition, we are aware that the existing right -of -way adjacent to our property which we use to access the lots at the back of our property and others use for access to the cellular towers and NBEPC transmission line towers as well as the current construction project next door is directly in the path of the proposed LNG pipeline through the City of Saint John. We would like the committee to consider the following questions and concerns that we have when evaluating the merits of this proposed rezoning. This proposed electrical substation is literally "in- our -back- yard" as it would be adjacent to 3 of the 4 lots comprising our property at 298 Westmorland Road. We have enclosed 2 pictures of the area under consideration that were taken this past weekend. The location of an electrical substation here would limit the viable use of these lots and therefore lower the value of our property as a whole, as well as other properties in the immediate area. How will we be compensated? How many additional electrical transmission lines will result and what paths will they follow? Is a schematic available? What "visual screening" will be provided by Saint John Energy? Is a detailed plan of the "visual screening" available? Electrical substations generate noise. There will be a constant "hum" from this facility, further depreciating the value of neighboring properties. This proposed location is either directly in the path or adjacent to the proposed land route for the Brunswick Pipeline (Emera) LNG pipeline. This is a potentially dangerous situation that will depreciate neighboring property values. What types of facilities can be put on property zoned `US" Utility and Service? What else might be erected on this lot? For instance is this the zoning that will be required for lands where the LNG pipeline will travel? Would those already granted the use of this right -of -way still keep their privileges as they now exist? How much additional traffic will be generated on the right -of way by this proposed development? In closing, we would like to suggest there are much better locations for an electrical substation rather than in the backyards of several residential properties. Why not locate it just over the hill in the already heavily commercialized area of Rothesay Ave.? Better yet why not locate it in the wooded area somewhere between Loch Lomond Road and Ellerdale Avenue? Both these locations are along the same NBEPC transmission line and close to the developing areas that require the additional power. Thank you for your consideration. Yours Sincerely, Beatrice Latour and Mel Hannan 87 Laura Drive Quispamsis, NB (506) 847 -0204 These photos show the back of our property at 248 Westmorland Read. They were taken a few days ago and show our barn and vegetable garden. You can see the power pole standing alone on the hillside. Our property boundary is to the left of the pole and the proposed substation would be to the right of the pole. In the second picture you can see alone the right side where the forest and hill have been cut away by Horizon Management during the continuing construction of the retail box store outlets. 03/2612002 09:43 1 PUNNING AND DEVELOP PAGE 05/05 Application for a Zoning By -taw Amendment Demande de modification it 11arrUk snr le nonage Applicant Related Information f Reaseigoements sar le demandeur N=e of Applicant / Nam da d=md= - MaAmS Address of applicant I Addrew posWe du dmandevr a� rio rJ A Postal cove / Cade postal Cy Te,cpho= Nnmbcr f Nvmoo de w4 bmc Home I Domicile 3 � `!^ � � � Wo rk f Tray-sil � �E Fax Number l Nttmdro de tdlr�cap�ieur e� � % - 7 Mnmr of Rmntarty ftwner lif different) /?%Tom du rnvrnidtaire (si differ) (5517813 ►) Address f Adresse Ci� o�,s Ss1�637s Propeny Information 1 Renseigneme~nts sur In prepriW Civic W I No de voiric Street. f Rue Code / Code postal `r a 5517 S! 31 -;L. ,55 ((O637S PID / NIP Lot Area / SWerficie du lot-4 � OO V m 2 Strut Ftontagc ! Far de sur rue _ .__. E,dsting Use of Property / UtAisadon xWMe de la pr*l td _ h Mu6dpal Fla bnd Use Designation �-OY r�C�7 S r' Ddjpati n de utilization Iles terns sur le putt zntmi pal geS t 6(f-AJ ,aJ Amendment Requested / MoMfiicatioa demandke PP=U zmung i zaaage aictuel 1J Change Zoning to I MoMcation du zonage A and/or / ou (itdc�e ) Mofixtion de teste (ngo le Mails) Tex Amend =t Development Proposal / Proposition d'aminagement Description of Proposal / Description de la proposition 5S175?/R 1 t _il� CtG477 (Z" You must provide a scaled site plant that illustrates your proposal. You may also provide photographs, building plans, elevation drawings and arly other form of information. The plan must show the dimensions of the property, the location of all buildings, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and signs. It is important that the distance between the property boundary and buildings are shown. Vous devez fournir un plan du site a 1'echelle illustrant votre proposition. Vous pouvez egalement journir des photographies, des plans de bdtiment, des dessins de plan d'elevation et toute autre forme de renseignemenL Le plan dolt indiquer les dimensions de la propriete, 1'emplacement de la totalite des bGtiments, des allees, des sires de stationnement, des amenagements pa)sagers et des panneaux de signalisation. 11 est important d'indiquer la distance entre les limites de la propriete et les hd1iments. Provide reasons why these amendments should be approved. / Fournir tout autre renseignement concernant votre proposition qui pounait titre approuv6es. u Provide any other information about your proposal that would be helpful, / Foumir tout autre renseignement concern= votre proposition qui pourrait &e utile. Signature of Applicant 1 Signature du den-tandem Date $400 Application Fee Enclosed / Ci joint les fiais de demande de 400 If you are not the owner of the land in question Si vows n `etes pas le proprietaire du terrain en question, please have the owner sign below. The signature of veuillez obtenir la signature du proprietaire dans la partie the owner is authorizing this application to proceed ci- dessous. La signature du proprietaire autorisant le for consideration by Common Council. traitement de la presence demande pour que cette derniere soft examinee par le conseil communal. Signature of Owner (if applicable) ( 9 Signature due propri6taire Wil y a lieu) Date: w can ^7_ W- N}a I %• �f sr of DP ;7 �aI 1 S tpp -- - - - - - - - - - - - 1 I r a.1 5; M i u:F � ��g• � � a� •� °�� w $�� fit • � S.6 y3 aa�� M iI � �� s � b �r W _ N /[ J r ad= L 113 O IN can ^7_ W- N}a Ni IM %• �f �ii� of -- - - - - - - - - - - - 1 I r a.1 M i u:F •� 3 I B n �gS x QQ� FN F F .♦°fF Fj�3{F��j �¢j¢j¢jS�V �G uo$ U a V Wad kk�kdks� dk : k .k X8=8 «n< =PaPaw9 E o�o�Q � � a'•�"Q u(J'°`�' � z H a x <f d p n r i' q, N. I` �t W- N}a Ni IM %• �f �ii� of N. I` �t BY -LAW NUMBER C.P.110- A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: ARRP,TLt No C.P.110- ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRtTlk SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors d'une reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a d6crdte ce qui suit: The Zoning By -law of The City of L'arret6 sur le zonage de The City Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of of Saint John, d6crete le dix -neuf (19) December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: d6cembre 2005, est modifi6 par: 1 Amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land with an area of approximately 4963 square metres, located at 587 Wallace Court, also identified as being PID No. 55166375 and a portion of PID No. 55178131, from "R -113" One Family Residential to "R -2" one and Two Family Residential classification. - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 2006 and signed by: Mayor/Maire 1 La modification de 1'annexe <<A», Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 4 963 metres carres, situ6e au 587, cour Wallace, et portant le NID 55166375 et 6tant aussi une partie du NID 55178131, de zone r6sidentielle — habitations unifamiliales <<R -1B» i3 zone r6sidentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales <<R -2». - toutes les modifications sont indiqu6es sur le plan ci joint et font partie du pr6sent arrete. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le pr6sent arret6 le 2006, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premidre lecture Second Reading - Deuxi6me lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 587 WALLACE COURT Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land with an area of approximately 4963 square metres, located at 587 Wallace Court, also identified as being PID No. 55166375 and a portion of PID No. 55178131, from "R -1B" One Family Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit the development of four semi- detached dwellings on an extension of Wallace Court. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 :30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 587, COUR WALLACE Avis public est donne, par la pr6sente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a 1'intention d'etudier la modification suivante de l'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la reunion ordinaire du conseil prevue le lundi 20 novembre 2006 a 19 h daps la salle du conseil : le rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain dune superficie d'environ 4 963 metres carres, situee au 587, cour Wallace, et portant le NID 55166375 et etant aussi une partie du NID 55178131, de zone r6sidentielle — habitations unifamifiales «R -1B» A zone residentielle — habitations unifamifiales et bifamiliales <<R -2 >>, comme l'indique la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre 1'amenagement de quatre habitations jumelees sur une prolongation de la cour Wallace. Toute personne interessee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de Purbanisme et du developpement a Ph6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les fours feries. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par dcrit a Fattention du soussigne a 1'h6tel de ville. J. Patrick Woods, Greffter communal 658 -2862 p� a^'Oz) LM S y� unoc) aIellpm anon PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 587 WALLACE COURT Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -Iaw at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land with an area of approximately 4963 square metres, located at 587 Wallace Court, also identified as being PID No. 55166375 and a portion of PID No. 55I78131, from "R -IB" One Family Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit the development of four semi - detached dwellings on an extension of Wallace Court. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUP, LE ZONAGE OBJET: 587, COUR WALLACE Avis public est donne, par la presente, que le Conseil communal de The City of Saint John a !'intention d'etudier la modification suivante de Farrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au cours de la reunion ordinaire du conscil pr6vue Ie lundi 20 novembre 2006 a 19 h dans la salle du conseil : le rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 4 963 metres carres, situee au 587, tour Wallace, et portant le NID 551 66375 et etant aussi une partie du NID 55178131, de zone r6sidentielle — habitations unifamiliales <<R -1 B» a zone r6sidentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales <<R- 2 », comme Findique carte ci- dessous. (1NSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre 1'amenagement de quatre habitations jumelees sur une. prolongation de la tour Wallace. Toute personne interessee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de Purbanisme et du developpement a 1'h6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les fours f6ries. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par ecrit a Pattention du soussigne a 116tel de ville. J. Patrick Woods, Greffier communal 658 -2862 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Bud et Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office (Account # 71206) Contact: J. Patrick Woods Phone: (506) 658 -2862 Fax: (506) 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement " SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, October 24, 2006 Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal ® Public Notice Sub - Headline (if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk/Greffier communal Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 November 17, 2006 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning Erb Builders Ltd. (Matt Erb) 587 Wallace Court On October 23, 2006 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its November 14, 2006 meeting. The applicant, Matt Erb of Erb Builders Ltd., appeared before the Committee in support of the application and staff recommendation. Two area residents (Bev McCann of 580 Sand Cove Road and Jack McQuinn of 582 Sand Cove Road) raised concerns regarding this application. These concerns related to traffic congestion along Wallace Court, the proposed density of the semi - detached development, lost of existing trees on the subject property and the close proximity of the proposed development to an existing sewer easement directly behind their properties on the subject site. There were no other presentations made at the meeting concerning this matter, and no letters were received from surrounding property owners. The applicant responded to questions with regards to the project and the variances being sought. With regards to the lost of trees the proponent suggested that any neighbouring property owner could purchase the land in question in order to protect most of these trees, otherwise it is likely they would need to be removed in order to accommodate the proposed development. Some confusion arose with the Committee whether the applicant wished to amend the original proposal or proceed with the application as submitted. The applicant expressed his desire to have the submitted proposal considered for approval, but would come back if necessary should the subdivision be altered to consolidate a portion of the land to an adjacent property. After considering the presentations and staff report, the Committee resolved to deny the requested rezoning application. No further consideration was given to the subdivision development or requested variances. Should Council give first and second reading to the requested rezoning, then a recommendation concerning Planning Advisory Committee November 17, 2006 Page 2 the subdivision (and consideration of the requested variances) will be provided by the Committee. RECOMMENDATION: That this rezoning application be denied. Respectfully submitted, Stephen Horgan Vice - Chairman MRO Attachment Project No. 06 -346 DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006 Mark O'Hearn Planning Officer SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Erb Builders Ltd. (Matt Erb) Name of Owner: Elsie Hughes and the City of Saint John Location: 587 Wallace Court PID: 55178131 & 55166375 Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: Existing: "R -113" One Family Residential Proposed: "R -2" One and Two Family Residential Proposal: To extend a cul -de -sac street in order to create four new building lots for two - family dwellings. Type of Application: Rezoning, Subdivision and Variances that would: (a) Further increase the cul -de -sac length standard of 105 metres (344 feet) to approximately 174 metres (571 feet) by extending a street an additional 45 metres (148 feet); Erb Builders Ltd. Page 2 587 Wallace Court November 10, 2006 (b) Reduce the minimum width of a cul -de -sac turnaround from 37.5 metres (124 feet) to 30 metres (98 feet); (c) Reduce the minimum lot depth requirement of 30 metres (100 feet) to approximately 26 metres (92 feet); (d) Reduce the minimum lot width requirement of 18 metres (59 feet) to approximately 9 metres (30 feet); (e) Reduce the minimum rear yard requirement of 7.5 metres (25 feet) to approximately 6 metres (20 feet); and (fj Reduce the minimum side yard requirement of 2.8 metres (9.2 feet) to approximately 2 metres (6.6 feet). JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed rezoning applications. The Committee's recommendation will be considered by Common Council at a Public Hearing on Monday, November 20, 2006. The Act also authorizes the Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning the subdivision of land, including the assent of streets, land for public purposes, and public easements, as well as cost - sharing for piping materials outside the limits of the subdivision, and the authorization of City/Developer Subdivision Agreements. The Act further authorizes the PAC to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning By -laws. Conditions can be imposed by the Committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That Common Council rezone a parcel of land with an area of approximately 4963 square metres (53,423 square feet), located at 587 Wallace Court, also identified as being PID No. 55166375 and a portion of PID No. 55178131, from "R -IB" One Family Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential. Erb Builders Ltd. Page 3 587 Wallace Court November 10, 2006 2. That, if and when third reading to the rezoning is given, Common Council assent to the submitted photo- reduced tentative subdivision plan illustrating an extension to Wallace Court with five (5) lots, as well as any necessary municipal services and public utility easements, on the condition that the Developer be responsible to reconstruct the existing cul -de -sac turnaround in accordance with detailed engineering plans approved by the Chief City Engineer, and that such work occur at the same time as the proposed subdivision development, and be included in the necessary City/Developer Subdivision Agreement. 3. That Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of one or more City/Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure provision of the required work and facilities, including detailed site and drainage plans for the approval of the Chief City Engineer, as well as the additional street work mentioned above. 4. That Common Council accept a cash -in -lieu Land for Public Purposes dedication for this proposed residential subdivision. 5. That Common Council authorize cost - sharing outside the limits of the subdivision in accordance with Section 26 of the Subdivision By -law. 6. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant the following variances from the requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning By -law that would: (a) Further increase the cul -de -sac length standard of 105 metres (344 feet) to approximately 174 metres (571 feet) by extending a street an additional 45 metres (148 feet); (b) Reduce the minimum width of the proposed cul -de -sac turnaround from 37.5 metres (124 feet) to 30 metres (98 feet); (c) Reduce the minimum lot depth requirement of 30 metres (100 feet) to approximately 26 metres (92 feet) for proposed Lot 06 -4; (d) Reduce the minimum lot width requirement of 18 metres (59 feet) to approximately 9 metres (30 feet) for proposed Lot 06 -2; (e) Reduce the minimum rear yard requirement of 7.5 metres (25 feet) to approximately 6 metres (20 feet) for the future semi- detached dwelling to be constructed on proposed Lot 06 -4; and (fj Reduce the minimum (northern) side yard requirement of 2.8 metres (9.2 feet) to approximately 2 metres (6.6 feet) for the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 06 -1. BACKGROUND: Erb Builders Ltd. 587 Wallace Court Page 4 November 10, 2006 On September 21, 2004 the Planning Advisory Committee considered a rezoning and subdivision application from Redpath Realty Ltd. (Jim Coloris). That application involved the rezoning of the subject area to "TH" Townhouse in order to permit the construction of a private street with three (3) buildings containing a total of twelve (12) townhouse units (see attachments). The Planning Advisory Committee recommended that the application be denied. On September 27, 2004 Common Council held the advertised Public Hearing, and after considering a number of objections and concerns raised by area residents, decided to deny the rezoning application. On August 23, 2005 the Committee considered a further subdivision application for the subject property (see attachments). That application involved the extension of Wallace Court with a new public cul -de -sac turnaround and six (6) new building lots with one - family dwellings. Among other issues, there was concern with regards to the proposed narrow turnabout for this revised proposal. The Committee resolved to table the application in order to allow the Developer and City staff to explore revisions to the proposal that would increase the turnabout area. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has no objection to the requested variances. The existing turnaround should be removed and a new street constructed with concrete curbs on both sides and a concrete sidewalk along one side. The existing curbs and all asphalt not required for driveways should be removed and the disturbed areas landscaped. Building and Technical Services has no concerns with this proposal. Saint John Transit has been advised of this matter. Saint John Energy has indicated that underground facilities are available to service the proposed extension of Wallace Court. The details and costs associated with this civil work can be discussed with the Developer later. Aliant Telecom has indicated that the necessary extension of underground facilities will be coordinated with Saint John Energy, and any costs will be borne by the Developer. Rogers has been advised of this proposal. Maritimes & Northeast has no concerns with regards to this subdivision development. Leisure Services has previously recommended that a cash -in -lieu dedication be required for any further subdivision development on the subject lands. Erb Builders Ltd. 587 Wallace Court Page 5 November 10, 2006 Fire Department has no objection to this application provided that full municipal services and underground utilities include the placement of a fire hydrant within 150 metres (492 feet) of the furthest property on the proposed cul -de -sac. School Board has been advised of this residential development. ANALYSIS: The subject property is situated at the end of Wallace Court immediately adjacent to the Saint John Throughway in West Saint John (see attached location map). The site is comprised of two parcels of land having a total area of 6024 square metres (64,844 square feet or 1.49 acres). The majority of the site is owned by Elsie Hughes who resides in a one - family dwelling on one of the proposed lots (Lot 06 -1). According to the applicant the previous landowner, Jim Coloris, still has a legal interest in this property. There is also a narrow 6 -metre (20 -foot) wide strip of land near the center of the site that is owned by the City of Saint John. A portion of this parcel would become part of the Wallace Court public right -of -way, with the remainder being part of proposed Lot 06 -3. The surrounding neighbourhood consists of mostly one - family dwellings with some two - family (semi- detached) buildings adjacent to the existing cul -de -sac turnaround (i.e., 608 -610 Wallace Court & 609 -611 Wallace Court). The surrounding homes vary from 1 to 11/2 storey with some being as high as 2 storeys. The adjacent portion of Wallace Court is a relatively newer residential development undertaken by Galbraith Construction Limited in the early 1990s. The street was constructed with an asphalt driving surface, concrete curbing and sidewalk, underground utilities, and full municipal services. Subdivision Proposal and Requested Variances As mentioned in the Background section of this report, in 2004 the previous Developer was unsuccessful in obtaining approval to carryout a townhouse project involving three (3) buildings with a total of twelve (12) units along a narrow private roadway. Later in 2005 the previous Developer then submitted a new proposal involving the extension of the Wallace Street right -of -way with a new turnabout. There would have been six (6) additional serviced lots created. The zoning would have remained "R -IB" One Family Residential, which limits construction to only one - family dwellings on the new lots. A new Developer, Erb Builders Ltd., is now interested in undertaking the development of the subject area. This new development would consist of a short extension of Wallace Court with a new public turnaround, and the creation of four (4) new lots with semi- detached dwellings. The existing dwelling at 587 Wallace Court would be placed on its own lot (Lot 06 -1), and an Erb Builders Ltd. 587 Wallace Court Page 6 November 10, 2006 adjacent small parcel of land (Parcel G) is proposed to be consolidated with the adjoining property at 605 Wallace Court (Lot 94 -3). In addition to the necessary rezoning, the following variances would also be involved with this proposal: ■ Allowance of Wallace Court to be further extended to an approximate total distance of 174 metres (571 square feet) when only a cul -de -sac distance of 105 metres (344 feet) is permitted. ■ Reduction of the proposed new turnaround with a diameter of 30 metres (98 feet) when a minimum diameter of 37.5 metres (124 feet) is required. It should be noted that such a diameter was permitted when Wallace Court was previously extended. ■ Allowance of proposed Lot 06 -4 with a varying depth of 26 metres (85 feet) to 28 metres (92 feet) when a minimum depth of 30 metres (100 feet) is required. ■ Allowance of proposed Lot 06 -2 with an approximate width of 9 metres (30 feet) when a minimum width of 18 metres (59 feet). It should be noted that the width is determined near the street, and the building site has a width of 31 metres (102 feet). ■ Reduction of the rear yard for the future semi- detached dwelling on proposed Lot 06 -4 from 7.5 metres (25 feet) to approximately 6 metres (20 feet). ■ Reduction of the northern side yard for the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 06 -1 from 2.8 metres (9.2 feet) to approximately 2 metres (6.6 feet). It should be further mentioned that the Developer will be responsible to extend Wallace Court with an asphalt surface, concrete curbing and a sidewalk. Full municipal services and underground utilities will also be necessary. Similar to previous applications, the Developer has not provided any details with regards to the existing turnaround. The surveyor has illustrated how the turnabout can be consolidated to adjoining properties, but no plans have been provided with regards to such work (i.e., removal of asphalt and curbing, installation of new curbing and sidewalk, landscaping, and extension of private driveways). Furthermore, at the time of preparing this report the Developer had not yet discussed this matter with the affected property owners at the end of Wallace Court, including the enlargement of existing Lots 94 -2 (606 Wallace Court — Russell Bouchard) and 94 -3 (605 Wallace Court — Patrick Graham) with Parcels D & G respectively. The tentative subdivision plan also illustrates very small portions of these mentioned properties being vested as part of the new Wallace Court public street right -of -way in exchange for these mentioned larger parcels. Erb Builders Ltd. 587 Wallace Court Consideration of Variances Page 7 November 10, 2006 The area is designated by the Municipal Development Plan as Low Density Residential. The proposal can satisfy relevant Plan policies, and is consistent with the existing semi- detached dwellings at the end of Wallace Court. With regards to the requested extension of Wallace Court, it should be noted that the Planning Advisory Committee granted similar variances when it considered an application by Galbraith Construction Limited in 1994 to slightly extend the then dead -end street with a turnabout right -of -way having a radius of only 15.24 metres (50 feet). Both the Engineering and Fire Departments had no objection to this reduced turnabout at that time, nor have they expressed objection with the creation of a similar turnaround for this further proposal. Given the inability to provide any additional public street access, and the limited nature of the proposed subdivision development, the variance to allow for the 45 -metre (148 -foot) extension of Wallace Court is considered reasonable. The surveying consultant has illustrated the location of the proposed semi- detached buildings on the proposed lots on a previously submitted plan. The requested variances relating to lot depth for proposed Lot 06 -4, and the rear yard necessary for the future building on this lot, are numerically minor and are considered reasonable under the circumstances. The lot width variance for proposed Lot 06 -2 is determined at the narrow portion of this lot near Wallace Court (extension). The actual building site has a width of 31 metres (102 feet), and, therefore, this variance can also be recommended for approval. Finally, the side yard variance for the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 06 -1 is considered minor. However, it should be noted that it could be avoided by altering the property boundary of proposed Lot 06 -2, though that would result in an increase to the proposed lot width variance necessary for this adjacent new lot. Provisions of Work and Facilities The Subdivision By -law requires the Developer to construct the proposed extension of Wallace Court to Local Street standards. This would include a 9 -metre (30 -foot) wide asphalt surface, concrete curbing on both sides, and the installation of a 1.5 -metre (5 -foot) wide concrete sidewalk along the western side of the new street. Underground public utilities, street lighting, and full municipal services (i.e., sewer, water and storm) would also have to be extended as required. In addition, as the proposed new turnaround would be in such close proximity to the existing Wallace Court turnabout, it would be necessary to reconstruct the existing turnaround at the same time the street extension is undertaken. This work would include the extension of the existing concrete sidewalk up to the proposed new turnaround. In addition, portions of the asphalt surface would have to be replaced with appropriate landscaping and dropped concrete curbing to accommodate the extension of driveways to the new driving surface. Eventually the unnecessary existing circular public right -of -way could be closed and conveyed to abutting property owners as Erb Builders Ltd. 587 Wallace Court Page 8 November 10, 2006 illustrated on the tentative subdivision plan. However, discussions with the abutting property owners would need to occur, and a formal street closing by -law process undertaken. Land for Public Purposes The Subdivision By -law requires that a Land for Public Purposes dedication be provided by the Developer for this subdivision. Leisure Services has suggested that a cash -in -lieu dedication be provided for this rather small subdivision development, which has been recommended for approval. Further Discussion and Negotiations The reconstruction of the existing turnaround has been discussed with the new Developer. While there appears to be a willingness to undertake this additional work, no discussion has yet occurred with the adjacent property owners that would be affected. Should this application be approved, the Developer would have to undertake the necessary discussions with the property owners in order properly reconstruct the existing cul -de -sac turnaround as explained in this report. As previously mentioned the tentative subdivision plan illustrates changes to the last two properties at 605 & 606 Wallace Court, which would have to be negotiated with these landowners. Furthermore, while Common Council has authorized the consideration of the City -owned parcel of land situated through the center of the site for this application, negotiations with the City for the acquisition of this parcel will also be necessary before the development could proceed. CONCLUSION: The requested rezoning to allow for the construction of semi- detached dwellings is consistent with the Low Density Residential policies of the Municipal Plan, and, therefore, can be recommended for approval. The associated variances to the Subdivision and Zoning By -laws are considered reasonable and can also be recommended for approval. The recommendation provides for all the necessary assents and approvals, including cost - sharing for any piping materials should service extensions be necessary outside of the limits of the proposed subdivision. In addition, authorization of a City/Developer Subdivision Agreement(s) is included to ensure provision of the required work and facilities. As noted in the recommendation, this subdivision proposal can only be supported if the existing Wallace Court cul -de -sac turnaround is reconstructed in a proper manner to accommodate the proposed new street extension and turnaround. This reconstruction will involve the cooperation of the adjacent property owners. The Developer is expected to undertake further discussion with these landowners once the necessary approvals have been granted by the City and detailed engineering (i.e., street) plans prepared. Erb Builders Ltd. 587 Wallace Court MRO /m Project No. 06 -346 Page 9 November 10, 2006 r PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENTIURBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT r s s • i -1 ■ ■ • • ■ ■ee R r 1 r r ■ 1 f f f r • f r ■ >r • ■ so i. V 61a Q! 61e 621 � 62e � W3 4 p2� O / a17 1 r, 555 _2 p en U 20 tr CO so XN S Ok aS O• rap' ♦1 Oi 6 - 5 715 Iia 357 "4e Y uc 01 h9 Sf 7 lai In u lei I vv sea nCe St. 77a % �t wi s2s c.� ,�� eL ■ 5 ■ ue Win- 1 a 647 CSOr $t. sas le 358 q \ Q su J lea ff!! PID(s) /NIP(s): Subject Site /site en question: a,. e 55178131 & 55166375 Location: 587, cour Wallace Ct. Date: Octoberloctobre 16, 2006 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a I'echelle SEMI - D LT)6 Lgewc) ??4jb90dA" loo(o PURPOSE OF PLAN -TO AMEND AND DISSOLVE THE REMAINIP WALLACE COURT, PURSUANT TO SECTION COMMUNITY PLANNING ACT, 1973. -TO CREATE LOT 06 -1 TO ACCOMODATE VA — w , ^Y M n — IBC C �n , i r OR � �n fill T ax its r m • �►, 4' i4wb' 4u, MOW t� 9, 8� 8 �� '/ 7z` - sS S 1 4F TV dd �1 pdp ,i. i i . ry °JS �S g8Sg6 °� s 4Ja � •'o p / os Job doted s --6.p0 \ \ \J� e m y x w u V a a �y 9 2 QO • •` /� !r ' � •ill A , \ n 'IV Job r, o/ yaD'd �, °'s a` /Js�r op 40 ,f ro sb ) '0900 d0 pro s, 1 Q b O y ° 4 \ ap 4r ov :`�ti ..��. •\ gip/ ,,o Ty •...tip v• f O }.�: r,L.•r:� S �, to o cv 4. ° �J z to 01 �• O v vN1 ~ o / pv 1. co cu G / � N �ry 10) E .y- / 44 _ / ��'�cs %5P 4- / py LLL N �i`SC V)VI - �N 1 fr-� •+Z/ a 40Z is /^CN / 'aZ CL N o V1 0. p 6 N (p p V/vN aJ„ c N c > o O 1 c4 � O J � � � o 4 � -at .oa .oz .ssF x 84' Z S6 '6d tZ6 -,.A �adol 999Z6Z •500 d PRI!wi7 ,tuoduio:) wayinoS "A'sunjS MaN o Application for Amendment to Section 39 Resolution or Agreement Demande de modification de la resolution ou de ['entente relative a ['article 39 Applicant Related Information / RensGol&y) eignements sur le demanddeur Name of Applicant 1 Nom du demandeur f ��Uli- Mailing Address of Applicant / Adresse postale du demandeur f Postal Code / Code postal C 6 1-�, - 4 V 5 . Telephone Number / Numdro de telephone: Home / Domicile Work / travai l (I Fax Number / Numbro de tdlecopieur 636 6-93q I } Name of Property Owner (if different) / Nom du propridtaire (si different) On e V kyQ M&tk NA, (-C- I IC Existing Resolution / Resolution actuelle Date of Resolution to be Amended / Date de la resolution a modifier Postal Code / Code postal E;�J ` 'r]cqj Location /Emplacement I } C' p (. !31Z307 Z Civic No. / No de voirie Street / Rue PID / NIP Applicant's Interest in Property / Intdret de demandeurs dan la propriete What is your Proposal? / En quoi consiste votre proposition? Note: Provide a fully dimensional drawing or plan which illustrates your proposal. (Describe proposal in detail) Nota: Fournier un plan ou un dessin entierement cote illustrant votre proposition. (Decrire la proposition en detail) ❑ A fee of $300.00 is enclosed in the form of a cheque or Money Order made payable to the City of Saint John. Ci joint des frais de 300 S sous forme de cheque ou de�andat -poste libel A 1'ordre de The City of Saint John. / Signature du Date ture of the owner mu a included. / Lasignature due propridtaire doit etre incluse. iture of Owner (if app[ ale) / signature du propridtaire (s'ii y a lieu) OCT B 2008 Date 10 (go2-5-695- PROVINCE OF NEVI,` BRUNSV'1IICK COUNTY OF SAINT JOHN 1, J. PATRICK WOODS, of The City of Saint John in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, DO HEREBY CERTIFY:- 1. That i am the Common Clerk of the said City of Saint John and as such have the custody of the minutes and records of the Common Council of the said City of Saint John and of the Common Seal of the said City. 2. That hereto attached and marked "A" is a copy of a resolution adopted pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act (Chapter C -12, R.S.N.B. 1973) at a meeting of the Common Council of The City of Saint John held on the first day of March, A.D. 2004. 3. That the resolution identified in the immediately preceding paragraph applies to land identified by PID Number 313072 and which land is apparently owned by: Howland Industries Limited / Howland Industries Ltd. 4. That I have carefully compared the said resolution with the original and the same is a true copy thereof. D A T E D at The City of Saint John on the eighth day of f. March,,A.D. 2004. ,� rx Y 1 a + P? 1- 17 MM 12 ZN4 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, 1, the said Common Clerk of The City of Saint John have hereunto affixed the Common Seal of the said City the day and year first hereinbefore written. J. Pat ' Woods Common Clerk I � "RESOLVED That pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of a parcel of land with an area of approximately 7200 square metres (1.8 acres), located at 1350 Hickey Road, also identified as being PID Number 313072, for commercial purposes be subject to the following conditions: a) The developer must pave all parking areas, vehicle manoeuvring areas and driveways with asphalt and enclose them with cast -in -place concrete curbs to protect the landscaped areas and to facilitate proper drainage; b) Adequate site drainage facilities must be provided by the developer, including catch basins where necessary, in accordance with a detailed drainage plan, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate, and the approved drainage plan must be attached to any application for building permit for the development; c) The developer must landf rape all disturbed areas of the site not occupied by buildings, driveways, walkways, parking or loading areas, including the City street right of -way to the edge of the City sidewalk; d) The landscaping along the front lot lines of the developed portion of the site must have a minimum width of 3 metres (10 feet), inside the front property line, except where interrupted by a permitted driveway; e) The developer must install all telephone and electrical wires underground from the existing overhead facilities on the street to any building on the site; f) Vehicular access to the site shall consist of a maximum of one driveway on Hickey Road, a maximum of one driveway on Bruce Lane, and no access on Loch Lomond Road, and the exact location of any permitted driveway is subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; g) The developer must extend concrete curb and sidewalk, to City specifications, along Bruce Lane to any new driveway; h) Prior to commencing the development of the site, the owner of the land shall grant to The City of Saint John any necessary easements that, in the opinion of the Chief City Engineer, are required to protect the existing municipal water transmission lines that traverse the site, with all documentation to be prepared by the City and executed at no cost to the owner; The site shall not be developed except in accordance with a detailed site plan and detailed building elevation plans, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, indicating the location, design and exterior finish of all buildings, the location and treatment of parking areas, driveway.,, i�ading areas, signs, exterior lighting, landscaped areas and other site features, and the approved site plan and building elevation plans must be attached to any application for building permit for the development; j) All site improvements as shown on the approved site plan and drainage plan must be completed within one year of building permit approval, with the exception of site paving, which must be completed within eighteen months of building permit approval; and further that upon the re- zoning of the area, the land and any building or structure thereon must be developed. and used in conformity with the proposal and conditions identified herein." w %lots I' �o J� o r �` 11 I LLJ z Q J W U D w m {9 �z r MQ LLj � O f Q f u1 N %lots I' �o J� o r �` 11 I LLJ z Q J W U D w m A O x zu x O C h a� �l GGG� A z 's o� a' �56 y� i Z LLI ZV U s WO_ N tu Zm J oc a L �o f z -b v; H S Z 9 3 t v a AW „my n d W O � Y d � x: Q� X LLJ w t >Z w �a O LLI O N t 7 M F � zm a OE A w a a Ilrr� isr r x Ww }x r Wa 4 PROPOSED SECTION 39 AMENDMENT RE: 1350 HICKEY ROAD Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider a proposal at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Amending the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 1, 2004 rezoning of the subject property located at 1350 Hickey Road, also identified as PID Number 00313072, to permit a revised proposal. REASON FOR CHANGE: 1) To permit the use of a food distribution centre and related training facility. PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARTICLE 39 OBJET: 1350, CHEMIN HICKEY Par les presentes, un avis public est donne par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention d'examiner une proposition lors de la reunion ordinaire qui se tiendra le lundi 20 novembre 2006 it 19 h dans la salle du conseil en apportant les modifications suivantes : Modification des conditions imposees en vertu de Particle 39, le 1" mars 2004 relativement au rezonage de ladite propriete situde au 1350, chemin Hickey et portant le NID 00313072 pour permettre la presentation dune proposition rdvisde. RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: 1) Permettre l'utilisation d'un centre de distribution alimentaire et d'installations de formation connexes. 2) To revise the condition that all parking areas be enclosed with cast -in -place concrete curbs. 2) 3) To revise the condition that the developer must install all telephone and electrical wires underground from the existing overhead facilities on the street to any building on the site. 4) To revise the condition that the developer must extend concrete curb and sidewalk, to City specifications, along Bruce Lane to any new driveway. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Passer en revue la disposition voulant que toutes les aires de stationnement soient entourees de bordures de beton could sur place. 3) Passer en revue la disposition voulant que le promoteur doit installer les fils electriques et telephoniques sous terre a partir des installations aeriennes existantes dans la rue et les relier aux batiments daps 1'emplacement. 4) Passer en revue la disposition voulant que le promoteur doit prolonger la bordure en beton et le trottoir le long de 1'allee Bruce jusqu'a la nouvelle entree, conformement aux specifications de la Ville. Toute personne interessee peut examiner la modification proposee au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de 1'urbanisme et du developpement a 1'h6tel de ville situe au 15, Market Square, a Saint John, au Nouveau - Brunswick, entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours feries. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 Veuillez faire part de vos objections au projet de modification par ecrit A 1'attention du soussignd a I'h6tel de ville. J. Patrick Woods, greffier communal 658 -2862 PROPOSED SECTION 39 AMENDMENT RE: 1350 HICKEY ROAD Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider a proposal at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., by: Amending the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 1, 2004 rezoning of the subject property located at 1350 Hickey Road, also identified as PID Number 00313072, to permit a revised proposal. REASON FOR CHANGE 1) To permit the use of a food distribution centre and related training facility. 2) To revise the condition that all parking areas be enclosed with cast -in -place concrete curbs. 3) To revise the condition that the developer must install all telephone and electrical wires underground from the existing overhead facilities on the street to any building on the site. 4) To revise the condition that the developer must extend concrete curb and sidewalk, to City specifications, along Bruce Lane to any new driveway. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk 658 -2862 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARTICLE 39 OBJET: 1350, CHEMIN HICKEY Par les prdsentes, un avis public est donne par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention d'examiner une proposition lors de la reunion ordinaire qui se tiendra le lundi 20 novembre 2006 a 19 h dans la salle du conseil en apportant les modifications suivantes : Modification des conditions imposees en vertu de Particle 39, le 1" mars 2004 relativement au rezonage de ladite propri6te situde au 1350, chemin Hickey et portant le NID 00313072 pour permettre la pr6sentation d'une proposition r6vis6e. RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: 1) Permettre l'utilisation d'un centre de distribution alimentaire et d'installations de formation connexes. 2) Passer en revue la disposition voulant que toutes les aires de stationnement soient entourees de bordures de b6ton cou16 sur place. 3) Passer en revue la disposition voulant que le promoteur doit installer les fils 6lectriques et t616phoniques sous terre a partir des installations adriennes existantes dans la rue et les relier aux batiments dans 1'emplacement. 4) Passer en revue la disposition voulant que le promoteur doit prolonger la bordure en b6ton et le trottoir le long de 1'all6e Bruce jusqu'a la nouvelle entree, conform6ment aux specifications de la Ville. Toute personne int6ress6e peut examiner la modification proposee au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de l'urbanisme et du d6veloppement & 1'h6tel de ville situ6 au 15, Market Square, a Saint John, au Nouveau - Brunswick, entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours f6ries. Veuillez faire part de vos objections au projet de modification par 6crit a 1'attcntion du soussign6 A 1'hdtel de ville. J. Patrick Woods, greffier communal 658-2862 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Bud et Number: 1 10 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office (Account # 71206) Contact: J. Patrick Woods Phone: (506) 658 -2862 Fax: (506) 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) " SJTJ City In €ormation Ad " SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, October 24, 2006 Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal © Public Notice Sub - Headline (if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk/Greffier communal Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 November 17, 2006 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Section 39 Amendment - 1350 Hickey Road On October 23, 2006 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its November 14, 2006 meeting. Mr. Fillmore had requested the following conditions imposed by Council as part of the March 1, 2004 rezoning of the property be removed: • (a) that cast -in -place curbing be installed around the paved areas of the site; • (e) that all telephone and electrical wires be installed underground; • (g) that concrete curb and sidewalk, constructed to City specifications, be required the extended along Bruce Lane to any new driveway. Additional deficiencies were discovered during a site visit to the property, specifically: • two accesses on Bruce Lane, whereas only one is permitted; • while most of the parking lot is paved, some disturbed portions of the site are not surfaced with asphalt. While the applicant is seeking a relaxation of the site improvements originally required, the staff recommendation did not support the removal of these conditions. Instead, it was recommended that greater improvements be made to Bruce Lane to accommodate the increased traffic and on- street parking generated from the applicant's business. Permitting the second access on Bruce Lane is supported by staff, since it permits delivery vehicles and normal customer traffic to use separate entrances. Mr. Shawn Fillmore, the applicant, attended the meeting and spoke in favour of the proposal. No other presentations were made and no letters were received. After considering the report and the applicant's comments, the Committee adopted the staff recommendation to maintain the existing conditions and further to require additional upgrades to Bruce Lane, as outlined below. Planning Advisory Committee November 17, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: Page 2 That Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 1, 2004 rezoning of the property situated at 1350 Hickey Road, also identified as PID 00313072, by 1) revising condition (f) to permit a maximum of two driveways on Bruce Lane, and 2) replacing condition (g) with the following three conditions: (g)(i) The developer improve Bruce Lane from Hickey Road to 5 meters past his last driveway by widening the street to 9.14 meters (30 feet), constructing concrete curbs on both sides and a concrete sidewalk on the south side of the public street right -of -way. (ii) The developer construct a new storm sewer on Bruce Lane to connect to the storm sewer on Hickey Road. (iii) The developer submit engineering plans of all new work on Bruce Lane. Respectfully submitted, Philip Hovey Chairman PF Attachments Project No. 06 -351 DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006 ' The original application included adding a food distribution centre and related training facility to the list of permitted uses on the site. The applicant has decided not to pursue this aspect of the development. Patrick Foran Planning Officer SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Shawn Fillmore Name of Owner: 616813 NB Limited (Golden Mile Produce) Location: 1350 Hickey Road PID: 00313072 Municipal Plan: District Centre Commercial Zoning: `B -2" General Business Proposal: To revise the previously imposed Section 39 conditions.' Type of Application: Section 39 amendment. ' The original application included adding a food distribution centre and related training facility to the list of permitted uses on the site. The applicant has decided not to pursue this aspect of the development. Shawn Fillmore Page 2 1350 Hickey Road November 10, 2006 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: Common Council has requested the views of the Planning Advisory Committee concerning the proposed amendment to the Section 39 conditions. Common Council will consider the Committee's recommendation at a Public Hearing on Monday, November 20, 2006. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 1, 2004 rezoning of the property situated at 1350 Hickey Road, also identified as PID 00313072, by 1) revising condition (f) to permit a maximum of two driveways on Bruce Lane, and 2) replacing condition (g) with the following three conditions: (g)(i) The developer improve Bruce Lane from Hickey Road to 5 meters past his last driveway by widening the street to 9.14 meters (30 feet), constructing concrete curbs on both sides and a concrete sidewalk on the south side of the public street right -of -way. (g)(ii) The developer construct a new storm sewer on Bruce Lane to connect to the storm sewer on Hickey Road. (g)(iii) The developer submit engineering plans of all new work on Bruce Lane. BACKGROUND: In 1989 the Committee considered an application to rezone the subject site to `B -2" General Business in order to permit a self - service, six -bay car wash. The Committee recommended approval of the proposal, subject to Section 39 conditions. First and second readings were given by Common Council however third reading was not given because the applicant decided not to proceed with the proposal. In 2003 the Committee considered an application to rezone the subject site to `B -2" General Business in order to permit a country market, including a garden centre, bakery, delicatessen and produce store. The Committee recommended approval of the proposal, subject to Section 39 conditions. Common Council gave third reading to the proposed Zoning By -law amendment on March 1, 2004, subject to the following conditions: (bold type indicates items that have not been completed) a) The developer must pave all parking areas, vehicle manoeuvring areas and driveways with asphalt and enclose them with cast -in -place concrete curbs to protect the landscaped areas and to facilitate proper drainage; Shawn Fillmore 1350 Hickey Road Page 3 November 10, 2006 b) Adequate site drainage facilities must be provided by the developer, including catch basins where necessary, in accordance with a detailed drainage plan, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate, and the approved drainage plan must be attached to any application for building permit for the development; c) The developer must landscape all disturbed areas of the site not occupied by buildings, driveways, walkways, parking or loading areas, including the City street right -of -way to the edge of the City sidewalk; d) The landscaping along the front lot lines of the developed portion of the site must have a minimum width of 3 metres (10 feet), inside the front property line, except where interrupted by a permitted driveway; e) The developer must install all telephone and electrical wires underground from the existing overhead facilities on the street to any building on the site; fj Vehicular access to the site shall consist of one driveway on Hickey Road, one driveway on Bruce Lane, and no access on Loch Lomond Road, and the exact location of any permitted driveway is subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; g) The developer must extend concrete curb and sidewalk, to City specifications, along Bruce Lane to the new driveway; h) Prior to commencing the development of the site, the owner of the land shall grant to the City of Saint John any necessary easements that, in the opinion of the Chief City Engineer, are required to protect the existing municipal water transmission lines that traverse the site, with all documentation to be prepared by the City and executed at no cost to the owner; i) The site shall not be developed except in accordance with a detailed site plan and detailed building elevation plans, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, indicating the location, design and exterior finish of all buildings, the location and treatment of parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, landscaped areas and other site features, and the approved site plan and building elevation plans must be attached to any application for building permit for the development; j) All site improvements as shown on the approved site plan and drainage plan must be completed within one year of building permit approval; and further that upon the rezoning the area, the land and any building or structure thereon must be developed and used in conformity with the proposal and conditions identified herein. Shawn Fillmore Page 4 1350 Hickey Road November 10, 2006 INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has no objections to the proposed changes to the Section 39 conditions respecting I. permitting food distribution and training 2. requiring enclosure of the parking lot with concrete curb 3. requiring underground utility connections They do have concerns with the proposal to eliminate the requirement to improve Bruce Lane as part of this development. The original developer did not provide the required site drainage plan, did not install concrete curb on Bruce Lane and placed substandard pipe in the city ditch without authorization. Municipal Operations has received complaints from the residents of Bruce lane that at busy times the overflow parking on Bruce Lane renders it nearly impassible. The original requirement for a sidewalk is to accommodate pedestrians, primarily high school students, who use this route as there is no sidewalk on Loch Lomond Road. The Department advises that the developer should be required to: a) improve Bruce Lane from Hickey Road to 5 meters past his last driveway by widening the street to 9.14 meters (30 feet), constructing concrete curbs on both sides and a concrete sidewalk on the south side. b) construct a new storm sewer on Bruce Lane to connect to the storm sewer on Hickey Road. c) submit engineering plans of all new work on Bruce Lane. Building and Technical Services indicate that they have no applicable comments at this time with regard to this proposal. Saint John Energy has not submitted any comments. Fire Department has not forwarded any comments. ANALYSIS: Site and Neighbourhood The subject site is located at the intersection of Loch Lomond Road and Hickey Road on the City's East Side. The property is part of the designated District Centre, which is intended to be the major commercial node serving the surrounding area of East Saint John. There are several other businesses located at this commercial node, including a large hardware /home improvement store, two auto repair establishments, a car wash and a Tim Horton's restaurant. The property currently contains the On The Vine country market. The applicant recently applied to construct a food distribution centre and related training facility. The proposed use required an Shawn Fillmore Page 5 1350 Hickey Road November 10, 2006 amendment to the Section 39 conditions imposed by Council as part of the March 2004 rezoning of the property. Amendments to these conditions were also requested to resolve outstanding issues not completed at the time of the original development. Subsequent to the application being circulated, the applicant decided not to proceed with the distribution centre. However, the applicant is still seeking revisions to some of the requirements imposed by Council. Overview of Existing Conditions As indicated in the staff report prepared for the original rezoning of the site, the conditions recommended to (and later adopted by) Council "are all normal requirements for new commercial developments in the fully serviced urban areas of the City, and are similar to those imposed on the car wash development at 1382 Hickey Road ". The report further states that "it is important that the final development be undertaken in such a manner that it results in a high - quality development with paved vehicular areas, concrete curbs, [and] landscaping ". The standard for new commercial developments has not changed and given the prominence of the site at such a busy intersection it continues to be important that the site adhere to the established standard and be consistent with the site improvements undertaken by neighbouring businesses. Detailed Review of Site Deficiencies The original developer submitted a site plan, approved by the Development Officer on March 30, 2004, which illustrates the proposed site improvements to be undertaken to conform to the Section 39 conditions. The current site does not conform to this plan and there are several conditions that have not been satisfied. Specifically: 1) Two areas shown as landscaping on the approved site plan were either never installed or have been removed to accommodate vehicle traffic for the greenhouse and the receiving area. Instead of being paved with asphalt, these areas have been surfaced with crushed rock and gravel. These areas should either be paved with asphalt to be consistent with the rest of the site or be closed to vehicle traffic and have the landscaping re- instated. 2) While the current landscaping is well maintained, the landscaped strip along the Hickey Road frontage is degraded into a gravel strip where it abuts the paved parking area. As evidenced by other properties in the vicinity, such as the Tim Horton's restaurant, this can be prevented with cast -in -place concrete curbing, as was originally required for this development. Although there are less costly alternatives to cast -in -place curbing, such as prefabricated wheel- stops, these do not have as much durability as cast -in -place concrete. Removal of the requirement to enclose all paved areas with cast -in -place concrete curbs is not recommended. 3) The original developer was required to provide a drainage plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. This plan was never provided. The site does not appear to have any drainage issues at present; however the absence of an approved drainage plan creates difficulties for the Shawn Fillmore Page 6 1350 Hickey Road November 10, 2006 City's Municipal Operations and Engineering Department in determining the adequacy of the stormwater system in the area. As indicated in their comments, the previous property owner installed a substandard pipe in the City's ditch without authorization. To prevent a drainage problem from occurring, a drainage plan should be submitted to the Chief City Engineer for his approval and any upgrading of the system consequently undertaken in accordance with the plan. 4) All telephone and electrical wires are required to be installed underground. The building is currently serviced by an overhead connection extending from Loch Lomond Road to the northwest corner of the store (the back corner of the building, closest to Loch Lomond Road). Due to the presence of a large water main extending along this portion of the public street right - of -way it is not possible to have an underground connection from Loch Lomond Road. However, there does not appear to be any physical or technical constraints preventing the installation of an underground connection from either Hickey Road or Bruce Lane. Removing this requirement is therefore not recommended. 5) The development was originally limited to having a maximum of one driveway access on Hickey Road and one driveway access on Bruce Lane. Currently there is a one -way access from Hickey Road which provides entrance to the site and a one -way access onto Bruce Lane which provides egress from the property. Further down Bruce Lane is an additional driveway used for delivery vehicles to access the receiving area behind the building. The second access on Bruce Lane conforms to the By -law provisions regarding the number of two -way accesses (although each access functions as a one -way access) and is considered appropriate given that it reduces congestion of the larger delivery vehicles mixing with customer traffic. 6) Access onto Bruce Lane was only permitted if a sidewalk and concrete curbs, built to City specifications, were extended along Bruce Lane up to the new driveway. No sidewalk or curbing have been installed. In light of the additional access being used by larger delivery vehicles, it is even more important that a sidewalk be provided for pedestrians. In addition, as indicated by the Municipal Operations and Engineering Department, residents of Bruce Lane have lodged complaints that at busy times the store's parking overflows onto Bruce Lane rendering it nearly impassable. Given the increased traffic and parking problem on Bruce Lane, significant improvements should be made to the street in addition to those originally required, as suggested by the Municipal Operations and Engineering Department. 7) As the site has not developed in accordance with the approved site plan, a revised plan should be submitted for the Development Officer's approval and future development of the site be undertaken in accordance with this plan. CONCLUSION: Shawn Fillmore 1350 Hickey Road Page 7 November 10, 2006 The subject site is located at a prominent location within a developing District Commercial Centre. There is an established standard for developments within such areas which has been adhered to by surrounding businesses. There is no planning rationale to support relaxing the existing requirements and given the increase in activity at the site, additional improvements beyond those originally imposed by Council should be considered, as outlined in the Staff Recommendation. PF Project No. 06 -351 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/URBAN ISM E ET DEVELOPPEMENT r ,p, 1 M � aro .1 •1 ,p asu �•� uu s•\ ,p 1 • p •1� ll,a • 1 „p „p N �• ♦1• • p p ♦• 0 Gr. • 1 •' ,• L 2 • L r •1 w • JU . �1 i � ♦ •al"s '•. g10�LM.�• ■,.,.i., a, •, �,.� r, �,.i Subject Site /site en question: Location: 1350, ch. Hickey Road Date: October / octobre 17, 2006 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a I'echelle PID(s) /Nl P(s): 00313072 ,w u • • N t SZ12 ` 0 ;n dv A M AM IT I 3 URI I H 'a dw55, 3 URI I H 'a BY -LAW NUMBER C.P 110 -26 A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: The Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: 1. Adding the following to the list of uses in Section 740(8)(a)(i) (Special Zone #8 "SZ -8 "): "- a lounge, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Committee;" - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 2006 and signed by: Mayor ARRETE No C.P. 110 -26 ARRETE MODIFIANT VARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors dune reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a d6cr&6 ce qui suit : Uarret6 sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, d6cr&6 le dix -neuf (19) d6cembre 2005, est modifi6 par: 1. L'adjonction de 1'616ment suivant a la liste d'usages du paragraphe 740(8)(a)(i) (Zone sp6ciale n °8 <<SZ- 8)) : - un salon -bar, sous r6serve des conditions impos6es par le comit6; » - toutes les modifications sont indiqu6es sur le plan ci -joint et font partie du present arr&& EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arret6 le 2006, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - October 23, 2006 Premiere lecture - 23 octobre 2006 Second Reading - October 23, 2006 Deuxi&me lecture - 23 octobre 2006 Third Reading - Troisi&me lecture - November 16, 2006 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Conditional Use (Lounge) 77 Golden Grove Road On October 23, 2006 Common Council held the public hearing and gave first and second readings to a proposed Zoning By -law text amendment to add a lounge as a conditional use in the "SZ -8" Special Zone #8 zone. The applicant indicated during the public hearing that he had revised his proposal and was not satisfied with the conditions that had been imposed by the Committee on October 17, 2006. Therefore, Common Council referred the matter back to staff and the Committee to "work out the conditions attached to the property" prior to consideration of third reading and adoption of the amendment. The Committee considered the attached report at its November 14, 2006 meeting. Mr. Norm Ganong attended the meeting on behalf of the applicant and indicated that he was not satisfied with the revised conditions being recommended by staff. Mr. Ganong pointed out the proposed location of his one or two lounges in relation to residential properties and suggested that, although his overall property abuts a residential zone, the specific location of Building `B' on the property will provide a suitable separation from any residential uses. He indicated that a seating capacity of 100 persons in his lounge(s) is necessary in order to make the operation economically viable. He also indicated that he has developed the site in conformity with the City's requirements with regard to curbing, paving, underground wiring, etc. and that he wishes to have the same maximum seating capacity as the lounge next door at 87 Golden Grove Road. In addition, Mr. Ganong indicated that he would not be having any outdoor entertainment, whereas the lounge at 87 Golden Grove Road is permitted to have occasional outdoor events. No other persons addressed the Committee; however, one letter in favour and two letters expressing objections were received (copies attached). After considering the matter, the Committee decided to revise its original conditions by adopting the staff recommendation in the attached report. The resulting conditions that have been imposed by the Committee are as follows: Planning Advisory Committee November 17, 2006 a) The subject site shall only be permitted to have one facility with a Lounge licence; b) The lounge shall always be operated as a secondary use to a restaurant having an approved Dining Room licence; c) The maximum occupancy of the lounge must not exceed SO seats, or 40 percent of the total combined restaurant /lounge seating capacity, whichever is less; d) Only one entertainment licence is permitted and is subject to the following restrictions: i) all entertainment shall cease prior to 1: 00 a.m.; ii) outdoor entertainment is prohibited; iii) "exotic entertainment" is prohibited; and iv) the sound from any recorded music or live entertainment must not be detectable outside of the building; e) All customer access to the lounge shall be from within the restaurant and there shall be no direct customer entrance or exit for the lounge other than an emergency exit if required by law; J) Any outdoor licensed deck or patio area is restricted to the east side or rear of Building `B' and shall be limited to a maximum of one deck or patio with a maximum area of 37 square metres (400 square feet); g) No lounge licence shall be permitted until such time as an agreement pursuant to Section 101 of the Community Planning Act, incorporating these conditions, is executed and registered. Page 2 The above conditions include a requirement that the applicant enter into a Section 101 agreement with the City. It should be noted that, because the proposed Zoning By -law amendment does not involve the rezoning of the property, there is not an opportunity for Common Council to impose conditions pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act. It should also be noted that the conditions imposed by the Committee with respect to a conditional use are not subject to appeal to Council. However, the applicant can appeal the conditions to the provincial Assessment and Planning Appeal Board. Planning Advisory Committee November 17, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: Page 3 That Common Council authorize the preparation of an agreement, pursuant to Section 101 of the Community Planning Act, incorporating the conditions imposed by the Planning Advisory Committee. Respectfully submitted, Philip Hovey Chairman RGP /r Attachments Project No. 06 -307 DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006 Randall G. Pollock, MCIP Planner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Name of Owner: F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Location: 77 Golden Grove Road PID: 300111 Municipal Plan: Service Corridor Zoning: "SZ -8" Special Zone #8 Proposal: To permit up to two licensed lounges Type of Application: Amendment to terms and conditions imposed by the Committee on October 17, 2006 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: A proposed amendment to the Zoning By -law, currently being considered by Common Council, would add a lounge as a permitted use in the "SZ -8" zone, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Planning Advisory Committee. F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Page 2 77 Golden Grove Road November 10, 2006 STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: 1. That the Planning Advisory Committee not approve the new conditions as proposed by the applicant, but that the Committee amend the conditions imposed on October 17, 2006 by: a) amending condition (c) to read, "The maximum occupancy of the lounge must not exceed SO seats, or 40 percent of the total combined restaurant /lounge seating capacity, whichever is less. "; b) amending condition (d) to read, "Only one entertainment licence is permitted and is subject to the following restrictions: i) all entertainment shall cease prior to 1: 00 a.m.; ii) outdoor entertainment is prohibited; iii) "exotic entertainment" is prohibited; and iv) the sound from any recorded music or live entertainment must not be detectable outside of the building."; c) amending condition (f) to read, "Any outdoor licensed deck or patio area is restricted to the east side or the rear of Building `B' and shall be limited to a maximum of one deck or patio with a maximum area of 37 square metres (400 square feet). "; d) adding an additional condition (g) to read, "No lounge licence shall be permitted until such time as an agreement pursuant to Section 101 of the Community Planning Act, incorporating these conditions, is executed and registered." 2. That Common Council authorize the preparation of an agreement, pursuant to Section 101 of the Community Planning Act, incorporating the conditions as amended. BACKGROUND: On October 17, 2006, the Committee considered the attached report concerning a proposed amendment to the Zoning By -law that would add a lounge as a conditional use in the "SZ -8" Special Zone #8 zone. The applicant attended the meeting and spoke against the recommendation of staff that the application be denied. After considering the matter, the Committee decided to recommend that Common Council approve the amendment. At the same time, the Committee also imposed the following terms and conditions upon the establishment and operation of a lounge at the subject site: a) The subject site shall only be permitted to have one facility with a Lounge licence; b) The lounge shall always be operated as a secondary use to a restaurant having an approved Dining Room licence; F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Page 3 77 Golden Grove Road November 10, 2006 c) The maximum occupancy of the lounge must not exceed 24 seats, or 40 percent of the total combined restaurant /lounge seating capacity, whichever is less; d) There shall be no entertainment licence, and any recorded music must not be detectable outside of the building; e) All customer access to the lounge shall be from within the restaurant and there shall be no direct customer entrance or exit for the lounge other than an emergency exit if required by law; There shall be no licensed outdoor patio or deck associated with the lounge operation. Common Council considered the proposed Zoning By -law amendment at a public hearing on October 23, 2006. During the public hearing, the applicant indicated that he wished to revise the proposal and was not satisfied with the conditions that had been imposed by the Committee. He also stated that he believed the conditions were unfair as they are different from those imposed on the adjacent property at 87 Golden Grove Road a few years ago. No other persons addressed Council. However, written objections were received. After considering the matter, Council approved first and second reading of the proposed Zoning By -law amendment. Council then referred the matter back to staff and the Planning Advisory Committee to "work out the conditions attached to the property." ANALYSIS: Revised Proposal During the public hearing it became apparent that the applicant had modified his proposal from the originally- described "pub -style seafood restaurant ". Staff subsequently met with the applicant to clarify the proposal. The applicant indicated that, in fact, he would like to have the ability to establish up to two separate lounges at this location, including one outside licensed patio or deck at the side of the building. He proposed that two lounges would be permitted only if operated in conjunction with an operating restaurant (not necessarily separately licensed as a Dining Room). If there are no food service facilities, a maximum of one lounge would still be permitted. There would be no restrictions on exterior entrances and exits, except that they would be in compliance with Building and Fire Code requirements and attempt to be in keeping with the appearance of the building. The applicant also indicated that he would like to be able to have one Entertainment licence, but that he would agree to limit live entertainment to no later than 1:00 a.m. and would not include any outdoor entertainment (i.e. on the patio) nor any so called "exotic entertainment." The applicant indicated he was willing to restrict the location of the proposed lounge(s) to the new building that is under construction and that he would also reduce the proposed floor area from the previously - proposed 4,000 square feet to a maximum of 3,000 square feet, plus a maximum 10 -foot by 40 -foot (400- square -foot) deck/patio area. The maximum total combined F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Page 4 77 Golden Grove Road November 10, 2006 seating for both lounges would also be restricted to 100 persons. If a restaurant were operated as a separate facility from the lounge(s), any seating in the restaurant could be in addition to the 100 maximum. Based on the information provided by the applicant, the following conditions would permit the applicant's revised proposal: PROPOSED LOUNGE OPERATION — APPLICANT'S PROPOSED CONDITIONS a) Except as set out in condition (b), the subject site shall only be permitted to have one facility with a Lounge licence. b) Two separate establishments, each having a separate Lounge licence, are permitted provided that at least one of the two establishments is established and continues to be operated as part of, or as a secondary use to, an establishment that serves meals prepared on the premises. C) The total cumulative area of any lounge operation(s) is restricted to an overall maximum floor area of 279 square metres (3,000 square feet) and an overall maximum of 100 seats, and shall be located only within Building `B' of the plaza (civic number 81 Golden Grove Road). d) Any outdoor licensed deck or patio area is restricted to the east side or rear of Building `B' and shall be limited to a maximum of one deck or patio with a maximum area of 37 square metres (400 square feet). e) Only one Entertainment licence is permitted and is subject to the following restrictions: i) all entertainment shall cease prior to 1:00 a.m.; ii) outdoor entertainment is prohibited; and iii) "exotic entertainment" is prohibited. The applicant is proposing that the conditions imposed by the Committee on October 17, 2006 be deleted and replaced with the above. He indicates that these conditions would allow him to continue to operate a stand -alone lounge (with entertainment) if the proposed seafood restaurant proves to be not viable. He would like to have the ability to do this. Discussion The original conditions were suggested by staff to ensure that, in the event the Committee and Council wished to approve a lounge for the subject site, it would be restricted in size and tied to the operation of a restaurant facility as indicated in the applicant's original proposal. The concerns about a larger stand -alone lounge operation were outlined in the attached report. The applicant's argument that there is an existing establishment next door that has different conditions misses the point that the general principles of the Zoning By -law with respect to lounges envisage a separation of such uses from schools, churches, residential zones and other lounges. The presence of a lounge on the adjacent property, in fact, indicates against any type of F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Page 5 77 Golden Grove Road November 10, 2006 lounge operation being permitted on the subject site, unless there are compelling extenuating circumstances to make an exception to the Zoning By -law's general separation principles. Such exceptions have been made in the past, and could include the operation of a small lounge that is secondary to a licensed restaurant. Although staff continue to be concerned about permitting another lounge in this area, the Committee and Council have both expressed a desire to allow such use with limitations. However, it is felt that the applicant's revised proposal to now have up to two lounges, as well as to permit the operation of one lounge independent of any restaurant use, is not appropriate for this location and not in accord with the general principles of the Zoning By -law. Given that there appears to be a desire on the part of Common Council to relax the current conditions that have been imposed by the Committee, some changes can be recommended. These include increasing the maximum capacity of the lounge to 50 seats, allowing limited indoor entertainment and a small outdoor deck area restricted to the east side or the rear of the building. However, in staff s opinion, only one lounge licence should be allowed and it should continue to be operated in conjunction with a licensed Dining Room facility. Regardless of the conditions that the Committee ultimately decides to impose, it is recommended that such conditions be incorporated into an agreement between the City and the property owner to ensure that they are recorded in the Registry/Land Titles office for notification of potential future owners. This is particularly important in this instance because there is no opportunity for Common Council to impose Section 39 conditions (as the site is not being rezoned.) Section 39 conditions would normally be recorded in this manner in the Registry/Land Titles Office. Finally, it should be noted that the Committee's decision concerning changes, if any, to its terms and conditions will be reported to Common Council. Common Council will likely take these conditions into consideration when deciding whether or not to give third reading to the Zoning By -law amendment. However, unlike Section 39 conditions, Council does not have the authority to make any changes to the conditions imposed by the Committee. RGP /r Project No. 06 -307 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENVURBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT • ��and Sr. -� �� I • h - r 00y r6ed sa ` . � v --� -,-ter: rT� \ \M a I a a I. ti o • I I I " RS- 2 1 / 1 f Y L •• \•I• � 1 ` fl I • ' i � C¢GYe Subject Site /site en question: PiD(s )/NIP(s ): 00300111 Location: 77, chemin Golden Grove Road Date: September 21 septembre, 2006 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a i'echelle SCALE 1/4' io 1' -V I Or, o��Pl� Ass 60 -s g., 3 -- Now UNOf32 r,"STJZiC110.j so if- / NRi! co�ii`Na�+l CoNCRC ie CU G BY -LAW NUMBER C.P 110 - A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: The Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: 1. Adding the following to the list of uses in Section 740(8)(a)(i) (Special Zone #8 "SZ -8 "): "- a lounge, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Committee;" - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 2006 and signed by: Mayor ARRETE No C.P. 110. ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors d'une reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a decrete ce qui suit: L'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, decrete le dix -neuf (19) decembre 2005, est modifie par: I. L'adjonction de P06ment suivant a la liste d'usages du paragraphe 740(8)(a)(i) (Zone speciale n 08 «SZ- 8» : - un salon -bar, sous reserve des conditions imposees par Ie comite; » - toutes les modifications sont indiquees sur le plan ci joint et font partie du present arretd. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arrete le 2006, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture * Tena�t Attention Mayor & Council Members t operate Custom Embroidery and have been a tenet of Mr. Ganong's for more than 6 years F rst at Westmorland Road now the CA Building and the last 3 years a A. Ganong Plaza. Being alsmall business owner myself I'm happy to see the growth and success. Mr. Ganong has had with his plaza and enjoy dealing with son Yeon local instead of a mall owner in Ontario. The opening of a lounge and restaurant would be helpful to my self and others tenants in Ganong Plaza as traffic flow from many new customers that do not live in the local area and the easy access in and out of t e parking lots should not cause problems like Westmorland & McAlli ter Drive has. I hope iou will approve this project. r Ar HW! 14 �� _SAT 1 1 � s Christopher L. Beyea and Laurette M. Walker 41 Dutch Garden Lane Saint John, NB E2H M (506) 696-1785 November 8, 2006 Planning Advisory Committee City of Saint John P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, N8 E21- 4L1 Re: Proposed Lounges 77 Golden Grove Road We are writing in response to Randall Pollock's correspondence dated November 3, 2006, a copy of which is attached for your reference. We note the Applicant's Revised Proposal as set out in that correspondence. Also enclosed is a copy of our correspondence dated October 5, 2006 in response to the initial proposal by F.G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. Our concerns as expressed in our letter dated October 5 have not changed and we still object to another lounge being permitted at the above address. However, should the revised application be approved by the Planning Advisory Committee, we request that conditions a) through f) suggested in its October 13 report and reiterated in its November 3 correspondence be imposed, in particular item d) which states "There shall be no entertainment licence, and any recorded music must not be detectable outside of the building ". The Applicant is now proposing live entertainment be permitted. We have no doubt any music /noise from live entertainment or recorded music emanating from or not being contained within the building will impact not only us but all residents in this neighbourhood. Also, the requested increased seating capacity to 100 is alarming. As outlined in our correspondence dated October 5, 2006, our main concern is noise and we believe this issue is not being properly addressed. Jmw ends. Thank you for your consideration. Yours ry truly, C.L. eye 6��Ivlzel� L.M. Walker Planning and Development Urbanisme et developpement www.saintjohn,ca November 3, 2006 Dear Sir/Madam: Re: Proposed Lounges 77 Golden Grove Road Background P.O. Box/C. P. 1971 Saint John, NB /N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 a e - The City or Saint John (C (3p, Y On October 2, 20061 wrote to you concerning an application of F. G. Ganong (Electrical) Ltd. to amend the Zoning By -law with respect to the above noted property (see attached location map). The applicant had requested that the "SZ -8" zoning of the subject property be amended to add a licensed lounge as a permitted use in addition to the uses currently permitted on the site. The applicant's proposal was to establish a pub -style seafood restaurant with an attached lounge, occupying up to 4,000 square feet, plus a possible outdoor deck. Although not recommended by City staff, the Planning Advisory Committee decided to recommend that Council approve the proposed amendment to the Zoning By -law after considering the matter at its October 17, 2006 meeting. However, the Committee did impose the following conditions on any lounge operation at the subject site: a) The subject site shall only be permitted to have one facility with a Lounge licence; b) The lounge shall always be operated as a secondary use to a restaurant having an approved Dining Room licence; c) The maximum occupancy of the lounge must not exceed 24 seats, or 40 percent of the total combined restaurant /lounge seating capacity, whichever is less; d) There shall be no entertainment licence, and any recorded music must not be detectable outside of the building; e) All customer access to the lounge shall be from within the restaurant and there shall be no direct customer entrance or exit for the lounge other than an emergency exit if required by law; f) There shall be no licensed outdoor patio or deck associated with the lounge operation. Common Council decided to give first and second reading to the proposed Zoning By -law amendment after its public hearing on October 23, 2006. Third reading and approval of the proposed Zoning By -law amendment was tabled, however, because the applicant indicated to Council that he had revised his proposal. Common Council will consider whether or not to give -2- third reading and approval of the proposed Zoning By -law amendment once the Planning Advisory Committee has considered the revised proposal and reports back to Council. Applicant's Revised Proposal The applicant has requested that the Planning Advisory Committee amend the conditions imposed at its October 17, 2006 meeting. Specifically, the applicant's revised proposal is to have up to two separate licensed lounges on the site. The applicant proposes that, if two lounges are established, at least one of them must include kitchen facilities for serving of meals on the premises. However, if only one lounge is established, the applicant proposes that a kitchen facility for serving of meals would not be required. The applicant further proposes that the proposed lounge(s) be located in the new building that is currently under construction, with an overall cumulative maximum floor area of 3,000 square feet. The total seating in the proposed lounge(s) is proposed to not exceed an overall maximum of 100 seats. The applicant proposes that an outdoor deck or patio area be restricted to one deck or patio located on the east side of the building with a maximum area of 400 square feet (e.g. 10' x 40'). Finally, the applicant also proposes that live entertainment be permitted, subject to the following conditions: all entertainment to cease prior to 1:00 a.m. each night no outdoor entertainment to be permitted no "exotic entertainment" to be permitted The Committee is interested in hearing the views of neighbouring property owners who might be affected by this proposal. If you wish to express your views, either in favour of or against the proposal, you can do so by submitting your comments in writing and/or by attending the Planning Advisory Committee's meeting on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Lobby Level, City Hall. Signed letters should be addressed to the Planning Advisory Committee, City of Saint John, P.O. Box 1971, Saint John, NB, E2L 4L1, and should be received on or before the Monday preceding the meeting. All received letters will be available to the applicant, the Committee, and anyone who may have an interest in the application. If you have any questions, or would like a copy of the report (available between 4:00 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. on Friday, November 10, 2006, or between 8:30 a.m, and 4 :30 p.m. on the regular business days thereafter), please contact me at (506) 649 -6076. Sincerely, 11 Wo Randall G. Pollock, MCIP Planner Attachments Project No. 06 -307 Christopher L. Beyea and Laurette M. Walker 41 Dutch Garden Lane Saint John, NB E2N 2V9 Phone: 696 -1785 Planning Advisory Committee City of Saint John P. O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB EX 4L1 Dear Sirs /Madams: October 05 ,2006 (C(DFIIY RE: Proposed Zoning By -law Amendment and Conditional Use 77 Golden Grove Road, Saint John, NB We reside at 41 Dutch Garden Lane (note enclosed map) and of course the flooding issue is always a major concern. Our home is located approximately 175 metres from 77 Golden Grove Rd. We o- biect to the proposed amendment to the above By -law, in particular, the adding of a lounge at 77 Golden Grove Road as a permitted use in Section 740 (8) (a) (i) (Special Zone #8 "SZ-8" ). We draw your attention to Section 620(2) (a) (ii) which states, in part: "a) a beverage room, club or lounge ............ may not be located: (ii) within 300 metres of another beverage room, club or lounge on the some street or within a radius of 180 metres thereof in any other direction." The Grove Lounge is located immediately next door to the "pub style seafood restaurant with an attached lounge with possible deck off to side of bldg.", as proposed by Mr. Ganong in his Application dated September 12, 2006. The Grove Lounge has an outdoor deck. We do encounter excessive periodic „noise from this establishment and from the other existing businesses in that area. A greater concern is the City's granting of a "notwithstanding" Condition of Use, as noted in Section 620(2)(a)(iv), to the 3 -Mile Entertainment Complex /MAXXX located at 5 - 19 Golden Grove Road. 1 2. Christopher L. Beyea and Laurette M Walker Our home is located approximately 250 metres from the 3 -Mile Entertainment Complex /MAXXX. The assailing extreme L4wfreq e cy (BASS) noise emanating from the 3- Mile Entertainment Complex /MAXXX since June 04, 2006, we are forced to endure, has effectively destroyed our quality of life and is jeopardizing our heath. Despite repeated attempts by us, sadly, the City has chosen not to enforce its Noise By -Law, nor has any City Official ever acknowledged low fruency (BASS,) noise exists! For the City to allow another lounge in this area would also, increase the high level of varyin _ traffiq and other associated noise already inundating our neighborhood, commencing but not limited to, early evenings and not ceasing until well after 3:00 AM the following mornings. To place our residential neighborhood in the predicament of another lounge being considered contravenes the City's existing Zoning By -laws and is simply wrong and unfair. Should not the protection of residential zoned neighborhoods have at least equal weight as the business? We expect City Officials responsible for the issuing of licenses, permits, variances etc., at all times conduct a complete unbiased investigation of the ultimate intent and full description of the business. We therefore request this Application be denied. urs truly, r.� Christ%oy, er L. Beyea Laurette M. Walker "lmw encl. cc: Honorable Stuart Jamieson Minister of Tourism and Parks Government House Leader '�5 '�. / \, �: i �� \ �' � � �; �� /i ;�; � r l� � � � �;`, 551 �- —� ��.� _ 1 � ,► � �� \ l -'" ' ' _ _' `�" Jam' � 1 � .yr � 1 1 _� � 1 .- -�1 _:r 1111 � '; ,� Yi�- - � 1s �� _ � `� =- � bN - "= �-t f � � �; ' t �. �V ltete.lp°b i� . `` � 1/ / 1 � r � ``r� >' -�� _�� -_` \ % - '� � -� r �� f � !� � /� � JiH �tN0 ! oil | |/ !. ' |! | i ' ! ; .| i� | i| |� | || ^^"n, | � � . | i! : �| ! ' |� ! ' i� |�!| | �! ! |! |� i |� i! i � (� i ii \! �. .| | .! /. ' |! . / | This is a letter to Mayor & Council pertaing to purposed lounge at 81 Golden Grove Road in Ganong Plaza. I have been a tenant at this location for more than 3 years and have seen it grow substantiality over the years. a I'm in favor of Mr. Ganong's purposed restaurant and lounge because it would be an asset and attract a variety of customers from areas of the city that may not normally travel to this area. Even with an increase of traffic the driveway is wider than normal and visibility is unobstructed for pulling in and out. AIso as a local small business owner myself I'm happy to see the success of Mr. Ganong's project to date and the continued growth in all our businesses located in this mini mall. I ask you to support Mr. Gar_ong's applications. Mayor & Council As a resident of 47 Golden Grove Road I am in support of the purposed lounge and Restaurant located at 77 Golden Grove Road as long as it is not operated as a night club. There should be no problem with traffic since the road is very straight, unlike the traffic backups around McAllister. * Tenant * Attention Mayor & Council Members I operate Custom Embroidery and have been a tenet of Mr. Ganong's for more than 6 years First at Westmorland Road now the CAA Building and the last 3 years at Ganong PIaza. Being a small business owner myself I'm happy to see the growth and success. Mr. Ganong has had with his plaza and enjoy dealing with someone local instead of a mall owner in Ontario. The opening of a lounge and restaurant would be helpful to my self and others tenants in Ganong Plaza as traffic flow from many new customers that do not live in the local area and the easy access in and out of the parking lots should not cause problems like Westmorland & McAllister Drive has. I hope you will approve this project. FA Custom Embroidery Joe Richard, Owner We Embroider: • SHIRTS • CAPS • JACKETS • TRACK SUITS • Merchandise Supplied or�ring Your Own! CE Manufacturers 77 Golden Grove Rd, Phone /Fax Saint John, N.B. E3H 1116 (506) 652 -6887 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL November 7, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Fellow Councillors, Re: Freedom of the City Common Council may, by unanimous vote, confer the honourable distinction of `Freedom of the City' upon any person. Council should consider the merit of bestowing this honour upon worthy individuals. I therefore move that the Common Clerk be directed to prepare a report on the process to be followed and that this report be referred to Committee of the Whole for further consideration. Respectfully submitted, C� Christopher T. Titus Councillor November 7, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Fellow Councillors, Re: Disability Management The Pension Board has revamped its long -term disability (LTD) application procedures. It is possible that existing beneficiaries or new applicants may not qualify for benefits under the terms of the Pension Plan legislation. There is a need to better integrate LTD benefits in the pension plan with short-term sick leave benefits provided under the terms of the various collective agreements. The Pension Board has engaged the services of `Lifemark' to provide independent objective advice regarding the management of our long -term disability application procedures. There may be some merit in using the same firm to provide advice to the City. I move that Council direct the City Manager to request a proposal from `Lifemark' to advise the City on matters pertaining to the integration of short-term sick leave benefits with LTD benefits provided in the Pension Plan. Respectfully submitted, C, Christoph . itus Councillor November 16, 2006 To: Your Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: SAINT JOHN YOUTH HOCKEY Background: Saint John Youth Hockey had to adjust their scheduling program after the Simonds Centennial Arena closed 3 years ago. They have been somewhat accommodated at Harbour Station, but that arrangement has not been a complete solution. Scheduling conflicts and costs continue to be an issue for Saint John Youth Hockey. Part of that temporary arrangement following the closure of the Simonds Centennial Arena involved funding support from the City of Saint John to Saint John Youth Hockey in the amount of $70,000. That funding arrangement ended in 2003. The Simonds Centennial Arena was closed with the anticipation of a new facility to be built within 3 years. The 3 years has come and gone. This matter is of concern to the organizers of Saint John Youth Hockey and they hope to find a solution to their participation needs. Be it resolved this matter; be referred to the Leisure Services Advisory Board for discussion and review and to respond back to Common Council as soon as possible with a recommended solution. Respectfully submitted, (Received by e-mail) John Ferguson Councillor November 16, 2006 Deputy Mayor Hooton and Councillors: Members of Council: I would make a motion that the Planning and Development Commissioner, Jim Baird, put a plan together that would encourage and help the development of the upper floors of the many unused, and in some cases unsightly buildings in our uptown area; and that Mr. Baird report back to Council, for their review, during the upcoming budget deliberations with what he believes would be an incentive for owners and developers to renew the look of our uptown area. Respectfully submitted, Yours truly, (received via email) William Farren Councillor REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL November 16, 2006 The City of Saint john His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: FIVE YEAR CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN: A REQUIREMENT UNDER THE FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL GAS TAX REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT Council will recall that included in the City of Saint John's 2006 approved Capital Budget was the following line item; "Amount to be received from the Gas Tax Refund $2,550,000." This amount was shown as a reduction in the amount that the City of Saint John would have otherwise had to borrow for its 2006 Capital Program. At that time, little detail was available with respect to the Federal/Provincial Agreement related to the transfer of Gas Tax Revenues. In March of 2006, all municipalities were provided with an "Information Package" (a portion of which is attached). Key to any application for funding is the creation of a five - year Capital Investment Plan. This plan has to outline, in detail, the anticipated eligible capital investment to be funded through the GTF Agreement that is considered as priorities for the municipality. While a five -year plan is a requirement, the agreement also recognizes that plans do change as Council alters its priorities. Provision has therefore been made to allow the municipality to update or modify its Capital Investment Plan any time during the term of the Agreement. The initial plan that staff are recommending be submitted, includes provision for six projects that otherwise would not have been made possible in the years 2006 through Report To Common Council Subject: Gas Tax Funding Agreement Page 2 2009 without the Provincial /Federal Agreement. These six projects total $14,420,000 and are split between the General Capital Program and the Water and Sewer Capital Fund. Staff would stress that Council should not feel bound by the target levels of investment that are proposed in this five -year Capital Investment Program. The purpose of this document is to initiate the initial flow of funds to the municipality. As we move forward under the Program, revisions will regularly be made and the Department of Local Government so advised. RECOMMENDATION: Consistent with the requirements of the Federal/Provincial Agreement related to the Transfer of Gas Tax Revenues, it is recommended: That the attached documentation representing Target Investment Levels by the General Fund and the Water and Sewer Utility for the years 2006 through 2011 be adopted, and that the listing of specific projects and supporting documentation for the years 2006 to 2009 ch funding is being sought under the Prq:�Tncial /Federal CW Tax be approved. Terrence L. Totten, FCA CITY MANAGER Enc. Information Package for New Brunswick Municipalities Canada — New Brunswick Agreement on the Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues under the New Deal for Cities and Communities and the Provincial Gas Tax Top -up Fund March 2006 Canada. NewQ Nou v au Bruni C; A N A D A Contents 1. Introduction 2. Process Overview 3. Project Categories Eligible for Funding 4. Eligible Costs 5. Ineligible Costs 6. Capital Investment Plan 7. Establishing the Base Amount 8. Capacity Building 9. Letter of Agreement 10. Outcomes Reporting 11. Financial Reporting 12. Communications Protocol 13. Contacts and Web Site 14. Questions and Answers Appendices: • Appendix A — Funding distribution to Municipalities • Appendix B — Capital Investment Process • Appendix C — Capital Investment Plan Template • Appendix D -- Worksheet for Calculating Base Amount • Appendix E — Outcome Indicators • Appendix F — Financial Reporting Worksheet for Eligible Expenditures Page I 1. Introduction The Canada - New Brunswick Agreement on the Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues under the New Deal for Cities and Communities 2005 — 2015, (hereafter referred to as the GTF Agreement), which was signed on November 24, 2005, will result in over $116 million being transferred to New Brunswick from the federal government of Canada, over a five -year period beginning in 2005 -2006. There is also a further $30 million to be invested by the provincial government over the same time frame, for a total of $146 million to be dedicated toward environmentally sustainable municipal infrastructure. This new funding will provide significant opportunities for municipalities to address infrastructure and capacity building needs. This information package has been prepared in order to outline the process through which New Brunswick municipalities are to access funding that has been committed to them through the GTF Agreement. This process will help to ensure that the funding to municipalities flows in a timely manner and that the terms of the GTF Agreement are followed. Funding through the GTF Agreement will be provided to municipalities over a five -year period. The first installment will be sent to municipalities as soon as possible in 2006, following receipt of their five -year Capital Investment Plans. Thereafter, installments will be sent to municipalities following transfer of the GTF Agreement funds from the federal government to the Province of New Brunswick. The funds will be provided to municipalities in accordance with the funding distribution schedule in Appendix A, subject to all necessary documentation being completed. Information Package for New Brunswick Municipalities: Canada — New Brunswick Agreement on the Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues Under the New Deal for Cities and Communities and the Provincial Gas Tax Top -up Fund Page 2 2. Process Overview The following steps are a summary of the process that municipalities will be required to follow in order to obtain funding through the GTF Agreement. Further details and explanations of this process are included in various sections of this information package. 1. As required by the GTF Agreement, municipalities must develop five -year Capital Investment Plans. These plans must not only identify the specific projects to be undertaken as a result of receiving funding through the GTF Agreement but also indicate what the outcomes of such projects will be and how they will be measured. (Refer to Section 6 for further explanation of the Capital Investment Plan requirements.) 2. As required by the GTF Agreement, municipalities must identify the base amount of funding that has been dedicated to municipal infrastructure, which is to be based on an average of the past five years. (Refer to Section 7 for further explanation of the base amount). 3. Municipalities submit to the Department of Local Government (DLG) their five -year Capital Investment Plans, as well as their base amount calculations. 4. The Oversight Committee% with the assistance of DLG, reviews the Capital Investment Plans and the base amounts provided by municipalities. 5. DLG prepares Letters of Agreement (based on the Capital Investment Plans submitted) for each municipality outlining the terms and conditions as well as the reporting requirements established by the GTF Agreement. (Refer to Section 9 for an overview of what is to be included in the Letter of Agreement). 6. A Letter of Agreement is sent to each municipality for signature. Following receipt of the signed Letter of Agreement, DLG will send the first installment to the municipality. Thereafter, installments will be sent to municipalities each year following transfer of the GTF Agreement funds from the federal government to the Province of New Brunswick. 7. An Outcomes Report and a Financial Report is to be prepared by municipalities on an annual basis, with the first reports being required in 2007. (Refer to Sections 10 and 11 for a further explanation of these reporting requirements). * The Oversight Committee is made up of two representatives of the provincial government of New Brunswick and two representatives of the Government of Canada. Information Package for New Brunswick Municipalities: Canada — New Brunswick Agreement on the Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues Under the New Deal for Cities and Communities and the Provincial Gas Tax Top -up Fund Federal Gas Tax Revenue Funding 2006- $3,400,000 2007- $2,270,000 2008- $2,840,000 $5.680.000 2009 - Total: $14,190,000 Other C Ity Year Project Category Location Description Share Share 2006 Retail Drive *Transportation Rothcsay Avenue to Westmorland City contribution toward construction of Retail Drive (Project made 0 3,000,000 Road possible by Federal Gas Tax Revenue) . . . . ...... . ....... . . ......... . ......... ------- . . . ... . .... . . ....... . ... . ..... Watermain Cleaning and Infrastructure Renewal - Various locations Cleaning and lining of existing unlined C. I. watennaina to improve 0 400,000 Lining Water pressure, water quality, and fire flows in the area (Project made ... . ... . .... possible by Federal Gas Tax Revenue) ... .... ..... ------ 2007 Reversing Falls Bridge Water Service Needs Reversing Falls Bridge Renew existing 475mm watermain with 2 new 600mm. watermains 0 2,500,000 proposed as part of the reconfiguration of the water distribution system, including design and construction management services (Project made possible by Federal Gas Tax Revenue) (Pre-approved .... . ..... — . . . ....... by Common Council on September 25, 2006; M & C No. 2006-268) .... . ............ . . ..... ..... . . ........... . .... . . ..... . . ........ I . ..... ...... . ..... . .... . ..... .. 2008 Transmission Main #3 Infrastructure Renewal - Old Champlain Drive to Renew approx. 1700m of deteriorated 600mm. Trarmnission Main 0 2,840,000 East Water Westmorland Road near Ellerdale #3, including construction management services (Project made Street (PRV location) possible by Federal Gas Tax Revenue) . .... — — - — — - 2009 Ashburn Lake Road Transportation Rothesay Avenue to Route #1 (Saint Road reconstruction (road widening, drainage control, bridge 0 3,000,000 John Throughway) construction, railway crossing, land acquisition), including design and construction management services (Project made possible by . . . — . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . .. . . . . . Federal Gas Tax Revenue) . . ............... .......... ..... ... . .. . ... —'- . ....... . ....... . ... . .... . .......... . . . . . . . .. .. ...... . ........ ... . . . . ... ... . .... Latimer Lake Intakes .... . ...... . Water Service Needs At Latimer Lake Construction of a new screen house (Phase 1), installation of approx. 0 2,690,000 Screen House 200m of new I 050mm intake pipe, including construction management services (Project made possible by Federal Gas Tax Revenue) TOTAL: !III ligglin 112 11 1 $14,420,000 i momm CITY OF SAINT JOHN FIVE -YEAR CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY GENERAL OPERATING FUND Services Term 2006 General Government Protective Services Transportation Retail Drive 15 3,000,000 Asburn Lake Road Environmental Health Environmental Development Recreation & Culture Total Capital Expenditures Source of Funds GTF Agreement Operating Fund Long -term borrowing 2007 2008 2009 3,000,000 2010 3,000,000 0 0 3,000,000 0 3,000, 000 3,000,000 0 0 3,000,000 0 CITY OF SAINT JOHN FIVE -YEAR CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY WATER & SEWERAGE UTILITY FUND Services Water Watermain cleaning and lining -various locations Watermain renewal: Reversing Falls Bridge Transmission Main #3 East Latimer Lake Intakes New Screen House Total Water Sewerage Term 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 400,000 2,500,000 2,840,000 2,680,000 400,000 2,500,000 2,840,000 2,680,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL WATER & SEWERAGE 4001000 2,500000 2,840,000 21680,000 0 Source of Funds GTF Agreement Operating Fund Long -term borrowing 400,000 2,500,000 2,840,000 2,454,906 225,094 400 000 2,500,000 2,840,000 2,680 000 0 Five —Year Capital_ Investment Plan GTF Agreement 1.) 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 ($3,400,000) a Retail Drive: ($3,000,000) Retail Drive is a new street presently under construction within the City of Saint John. It will serve as a new link to transfer an anticipated large volume of traffic from Rothesay Avenue (a major arterial) to Westmorland Road (a minor arterial). The area within which Retail Drive is being constructed is primarily commercial with a large number of shopping facilities. There has been a very rapid growth in the commercial sector in this area and existing City streets have become very congested by this increase in traffic accessing this area. Retail Drive will serve to better move this heavy traffic load within the area and greatly reduce traveling distances to access the various commercial establishments. Vehicles accessing this commercial area must do so by using the existing street infrastructure. Retail Drive will allow vehicles to access this newly constructed commercial area and eliminate a traveling distance of approximately 2.7 km for all vehicles accessing the area from Rothesay Avenue. This road will provide access to the commercial area not only from Rothesay Avenue but also from a new road proposed under the GTF Agreement for 2009 (Ashburn Lake Road) which will provide access to the area directly from Route 1. The outcomes for this project will include reduction in green house gas emissions, improved air quality, reduce vehicle fuel consumption and operating expenses as well as provide a walking access to the commercial shopping area for residents and local businesses. a Watermain Cleaning and Lining ($400,000) Unlined cast iron watermains that were installed in the late 1800's and early 1900's up until about 1960, are subject to a phenomenon called tuberculation ( a build -up of material on the inside wall of the pipe). This build -up reduces the internal diameter of the pipe which in turn leads to a decrease in water pressure and available fire flows. In addition, tuberculation is a major contributor to water quality problems such as colour, iron content and reduced chlorine residual. Unlined cast iron watermains that exhibit good structural integrity can be rehabilitated using a cleaning and lining process. This procedure will not only clean the lines and improve their flow capacity but will appreciably extend the service life of candidate watermains. Page 2 5 -Year Capital Investment Plan GTF Agreement The measures for this project will include a measurable reduction in colour and iron content of the water, increase in water pressure, increase in fire flows, reduction of water wasted for watermain flushing to maintain water quality, maintain an acceptable chlorine residual and reduction in customer complaints. The outcomes will include improved water conservation by reducing the requirement for extensive watermain flushing, improved water quality to customers and ensuring that drinking water standards are met. 2.) 2007/2008 ($2,270,000) • Reversing Falls Bridge ($2,500,000) Reversing Falls Bridge was opened to traffic in 1915. In 1967, a 475 mm steel watermain was installed under the bridge to deliver water from the Loch Lomond watershed in east Saint John to a limited number of customers in west Saint John, separate from the west Saint John Water System. In 2005, the east and west Saint John Water systems were fully interconnected. This interconnection provides Saint John Water with the ability to supply potable water from the Loch Lomond Water shed to a large number of west Saint John water system customers. In the case of emergencies, potable water from the west system can flow east to maintain potable water supply in sections of the eastern side of the City. The watermain installed under the bridge in 1967 now serves as a critical link between the two water systems. The capacity of the 475 mm steel watermain under reversing Falls Bridge is a limiting factor to the amount of eastern water that can be delivered to west Saint John Water System customers. Any increase in flow through this watermain will cause increased internal pressures. There is uncertainty as to the maximum allowable, safe pressure that this watermain can handle. In addition, owing to the nature of the installation under the bridge and the height involved, repairs to this aging watermain are both costly and dangerous. The measures for this project will include two new 750 mm watermains which will increase flow capacity, have defined allowable pressures and provide a safe and reliable link for water supply between the two Saint John water systems. The outcomes for this project will include reliable water quality and quantity for west Saint John Water System customers, provide a critical redundancy and ensure that drinking water quality standards are met. Page 3 5 -Year Capital Investment Plan GTF Agreement 3.) 2008/2009 ($2,840,000) • Transndssion Main #3 East ($2,840,000) This project will provide for the installation of about 1.7 km of 600mm (24 ") diameter water main from Old Champlain Drive to Westmorland Road. This new transmission main will replace a portion of a 600mm pipe installed in the 1870's that is still in service. The old pipe has exceeded the normal Iife expectancy of buried infrastructure. The old pipe has experienced breaks that have caused service disruptions, which can have affects on the local economy. This work will renew a critical and aging link in the core transmission system that delivers water to the majority of the City of Saint John. One reason for this project is to reduce the risk of having a water main failure that can not be repaired in the same location. A portion of this pipe runs along the top of a large steep sand embankment. The exposed sand is loose and continually eroding. If left unchecked, the pipe would eventually be exposed, fail and slide down the hill. Any type of water main failure at this location would wash out a very large volume of granular material that may be impossible to replace due to the steep grades of the embankment. This project will place the new pipe in a safer location and stabilize the bank from future erosion. This transmission main renewal will have several benefits to water customers. This project will start to address the need to renew aging infrastructure. It will create a more secure supply of water, improve water quality and reduce the possibility of a major transmission main break that would be very disruptive. Removing an unlined cast iron pipe from the system will improve water quality, reduce water quality complaints and reduce iron levels in the water. Chlorine residuals will improve when a new pipe is used. Less chlorine will be used at the treatment plant. Newer pipes also tend to be cleaner, more reliable with fewer breaks and service disruptions. This will save the utility and the citizen's time, and money. Finally, as a critical link in the system to supply water from the watershed to the City of Saint John, it will improve the overall reliability to the City of Saint John customers. Page 4 5 -Year Capital Investment Plan GTR Agreement 4.) 2009/2010 ($59680,000) • Ashburn Lake Road ($3,000,000) The reconstruction of Ashburn Lake Road will upgrade an existing 2 lane road to a 4 lane road to serve as a north/south connection between N.B. Highway Route 1 and the major arterial Rothesay Avenue. At Rothesay Avenue, there will be a new set of traffic signals where traffic can access Retail Drive (being constructed in 2006 under the GTF Agreement) and the major commercial shopping area within the City. The City has proposed to the Provincial Department of Transportation that a new full interchange be constructed at the intersection of Route 1 and Ashburn Lake Road on the southeast side and Poster Thurston Drive on the northwest side of Route 1. A full interchange would transfer traffic traveling in both an easterly and westerly direction along Route 1 as well as traffic from the north end of the City to the major commercial shopping area. If a full intersection is not immediately constructed, only traffic traveling east on Route 1 will have access in and out of the commercial shopping area from Route 1. Vehicles accessing the commercial area on the east side of the City from Route 1 must do so by accessing existing City street infrastructure. There is not a direct link from Route 1 to the retail area. The reconstruction of Ashburn Lake Road coupled with a new interchange will provide direct access for a large volume of traffic to the commercial shopping facilities. Vehicles traveling west will travel approximately the equivalent distance via Route 1 to Retail Drive instead of using City streets while vehicles traveling east will travel approximately 3.1 Km less to access Retail Drive at the intersection with Rothesay Avenue. Traffic from the Millidgeville area would travel approximately 3.5 Km less to access Retail Drive assuming the full interchange is constructed by the Province at Route 1 and Ashburn Lake Road. The outcomes for this project will include reduction in green house gas emissions, improved air quality, reduce vehicle fuel consumption and operating expenses. • Latimer Lake Intakes /Screen House ($2,680,000) The east Saint John Water System is supplied by the Loch Lomond watershed. Water is drawn from the watershed though two large intake pipes at Latimer lake. The water is then screened, chlorinated and delivered by gravity to Saint John Water customers. This project will see the construction of a new screen house (Phase 1) with the installation of approximately 200m of new 1050mm intake pipe. Page 5 5 -Year Capital Investment Plan GTF Agreement The intake pipes at Latimer Lake are in excess of 100 years old. The true condition of these pipes is unknown and a complete investigation could prove both costly and dangerous. It is known that one of the intake pipes is a wood stave pipe. The existing screen building was built approximately 45 years ago to cover two screen pits which were previously housed separately. The foundations for these screen pits are of the same general age as the intake pipes and they are crumbling and leaking badly. The screens themselves must be removed and cleaned manually on a regular basis. This practice is labour intensive and potentially dangerous. The measures for this project will include three new intake pipes and a new screen building with automatic, self cleaning screens. The outcomes for this project will include a safe and reliable quantity of water to supply Saint John Water's treatment and distribution system. 1I r14MOOS Cn of Saint John Proposed Capital Erpenddvres a-wl Pond Budget Five Year 2006 2004 2003 20D2 2001 Average 2006 Olaerence Oat Tar Program 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Intmetuclura panawal: Transportation: Road, 66te018 5,220,000 4,865,000 2,200,000 4,845,000 3500,000 4,088,000 8,045,000 3,979,000 8,046,000 8,060,000 7,260,000 9,325,000 6,285,000 8,645,000 Asphalt Resurfacing 1,210,000 242,000 (242,000) 61orm System Upgrade* 1,335,000 836,000 686,000 1,155,000 800,000 898.000 1,300,000 382,000 1,300,000 ..�. 1.270.000 1.770,000 1,620,000 2,390,000 2,325,000 6,655,000 51910,000 2.765,000 6,700,000 4.300,000 6,2AB,D00 9,346,000 4,089 ,000 8,345,000 91330,00D 9,030,000 10,946,000 6,6761000 8,870,000 SulldingiEQulpmem UpgmdeslEnergy Management Murddpal Facilities 680,000 1276,000 800,000 400,000 600,000 691,200 1,000,000 308,800 1,000,000 4,446,000 7,638,000 1,327,000 1,480,000 1,350,000 Lilly take Pavllllon - 215,000 216,000 215,000 Lord 9eaverbrook Rink 260,000 300,000 280,000 60,000 - 172,000 250,OOD 78,000 26D,000 Are Department - 100,000 1,300.000 114,000 290,000 360,800 100,000 (260,800) 100,000 PoIk4Cemmfesion 1OO,ODO 20,000 (20,000) E6p .60,000 12,000 (12,000) Market SOUere 95 ODD 18,000 40,000 21,000 40,000 Trade 6 Cornenson Centre 100,000 57,000 70,000 70,000 69ADD 122,000 62,800 122,D00 318,000 300,000 188,000 290,00D 311,000 Trerea Commission 80.000 380,000 MOW - (92,000) - HarbwrStadon - - 100,000 100,000 100,000 523,000 Aquatic Centre 42,000 100.000 100,000 100,000 88,400 100,000 31,800 100.000 130,000 181,500 263,00D 450,000 165,000 Rookwocd Parr GOO Course - 25,000 25,000 25,000 26,000 26,000 25.00D 26.000 25,000 Horocunural Association 100.000 20,000 4C,000 20.000 40,000 Library 52,000 25,CDD 25,000 22.400 60,000 27,800 60,000 51.715 63,500 66,100 1.067.000 1.995,000 2.1 BO,ODO 639,000 1,625,000 1,537,200 2.042,000 504,800 2.042.000 6,493,716 8,188,000 1,858,100 2226,000 1,861,000 Parrs and Raids 87,800 ...Y 50,ODD 25,000 200,000 MODO 112.50 880,000 647,440 660,000 937,750 574,150 121,000 363,000 191,5DO Technology 8 Communications: Information Systems(Intemel) 928,700 2,160,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 400,000 1,101,340 800,DDO (301,340) aO.00D 11822,900 1,882,700 1.091.200 689,300 687,SDC MobNliy Systems 473,000 941800 500,DDD 406,400 600,000 1,399,700 2180.000 1,000,000 1,000,000 400,000 1,195,940 1,300,000 104,060 1.300.000 1,522,800 1,692,700 1,091,200 683,300 887,300 Rest Roplmament: 786,000 750,000 307,000 800,000 593,000 900,000 940,000 1,075,000 1,965,000 2,085,000 1,875,000 Pubk Transportatlon City SOMeas 2,900,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 600,000 1,380,000 31200,000 1,820,CW 3,200,ODO 3,685,000 2,750000 1,600.000 500,000 1,887.000 4,100,000 2,413,000 4.100,000 _ 940ADO 1,875,000 1,96600_0_ 2.086.000 1,876.000 Wabrnam0eepmsnt Water Street Aecaletrudlon 2,040,000 588,000 515,000 247,000 815,000 800,000 Harbour Postage 800,000 700,000 �50DO 85,000 366000 063,000 308,ODO 663,000 9,440,000 700,0DO 395,000 95.000 g2B4O00 1A78.0DO 662.000 1,478,000 800,000 - 0 Pollee Futility 1,760,000 500,000 ` %00,000 100,000 � 490,000 1,750,000 1,280,000 1,750,000 5,000,000 7,500,000 6,000,000 Economic 0-1- pmerd: RetldsntlairCommercla11ncentNes 500,000 3D0,ODO 300,000 400,CW 400,000 350,000 1,00.000 a20,000 1.000.000 Indusolal Parke Growth 235,OOD 350.WD 400,000 400,000 WO,ODO 397,000 350,000 (47,000) $50,000 Heritage Grants 50,000 26,000 25,000 50,000 76,000 45,000 50,000 5,000 50,000 Other 10.000 750,000 170,000 300,000 130,000 3DD,080 885,000 676,000 14764M 850,400 1,075,000 992,ODD 1,700,OD0 708,000 1.700.000 0 Envlrenmem: Landllll 500.000 100,000 325,000 300,000 266,000 800,000 336,000 600,000 600,000 50,000 30.ODD 0 0 closure Taut 19,489,500 15,760,000 9,520,000 8,609,000 7,900,000 12,451,700 22,975,000 10,623 ,300 22,975,000 24,624,366 29,388,450 21,28D,300 14,021,300 13,284,800 F1DOSUmen4 U4 aecrpaH YV I?M1y CWum It- kD&ItZ ft tX)071CAPIPI MCC Five You Summary 2005 11118@006 City of Saint John Proposed Capnel Expmdtturee Watark8 regauelay Budget Flw Year Ass Tex Program 2006 2004 2003 2002 2001 Averaga 2006 Oltferance 2006 2007 2006 2009 2010 2011 water Irdrastructure renewa! 3,946,000 2,260,000 3,925,000 4,485,000 2376,000 3,398,000 3,785,000 387,000 3,785,000 3,916,000 5,270,000 3,320,000 4,490,000 4,980,000 Water Servda Needs 2,655,000 5,100,000 4,010,000 4,141,000 1,986,000- 3,620,200 3,480,000 (140,200) 3,480,000 4,890,000 5,440,000 7,560,000 7,215,000 6,150,000 System Development 1,850,000 170,000 125,000 Waterehed Proteetl5n 300,000 300,000 SDO,DDO 250.000 160,000 260,000 500.000 240,000 50,000 500,000 550,000 660,000 550,000 800,000 TOTAL •WATER 7,1MOD0 7,680000 9,885 9,046,000 4,645,000 7,P782� 00 7,766,000 486,800 7,786,DD0 9,306,000 11,260,000 11,430,000 12,255,000 11,730,000 Wastewater Infrastructure renewal 2,680,000 2,340,000 2,590,000 1,880,000 2,339,000 2,425,800 2,350,000 (75,800) 2,350,000 1,620,000 1,780,000 1,665,000 2,675,000 2,505,000 Wastewater Treatment 1,960,000 11500,000 8,470,000 1,889,000 2,372,000 2,838,200 5,832,000 3,993,800 6,832,000 4,510,000 9,080,000 5,050,000 2,780,000 1,630,000 TOTAL - WASTEWATER 4,80.000 9,840,000 9,050,000 3,669,000 4,711,000 5,P640i0 9,182,000 3,918,000 8,182,000 6,130,000 10,660,000 6,715,000 6,456,000 4,135,000 TOTAL - WATER & WASTEWATER 11,940,000 11,500,000 18,946,000 12,915,000 9,366,000 12,542,200 16,947,000 41404,800 16,947,000 15,435,000 221120,000 18145,000 77,710,000 15,866,000 MM. Tex Rebel. Proerem%C.PKd Swpo Ft. Veer Summery 2008 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2006 -310 November 15, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane & Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: CONTRACT NO. 2006 -30: WATERMAIN CLEANING & LINING — PHASE 1 PURPOSE 71r � I The City of Saint john The purpose of this report is to update Council on the status of the Watermain Cleaning & Lining — Phase 1 project. BACKGROUND On September 11, 2006 (M &C 2006 -255) Common Council awarded Contract 2006 -30: Watermain Cleaning & Lining to Alltech Solutions Inc. at their tender price of $281,814.75. The sections of watermain to be cleaned and lined under this contract included: • Church Avenue, from Main Street to Civic #76 • Prospect Street W, Walnut Street, McKeil Street • Morris Street, from Prospect Street to Civic #73 and from McKeil Street to its end. • Parkwood Avenue, from Sandy Point Road to Parks Street Extension. • Parks Street Extension, from Parks Street to Civic #71 ANALYSIS To date, all the sections of watermain identified in the above list of streets have been cleaned and lined for a total overall length of 1174 m. All of the existing cast iron pipe was heavily tuberculated prior to the cleaning and lining process and has now been restored to the original inside diameter. M &C2006 -310 November 15, 2006 Page 2 On September 11, 2006 (M &C 2006 -255) Council was advised that "staff will monitor the project expenditures against the budget and may report back to Council with a request to include additional sections of watermain cleaning & lining under this contract should time permit." Municipal Operations & Engineering staff has identified several other sections of watermain on streets in close proximity to the current contract area that are candidates for cleaning and lining. The additional sections of watermain proposed to be cleaned and lined under this contract include: • Greendale Crescent, from Dever Road to Brookview Crescent • Hughes Lane • Sunset Drive, from Roderick Row to Lingley Lane • Roderick Row • Dever Road, from Manchester Avenue to Roderick Row FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Contract 2006 -30 was awarded to Alltech Solutions Inc. in the amount of $281,814.75. It is proposed to proceed with the cleaning and lining of the additional sections of watermain identified above or until a total overall Contract amount of $400,000 is reached. Dillon Consulting Limited was previously engaged under a purchase order in accordance with the City's Procurement Policy to provide engineering inspection services for this project at an amount not to exceed $25,000. With the additional sections of watermain being added to this contract, it is anticipated that the engineering inspection services will increase to a total of approximately $35,000. An analysis has been completed which includes $400,000 of work to be completed by the Contractor, Alltech Solutions Inc., and the $35,000 for engineering inspection services for the Consultant, Dillon Consulting Limited. The analysis concludes that a total amount of $400,000 was provided in the budget and that the projected completion cost of the project is estimated to be $394,662.53, including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate — a $5,337.47 positive difference. In a separate report that is also before Council tonight on the GTF Agreement which is a 5 -year Capital Investment Plan, it is proposed that the entire $400,000 value of Contract 2006 -30 be recovered under the Federal Gas Tax Revenue program. The original $400,000 budget approved in the 2006 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program for Watermain Cleaning & Lining will be utilized to offset additional costs on other approved projects so that the overall Capital Program remains at the original envelope amount. Staff will report back to Council in the coming weeks identifying the offset projects for approval. M &C2006 -310 November 15, 2006 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract No. 2006 -30: Watermain Cleaning & Lining — Phase 1, previously awarded to Alltech Solutions Inc., be increased to an amount of $400,000 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that Council authorize an amount of $35,000 for engineering inspection services for Dillon Consulting Limited. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P.Eng. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A. City Manager REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M & C 2006 -311 November 16, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: 71r � I The City of Saint john Approval Request — Design Services for Upgrade to Culvert Servicing West Side Estates Subdivision BACKGROUND As a result of flooding to home owners' properties and City infrastructure in the Glenwood Drive/ West Side Estates area in early June 2006, and as part of an overall project to reduce the risk of future flooding events, CBCL Limited completed on behalf of the City a storm water management plan for the area. The need for an upgraded storm culvert under a rail line owned by New Brunswick Southern Railway (NBSR) was one of the main recommendations of the consultant's study to reduce the risk of future flooding events. This culvert, which drains storm water from a large area, was deemed to be undersized and in poor shape. ANALYSIS Staff believe this culvert needs to be upgraded as soon as reasonably possible. The longer the existing culvert remains in place, the higher the probability another major storm event will cause flooding and subsequent damage to citizens' homes and City infrastructure similar to that experienced in June 2006. In fact, staff has had to monitor high water levels in the brook during several heavy rain storms since the June 2006 flooding. M &C2006 -311 November 16, 2006 Page 2 ANALYSIS Continued Although the culvert is owned by NBSR, the City is taking the initiative toward having the infrastructure upgraded in a timely manner. On October 18, 2006, with a comprehensive and detailed scope of work document developed by staff, a proposal for engineering design services was requested from CBCL Limited. The proposal request consisted of two parts; (1) a recommended construction method/ product to replace the existing culvert based on a feasibility and cost comparison analysis of various options, and (2) a completed detailed design and cost estimate of the recommended option. Staff chose CBCL Limited to submit the proposal because of their quality of work in previous design projects for the City and because they are the consultant that completed the original study of the area and are therefore familiar with the overall storm system. In response to the request, CBCL Limited submitted a proposal on November 1, 2006. A Review Committee of staff completed an analysis of the submission: Eric Giffin, P.Eng. Deputy City Engineer Shayne Galbraith, P.Eng. Director, Saint John Works Tim O'Reilly, MIT Operations Manager, Saint John Works Each member completed a review of the submission and agreed the proposed design work will produce the required deliverables. The upset price contained in the proposal was also evaluated and the committee agreed that CBCL Limited's requested fee was appropriate for submission to Council for approval. A formal discussion with NBSR regarding the need for an upgraded culvert was held soon after Council authorized staff to do so in a Council Report of the August 28, 2006 Council Meeting (M & C 2006 — 240). Staff is proposing to share the design and construction costs with NBSR to expedite this project; funds will be requested in the 2007 General Fund Capital Program for the City's share. Staff also recently provided NBSR with follow -up correspondence (copy attached) re- iterating the City's intention to see a timely upgrade to their storm culvert. The correspondence specifically outlines how staff plans to continue the relationship with NBSR toward a solution. M &C2006 -311 November 16, 2006 Page 3 ANALYSIS Continued Although monies are yet to be requested and approved in the 2007 General Fund Capital Program for this project, staff believe design work should commence in 2006. Expediting the design schedule will increase the probability of undertaking construction in 2007 and reduce the risk of future flood damage to citizen and City property. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS CBCL Limited's proposed fee to complete the design work is $45,550.00 + HST. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Common Council pre- approve $51,984.00 ($45,550.00 + HST) for design services by CBCL Limited as part of a project within the proposed 2007 General Fund Capital Program — Storm Category. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A. Commissioner, City Manager Municipal Operations & Engineering Municipal Operations and Engineering Operations et genie municipaux www.saintiolln.ca November 16, 2006 Mr. Steve Wills Railway Operating Officer New Brunswick Southern Railway 11 Gifford Road Saint John, NB E2M 4X8 P.O. Box/C.P. 1971 Saint Jolin, NB /N. -B, Canada E2L 4L1 f �VC>G Y. i RE: NBSR Culvert near West Side Estates Subdivision — Follow -Up Correspondence Dear Mr. Wills, A stone water management study was commissioned by The City of Saint John following a major rainfall event in early June 2006, which flooded City's and citizens' property in the West Side Estates subdivision (West Saint John) area. This study indicated a storm culvert owned by New Brunswick Southern Railway (NBSR) was the main cause of this flooding and it recommended that this culvert be upgraded to reduce the risk of similar flooding events. After presenting your company with a copy of that study, representatives of The City of Saint John met with you on September 26, 2006. Potential requirements to see a timely upgrade to this culvert were discussed. Left on the table at this meeting was the possibility of the City and NBSR entering into a partnership following further investigation. This correspondence is to update NBSR on the initiatives the City has taken since this meeting toward a timely upgrade to this culvert, to request NBSR's continued commitment to upgrading your culvert and to communicate the City's future plans on this file, including a pending formal request to NBSR. Following the previously discussed meeting, the City requested CBCL Limited to submit a proposal for design services toward an upgraded storm culvert. Two components of design work were requested; (1) a recommended construction method/ product to replace the existing culvert based on a feasibility and cost comparison analysis of various options, and (2) a completed detailed design and cost estimate of the recommended option. NBSR Culvert near West Side Estates Subdivision — Follow -Up Correspondence November 16, 2006 Page 2 of 2 Staff of The City of Saint John has received CBCL Limited's proposal and are preparing to request Common Council's approval for the consultant to proceed with design work. CBCL Limited's estimated fee for their design services is $45,550.00 + HST. A copy of CBCL Limited's proposal is attached. If approved by Common Council, the City will have CBCL Limited proceed with Part 1 of the proposed design work. Please note that CBCL Limited will need input from you or other representatives of NBSR throughout the completion of Part 1 and Part 2 of their design work. After completion of Part 1, the City will approach NBSR with a request to formally commit to upgrading your culvert. Part 1 of CBCL Limited's work will produce the estimated financial contributions necessary to upgrade the culvert. Although NBSR owns the culvert, the City will be prepared to contribute financially to the design and construction costs so that construction can proceed in a timely manner. Following NBSR's commitment, the City intends to form a partnership with your company for the completion of Part 2 of CBCL Limited's design work and the construction of the upgraded culvert. The City hopes to see the storm culvert upgraded in 2007. We look forward to your response to this correspondence, your input into CBCL Limited's design work, and a future formal commitment toward a much needed upgrade to your culvert. Since , Paul r dy, P.Eng. �C.oinmissioner, Municipal Operations & Engineering C.C. Eric Giffin, P.Eng. Deputy City Engineer Shayne Galbraith, P.Eng. Director, Saint John Works Tim O'Reilly, MIT Operations Manager, Saint John Works M & C 2006 -314 November 17, 2006 His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Lease of Stall A - Raymond's Deli, City Market BACKGROUND: Raymond's Deli has been operating in the City Market under that banner since 1962 or 1963. Ownership has changed over the years with Anne French being the principal today. Great customer service combined with choice cuts of deli meats and related products have earned this store a loyal following. Over the past 12 months Mrs. French and the Deputy Market Clerk have worked towards an agreement to secure this tenancy for a term and under conditions beneficial to both parties. The proposed Lease was slowly negotiated as the tenant was monitoring the City's changes to the Market and gauging the environment she'd be operating in during the upcoming years. Finally satisfied with the direction of the City Market, the proposed lease was agreed upon, subject to Council's approval. Raymond's Deli operates in space referred to as Stall A at the City Market, space totalling 373 square feet. The proposed lease would commence December 1, 2006 and would expire 5 years later. The rent escalates from a base of $22.00 per square foot to $26.00 per square foot in year five, for a $24.00 average over the term. Report to Common Council November 17, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: Page 2 1. That The City of Saint John enters into a Lease of Space for Stall A at the City Market with A.B.S. French Inc. as per the terms and conditions as contained in the Lease attached herewith to M &C 2006 -314; and 2. that Common Council give 1St and 2nd reading to the attached "City Market By -Law" whereby section 5(2) is amended to add following Section 5(2)(m), Section 5(2)(n) Stall A; and 3. further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease or any other document required to finalize the transaction. Respectfully submitted, Jim R. Baird, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development Terrence Totten, C.A. City Manager BY -LAW NUMBER C -1 A BY -LAW RELATING TO THE MARKET IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by the Common Council of The City of Saint John as follows: A By -law of the City of Saint John entitled "A By -law Relating to the Market In The City of Saint John ", enacted on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2005 is hereby amended as follows: 1 Amending Section 5(2) by adding the following immediately after subsection 5(2)m: (n) Stall A IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Common Corporate Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the day of A.D. 2006 and signed by: Mayor /Maire ARRETE NUMERO C -1 ARRETE CONCERNANT LE MARCHE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Le conseil communal de The City of Sairn John edicte: L'arrete intitule "Arrete concernant le marche de The City of Saint John" decrete le 18 mai 2005, est modifie comme suit: 1 La modification du paragraphe 5(2) par Padjonctin de ce qui suit immediatement apres l'alinea 5(2)m: (n) Mosque A EN FOI DE QUOI The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arrete 2006, avec les signatures suivanted: Common Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture - Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture - Third Reading - Troisieme lecture - w Form A19 LEASE Standard Forms of Conveyances Act, S.N.B. 1980, c. 5 -12, s.2 The parties to this lease are: The City of Saint John, having its City Hall at 15 Market Square, Saint John, New Brunswick, a body corporate by Royal Charter, confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of New Brunswick, the "Lessor" - and — A.B.S. French Inc., 413 Windsor Street, Saint John, New Brunswick, E2M 2Z5, the "Lessee" The "Rules and Regulations" attached hereto as Schedule "D" and the Form attached hereto as Schedule "D -1" form part of this Lease. The Lessor leases to the Lessee the premises described in Schedule "A" attached hereto on the following conditions: Duration: 5 years Date of Commencement: December 1, 2006 Date of Termination: November 30, 2011 Payment Dates: First day of each and every month during term hereof Place of Payment: Cashier's Office City Hall Saint John, NB This lease contains the covenants and conditions which are attached and set out in Schedule "C ". DATED / / VI , 2006. SIGNED, �EALED & DELIVERED ) THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN In the pres lce of: ) N.M. McFarlane, Mayor J. Patrick Woods, Common Clerk F Common Council Resolution: 2006. A.B.S. FRENCH Per: f ter: s SCHEDULE "A" i tnnkimfMA1 WALL I:UMN. .OF CASE r GROUND FLOOR (LEASEABLE AREA„ 373__,•f•i SCALE:. 1 /4 "= 1'-0" LEASE PLAN (COPIES: s. 1/2" x 14' ARE NOT TO SCALE) i LEASE FOR STALL SPACE CITY MARKET A.B.S. FRENCH INC. SCHEDULE "C" ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS 1.01 Definitions In this lease: a) "Additional Rent" means all and any monies required to be paid by the Lessee to the Lessor under or pursuant to the terms of this Lease, save only for Gross Rent; b) "Architect' shall mean the architect from time to time named by the Lessor or at the option of the Lessor, the Lessor's general contractor. Any certificate provided by the Architect and called for by the terms of this Lease shall be. final and binding on the parties hereto; c) "Commencement Date" means a date determined in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.03; d) "Common Areas" means those areas, facilities, utilities, improvements, equipment and installations in the City Market which from time to time are not designated or intended by the Lessor to be leased to tenants of the City Market, and those areas, facilities, utilities, improvements, equipment and installations which serve or are for the benefit of the City Market whether or not located in, adjacent to or near the City Market and which are designated from time to time by the Lessor as part of the Common Areas. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Common Areas includes all parking areas, all entrances and exits thereto and all structural elements thereof, access roads, truck courts, driveways, truckways, delivery passages, the roof, exterior weather walls, exterior and interior structural elements and bearing walls in the building and improvements comprising the City Market, package pick -up stations, loading and related areas, pedestrian stairways, ramps, electrical, telephone, meter, valve, mechanical, mail storage service and janitor rooms and galleries, fire preventions, security and communication systems, columns, pipes, electrical, plumbing, drainage, any central system for the provision of heating, ventilating or air conditioning to leaseable premises or any enclosed Common Areas and all other installations, equipment or services located therein or related thereto as well as the structures housing installations, including but not limited to all open and enclosed malls, courts and arcades, public seating and service areas, corridors, furniture, first aid and/or information stations, auditoria, conference rooms, nurseries, childcare play areas and related kitchen and storage facilities, escalators, elevators, public washrooms, music systems and any atrium seating/food court; e) "C.P.I." means the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Canada (or any index published in substitution for the Consumer Price Index or any other replacement index reasonably designated by the Lessor, if it is no longer published) published by Statistics Canada (or by any successor thereof or any other governmental agency, including a provincial agency); f) "Atrium Seating/Food Court" means those portions of the Common Areas designated by the Lessor from time to time for use in support of the operations of any group of premises providing quick food service to customers of the City Market and includes, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, public table and seating areas, waste collection facilities and other areas, facilities and equipment intended for such use; g) "Gross Receipts" means the total of all gross sales and receipts from all business conducted upon or from the Leased Premises, whether or not by the Lessee, and whether for cash, cheques, credit, charge account, exchange or otherwise, and shall include, but not be limited to, amounts received or receivable from the sale of goods or services and the amount of all orders taken or received at the Leased Premises regardless of where they are filled, whether such sales be made at a sales desk or counter, over the telephone or by any vending device. Interest, instalment, finance charges and deposits will be included, and bank or collection agency charges and uncollectible amount or bad debts will not be deducted. A credit or instalment sale will be considered as a sale for the full price in the month in which it takes place. Gross Receipts shall not include: 7i Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 2- i. sales for which the customer has received a refund, provided that the original sale was included in Gross Receipts; ii, sales of merchandise in exchange for returned merchandise, but only to the extent the original sale of the returned merchandise was included in Gross Receipts; iii. HST and any other sales, use, excise or gross receipts tax directly on sales and collected from customers at the point of sale, provided that the amount thereof is added to the selling price and shown and/or collected as a separate item, and paid by the Lessee to such governmental authority; iv. delivery charges; v. transfers of merchandise between stores of the Lessee or returned to suppliers of the Lessee, but only if such transfer or return is not for the purpose of reducing Gross Receipts. h) "HST" means harmonized sales taxes, value -added taxes, multi -stage taxes, business transfer taxes or other similar taxes however they are characterized and any taxes 'in lieu thereof; i) "Hazardous Substances" means any contaminant, pollutant, dangerous substance, potentially dangerous substance, noxious substance, toxic substance, hazardous waste, flammable, explosive or radioactive material, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, asbestos, PCB's or any other substances or materials that are declared or defined to be hazardous, toxic; contaminants or pollutants in or pursuant to any applicable federal, provincial or municipal statute, by -law or regulation; j) "Lessor" includes the Lessor and its successors and assigns; k) "Lease" means this indenture of lease and includes any riders and schedules hereto and shall also include any agreements entered into which have the effect of amending this indenture from time to time; 1) "Leased Premises" means the premises leased to the Lessee as referred to and described in Section 2.01 hereof. Save as mentioned below, the boundaries of the Leased Premises shall extend from the top surface of the structural subfloor to the bottom surface of the structural ceiling. If the Leased Premises have no ceiling abutting the demising walls, but rather are open to the ceiling of the City Market building, the boundaries of the Leased Premises extend from the top surface of the structural subfloor to the height of the demising walls; m) "Lease Year" shall mean a period of time, the first Lease Year commencing on the Commencement Date and ending on the 31St day of December in the calendar year of the Commencement Date. Thereafter Lease Years shall consist of consecutive periods of twelve calendar months ending in each case on December 3191, save for the last Lease Year of the Term which shall terminate upon the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease, as the case may be; n) "Gross Rent" means the annual Gross Rent payable by the Lessee pursuant to Section 3.01; o) "Operating Costs" means the total cost and expense incurred in owning, operating, maintaining, managing and administering the City Market and the Common Areas, specifically including without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any capital or place of ownership taxes levied against the Lessor or any owners of the City Market on account of their interest in the City Market, in an amount equitably allocated to the City Market by the Lessor; gardening and landscaping: charges; the cost and expenses of taking out the insurance described in Section 9.03; cleaning, snow removal, garbage and waste collection and disposal; lighting, electricity, public utilities, loud speakers, public address and musical broadcasting systems and any telephone answering service used in or serving the City Market, and the cost of electricity and maintenance for any signs designated by the Lessor as part of the Common Areas; policing, security, supervision. and traffic control; salaries and benefits of all supervisory and other personnel employed in connection with the City Market and management office rent imputed to the City Market by the Lessor, acting reasonably; Management Fee, the cost of providing additional parking or other Common Areas for the benefit of the City Market, whether such costs be Taxes or other type of costs; the costs and expenses of environmental site reviews and investigations, removal and/or clean -up of Hazardous Substances from the Common Areas; the cost of the rental of any equipment and signs and the costs of i Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" -Page 3 - supplies used in the maintenance and operation of the City Market and the Common Areas; accounting and audit fees incurred in the preparation of the statements required to be prepared and supplied by the Lessor under the terms of this Lease; heating, ventilating and air conditioning of the Common Areas; all repairs and replacements to and maintenance and operation of the City Market and the Common Areas; depreciation or amortization of the costs, including repair and replacement, of all maintenance and cleaning equipment, master utility meters, and all other fixtures, equipment, and facilities serving or comprising the City Market or the Common Areas; which are not charged fully in the Lease Year in which they are incurred, from the earlier of the date when the cost was incurred or the Commencement Date, at rates on the various items determined from time to time by the Lessor in accordance with sound accounting principles; p) "Proportionate Share" means a fraction, the numerator of which is the Rentable Area of the Leased Premises and the denominator of which is the Rentable Area of the City Market; q) "Rent" means all Gross Rent and Additional Rent payable pursuant to the terms of this Lease; r) "Rentable Area of the Leased Premises" means the area expressed in square feet of all floors of the Leased Premises measured from: i. the exterior face of all exterior walls, doors and windows; ii. the exterior face of all interior walls, doors and windows separating the Leased Premises from Common Areas; if any; and iii. the centre line of all interior walls separating the Leased Premises from adjoining leasable premises. The Rentable Area of the Leased Premises includes all interior space whether or not occupied by projections, structures or columns, structural or non - structural, and if the store front is recessed from the lease .line, the area of such recess for all purposes lies within the Rentable Area of the Leased Premises. s) "Rentable Area of the City Market" means the area in square feet of all rentable premises in the City Market set aside for leasing by the Lessor from time to time, except for any occupancy as designated by the Lessor for which there is no Gross Rent payable. Provided however that the Lessor shall credit to Operating Costs any contributions received in respect of such Operating Costs from the occupants of any of the areas excluded from the Rentable Area of the City Market in accordance with this definition. Provided further that in determining the fraction that is the Lessee's Proportionate Share, if the Leased Premises consists of any of the foregoing excluded categories, the Rentable Area of that category will be included in the Rentable Area of the City Market; t) "Rules and Regulations" means the rules and regulations adopted and promulgated by the Lessor from time to time acting reasonably, including those listed on Schedule "D "; u) "City Market" means the lands and premises. known by the civic address 47 Charlotte Street, Saint John, New Brunswick, as such lands and premises may be altered, expanded or reduced from time to time and the buildings, improvements, equipment and facilities erected thereon or situate from time to time therein; v) "Taxes" means all duties, real property taxes, charges, assessments and payments, from time to time levied, assessed or imposed upon the City Market or any part thereof or upon the Lessor by reason of its ownership of the City Market, by any taxing authority: Taxes shall also include any penalties, late payment or interest charges imposed by any municipality or other taxing authority as a result of the Lessee's late payments of any taxes or instalments thereof. For greater certainty "Taxes" shall exclude any penalties or interest incurred by the Lessor as a result of its failure to pay Taxes in a timely manner, except Taxes shall include any interest in respect of a deferral of payment in accordance with sound accounting practices if permitted by statute or pursuant to an agreement with the taxing authority; and (ii) income, profit or excess profits taxes of the Lessor; w) "Lessee" means the party named as Lessee in this Lease; and x) "Term" means the period referred to in Section 2.03. Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 4 - ARTICLE H GRANT, TERM AND INTENT 2.01 Leased Premises In consideration of the rents, covenants and agreements hereinafter reserved and contained on the part of the Lessee to be paid, observed and performed, the Lessor demises and leases to the Lessee and the Lessee leases from the Lessor, the Leased Premises. The Leased Premises are presently designated as Stall No. A, are shown outlined in red on Schedule "A" attached hereto and contain a Rentable Area of approximately Three Hundred Seventy Three Square Feet (373 fe). In the event the Leased Premises is re- measured the Lessee shall pay all rents based on a maximum square footage of Three Hundred Seventy. Three Square Feet (373 ft'). 2.02 Use of Common Areas The use and occupation by the Lessee of the Leased Premises shall entitle the Lessee to the use in common with all others entitled thereto of the Common Areas, subject however, to the terms and conditions of this Lease and to reasonable rules and regulations for the use thereof as prescribed from time to time by the Landlord. 2.03 Term of Lease TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Leased Premises for and during the term of Five (5) Years to be computed from December 1, 2006 and fully to be completed and ended on November 30, 2011 save as hereinafter provided for earlier termination. PROVIDED THAT if there is any.Lessor's Work or Lessee's Work to be performed prior to the Lessee opening for business in the Leased Premises or the Leased Premises are occupied by a third party as of the date of this Lease, the Commencement Date shall be the earlier of: a) forty -five (45) days after the Lessor has delivered vacant possession of the Leased Premises to the Lessee notwithstanding that the Lessor may still, during such forty -five (45) day period, be completing its work; or b) the opening by the Lessee to the public of its business in the Leased Premises. Notwithstanding any change in the Commencement Date calculated in accordance with the preceding provisions hereof, the Terms shall expire on the date set for such expiry in the first paragraph of this Section 2.03, subject always to earlier termination as provided for in this Lease. PROVIDED THAT upon the Lessor or its Architect giving notice to the Lessee that the Leased Premises are available for the commencement of the Lessee's Work, the Lessee shall immediately take possession of the Leased Premises and shall occupy same for the purpose of fixturing and installing its inventory, at its own risk, for a period of ** ( * *) days after receipt of such notice or until the Lessee opens for business to the public in the Leased Premises, free of the payment of Gross Rent, and Additional Rent save for the obligation of the Lessee to pay for all utility charges used by the Lessee or consumed in the Leased Premises during the period of such fixturing, and shall during the period from the giving of such notice until the Commencement Date be a tenant in the Leased Premises subject to the same covenants and agreements as are contained in this Lease, mutatis mutandis. FURTHER PROVIDED THAT NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY, if the Lessor is unable to deliver vacant possession of the Leased Premises to the Lessee for any reason, including but not limited to the holding over or retention of possession of any other lessee or occupant; or the lack of completion of any repairs, improvements or alterations z-equired to be completed before the Lessee's occupancy of the Leased Premises, then the time for commencement of the Term shall be extended to correspond with the period of delay and the Lessee shall not be entitled to any abatement or diminution of Rent (except that Rent shall not commence to be payable until possession of the Leased Premises is given by the Lessor to the Lessee) nor shall the validity of this Lease or the parties' respective obligations hereunder be affected. However, if the Lessor does not give vacant possession of the Leased Premises to the Lessee within six (6) months of the date of this Lease, then the Lessor may, at is option, terminate this Lease by written notice to the Lessee and in such event this Lease shall be null and void and of no effect whatsoever. Any deposit paid by the Lessee to the Lessor shall be returned without interest or deduction, and neither party shall have any further liability to the other. Forthwith, upon the Commencement Date being determined in accordance with the foregoing, the Lessee shall execute an acknowledgement of same on Lessor's usual form. Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" -Page 5 - The Lessee shall pay all Gross Rent and Additional Rent calculated on a per diem basis, from the end of the rent -free period to the last day of the month in which the Commencement Date occurs and thereafter all payments of Rent shall be made on the first day of each month throughout the Term unless otherwise specified herein. 2.04 Option to Renew The Lessee shall have the option to renew this Lease for a further one (1) term of five (5) years at the then prevailing market rate by providing written notice of its intention to renew to the Lessor no later than six (6) months prior to the expiration of the Initial Term. In the event the Lessor and the Lessee do not agree on the then prevailing market rate, such rate may be determined by a single arbitrator appointed by agreement between the Lessor and the Lessee pursuant to the Arbitration Act." ARTICLE III RENT AND DEPOSIT 3.01 Gross Rent The Lessee shall pay annual Gross Rent to the average amount of Twenty Four ($24.00) Dollars per square foot of Leased Premises. The Gross Rent shall be paid in equal monthly instalments, monthly in advance. According to the following schedule: Year 1 - $22.00 monthly ($683.83 per square foot) Year 2 - $23.00 monthly ($714.92 per square foot) Year 3 - $24.00 monthly ($746.00 per square foot) Year 4 - $25.00 monthly ($777.08 per square foot) Year 5 - $26.00 monthly ($808.17 per square foot) 3.02 Reports by Lessee a) The Lessee shall submit to the Lessor on or before the IUh day following the end of each calendar month during the Term and including the 10th day of the month following the end of the Term, at the place then fixed for the payment of Rent, a written statement signed by the Lessee showing the amount of Gross Receipts for the preceding month (and fractional month, if any) and the amount of Gross Receipts for all preceding months of such Lease Year; b) On or before the 60'h day following the end of each Lease Year (including the last Lease Year of the Term) the Lessee shall submit to the Lessor a statement in such form, style and scope as the Lessor reasonably determines, showing the amount of Gross Receipts during the preceding Lease Year, which statement shall be duly certified to be correct by the Lessee. The Lessee will not change its procedure relating to any aspect of its reporting of Gross Receipts without the prior written consent of the Lessor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. c) In addition to any other reports required by this Section 3.02, the Lessee shall also supply to the Lessor a statement of the approximate amount of Gross Receipts during any particular week in respect of which such a statement is requested by the Lessor, it being acknowledged that such weekly statement will be requested during weeks when promotions or other special activities are being carried on in the City Market. 3.03 Audit (Mandatory when rent calculation based on Lessee's sales) At its option, the Lessor may cause, at any reasonable time upon five (5) days' prior written notice to the Lessee, a complete audit to be made of the Lessee's entire business affairs and records relating to the Leased Premises for the period covered by any statement issued by the Lessee pursuant to Section 3.02. Any information obtained by the Lessor as a result of such audit shall be held in strict confidence by the Lessor. 3.04 Rent Past Due If the Lessee fails to pay, when the. same is due and payable, any Gross Rent, Additional Rent or other amount payable by the Lessee under this Lease, such unpaid amounts shall bear interest from the due date thereof to the date of payment, compounded monthly at the rate equal to four (4) percentage points in excess of the Prime Rate. i Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 6- 3.05 Deposit The Lessor acknowledges receipt of Zero Dollars ($00.00) which it will apply towards the payment of Gross Rent for the first and last months of the Term except that the Lessor may apply all or part of the amount retained for application towards the last month's Gross Rent as compensation for any loss or damage arising from the breach by the Lessee of any provisions of this Lease. This right will not be construed to limit the Lessor's other rights under this Lease or at law or to limit the amount recoverable by the Lessor for damages in respect of breaches by the Lessee of this Lease. If the Lessor uses all or part of the deposit for the last month's Gross Rent as provided above, the Lessee will, upon notification by the Lessor, pay to the Lessor the amount required to reimburse it for the amounts so applied. The Lessor will not be required to pay interest to the Lessee on any of the amounts paid to the Lessor or retained by it under this section. The Lessor may deliver the aforesaid deposit to any purchaser of the Lessor's interest in the City Market or any part thereof, whereupon the Lessor will immediately be discharged from any further liability with respect to the deposit. The Lessee will not assign or encumber its interest in the deposit except in connection with a permitted Transfer, in which case the Lessee's interest in the deposit will be deemed to have been assigned to the permitted Transferee as of the date of the Transfer. 3.06 Pre - Authorized Payments /Postdated Cheques The Lessee may participate in a pre - authorized payment plan whereby the Lessor will be authorized to debit the Lessee's bank account each month from time to time during each Lease Year in an amount equal to the Gross Rent and Additional Rent payable on a monthly basis, and, if applicable, generally any amount payable provisionally pursuant to the provisions of this Lease on an estimated basis. In the event the Lessee opts to participate in the pre - authorized payment plan, the Lessee shall sign a form of application which is the same or similar to Schedule "D -1 ", to give full force and effect to the foregoing within five (5) days of presentation. In lieu of the pre - authorized payment plan referred to above, the Lessor shall be entitled to require the Lessee to present at the beginning of each Lease Year a series of monthly postdated cheques for each such Lease Year for the aggregate of the monthly payments of Gross Rent payable on a monthly basis, and, if applicable, any amount payable provisionally pursuant to the provisions of this Lease on an estimated basis. ARTICLE IV TAXES 4.01 Taxes Payable by the Lessor The Lessor shall pay all Taxes which are levied, rated, charged or assessed against the City Market or any part thereof subject always to the provisions of this Lease regarding payment of Taxes by the Lessee. However, the Lessor may defer payment of any such Taxes or defer compliance with any statute, law, by -law, regulation or ordinance in connection with the levying of any such Taxes in each case to the fullest extent permitted by law, so long as it diligently prosecutes any contest or appeal of any such Taxes. 4.02 Taxes Payable by Lessee a) The Lessee shall during the Term pay, without any deduction, abatement or set -off whatsoever, all Taxes levied, laid or assessed on or against the Leased Premises; b) In the case of assessments for local improvements or betterments which are assessed or imposed during the term and which may by law be payable in instalments, the Lessee shall only be obligated to pay such instalments as same fall due during the Term, together with interest on deferred payments; c) In any suit or proceeding of any kind or nature arising or growing out of the failure of the Lessee to keep any covenant contained in this Article, the certificate or receipt of the department, officer or bureau charged with collection of the Taxes, showing that the tax, assessment or other charge affecting the Leased Premises is due and payable or has been paid, shall be prima facia evidence that such. tax, assessment or other charge was due and payable as a lien or charge against the Leased Premises or that it has been paid as such by the Lessor; d) The Lessee, if allowed by the taxing authority, shall have the right to contest or review by legal proceedings or in such manner as the Lessee in its opinion shall deem advisable (which proceedings or other steps taken by the Lessee shall be conducted diligently at its own expense and free of expense to the Lessor) any and all Taxes levied, assessed or imposed upon or against the Leased Premises or Taxes in lieu thereof required to be paid by the Lessee hereunder. No such contest shall defer or suspend the Lessee's obligations to pay the Taxes as herein provided pending the contest, but if by law it is necessary that such payment be suspended to preserve or perfect the Lessee's contest, then the contest shall not be undertaken without there being first deposited with the Lessor a sum of money equal to. twice the amount of the Taxes that are the subject of the contest, to be Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 7- held by the Lessor as an indemnity to pay such Taxes upon conclusion of the contest and all costs thereof that may be imposed upon the Lessor or the Leased Premises. Any costs associated with an appeal undertaken by the Lessor, the Lessee shall pay their proportionate share of such costs; e) The Lessee upon request of the Lessor will promptly exhibit to the Lessor all paid bills for Taxes which bills after inspection by the Lessor shall be returned to the Lessee. 4.03 HST Payable by Lessee. The Lessee shall pay to the Lessor all HST on Rent and any other HST imposed by the applicable legislation on the Lessor or Lessee with respect to this Lease, in the manner and at the times required by the applicable legislation. Such amounts are not consideration for the rental of space or the provision by the. Lessor of any service under this Lease, but shall be deemed to be Rent and the Lessor shall have all of the same remedies for and rights of recovery of such amounts as it has for recovery of Rent under this Lease. If a deposit is forfeited to the Lessor, or an amount becomes payable to the Lessor due to a default or as consideration for a modification of this Lease, and the applicable legislation deems a part of the deposit or amount to include HST, the deposit or amount will be increased and the increase paid by the Lessee so that the Lessor will receive the full amount of the forfeited deposit or other amount payable without encroachment by any deemed HST portion. 4.04 Business Taxes and Other Taxes of Lessee The Lessee shall pay to the lawful taxing authorities, when the same becomes due and payable: a) all taxes, rates, duties, assessments and other charges that are levied, rated, charged or assessed against or in respect of all improvements, equipment and facilities of the Lessee on or in the Leased Premises; and b) every tax and license fee which is levied, rated, charged or assessed against or in respect of any business carried on in the Leased Premises or in respect of the use or occupancy thereof whether in any case any such taxes, rates, duties, assessments or license fees are rated, charged or assessed by any federal, provincial, municipal or other body. ARTICLE V UTILITIES 5.01 Utilities The Lessee shall pay all utilities directly to the utility company, on a metered basis. In the event that a Lessee leases cooler space with the Leased Premises, the Lessee shall pay to the Lessor the Lessee's proportionate share of any utility consumed. ARTICLE VI MERCHANTS' ASSOCIATION 6.01 Merchants' Association If and when an association or corporation of merchants or lessees (the "Association") is formed comprising tenants of the City Market, the Lessee shall forthwith become a member of such Association or if such an Association has already been formed, the Lessee shall forthwith become a member thereof and the Lessee shall retain its membership in such Association during the entire Term and shall abide by all rules, regulations, by -laws, decisions, directions, dues and assessments of the Association. Such Association shall in no way affect the rights of the Lessor and any by -laws, rules and regulations of such Association shall at all times be subject to the prior approval of the Lessor. 6.02 Promotion Fund The Lessee shall pay to the Lessor an amount equal to 6% of annual Gross Rent to be paid in twelve (12) monthly instalments each instalment payable on the 1 51 day of each month during the Term. Lease for Stall Space —City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" -Page 8 - ARTICLE VII CONDUCT OF BUSINESS BY TENANT 7.01 Use of Leased Premises a) The Leased Premises shall be used continuously, actively and diligently for the sole purpose of a deli for the sale of all cheddars of various ages, cream cheeses, European, speciality cheeses, cheese products, and any products containing cheese, processed meats, pressed, slicing meats, jellied, headcheese, coils, chicken products, port products, beef products, dried salamis, pepperonis, bolognas, salamis, pepperoni sticks, beef jerky, and also bread loaves and rolls, variety of sausage, maple syrup products, honey, pickles, pickled eggs, various pickled items, cretons, pates, bruchetta topping, olive oils, various mustards, anchovies, spices, hot sauces, cabbage rolls, butters, garlic butter, potato salad, various salads, homemade baked beans, meat pies, sauerkraut, gravy, fish cakes, egg rolls, Chinese food products, frozen dinners, Child's potatoes, lasagne, yogurt, horseradish, blood pudding, balsamic vinegar, salad dressings, meatballs, hot peppers, humus, pepper sauce, variety of sauces and dips. The Lessee will not use or permit or suffer the use of the Leased Premises or any part thereof for any other business or purpose. In connection with the business to be conducted by the Lessee on the Leased Premises, the Lessee shall only use the advertised name "Raymond's Deli" and will not change the advertised name of the business to be operated in the Leased .Premises without the prior written consent of the Lessor. The Lessee shall not introduce new product lines, or offer new services to its customers without first obtaining the written consent of the Lessor. The Lessee acknowledges that it would be reasonable for the Lessor to withhold its consent if the introduction by the Lessee of such product line or service would compete with the business of other tenants in the City Market or infringe on exclusive covenants granted by the Lessor. Unless otherwise specifically set out in this Lease to the contrary, nothing contained in this Lease shall: (i) confer upon the Lessee the exclusive right to sell or provide in the City Market any of the products or services permitted to be sold or provided from the Leased Premises pursuant to this Section 7.01; nor (ii) prevent the. Lessor from leasing any other premises in the City Market to any other tenant(s) carrying on a business which is similar in whole or in part to the business permitted to be carried on from the Leased Premises pursuant to this Section 7.01. b) The Lessee acknowledges that its continued occupancy of the Leased Premises and the regular conduct of business therein are of utmost importance to neighbouring tenants and to the Lessor in the renting of space in the City. Market, the renewal of other leases therein, the efficient and economic supply of services and utilities, and in the character and quality of other tenants in the City Market. The Lessee therefore covenants and agrees that throughout the Term it will occupy the entire Leased Premises, comply strictly with the provisions of Section 7.01 and not vacate or abandon the Leased Premises at any time during the Term. The Lessee acknowledges that the Lessor is executing this Lease in reliance thereupon and that the same is a material element inducing the Lessor to execute this Lease. The Lessee further agrees that if it vacates or abandons the Leased Premises or fails to so conduct its business therein, or uses or permits or suffers the use of the Leased Premises for any purpose not specifically herein authorized and allowed, the Lessee will be in breach of the Lessee's obligations under the Lease, and then, without constituting a waiver of the Lessee's obligations or limiting the Lessor's remedies under this Lease, all Rent reserved in this Lease will immediately become due and payable to the Lessor unless guaranteed to the satisfaction of the Lessor. The Lessor will have the right, without prejudice to any other rights which it may have under this Lease or at law, to obtain an injunction requiring the Lessee to comply with the provisions of this Section 7.01(b). 7.02 Conduct and Operation of Business The Lessee shall occupy the Leased Premises from and after the Commencement Date and thereafter shall conduct continuously and actively the business set out in Section 7.01, in the whole of the Leased Premises. In the conduct of the Lessee's business pursuant to this Lease the Lessee shall: a) operate its business with due diligence and efficiency and maintain an adequate staff to properly serve all customers; own, install and keep in good order and condition free from liens or rights of third parties, fixtures and equipment of first class quality; and carry at all times such stock of goods and merchandise of such size, character and quality as will Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 9- all times such stock of goods and merchandise of such size, character and quality as will produce the maximum volume of sales from the Leased Premises consistent with good business practices; b) conduct its business in the Leased Premises during such hours and on such days as the Lessor from time to time requires or permits and at no other time. However the Lessee is not required or permitted to carry on its business during any period prohibited by any law regulating the hours of business. If the Lessee fails to open on the Commencement Date or during the days and/or hours required by the Lessor, then in addition to all other amounts of Rent payable under this Lease the Lessee shall pay as Additional Rent to the Lessor upon demand as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, an amount equal to two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) per day for each and every day that the Lessee is in default. When not open for business the security of the Leased Premises is the sole responsibility of the Lessee; c) keep displays of merchandise in the display windows (if any) of the Leased Premises, and keep the display windows and signs (if any) in the Leased Premises well -lit during the hours the Lessor designates from time to time, acting reasonably; d) stock in the Leased Premises only merchandise the Lessee intends to offer for retail sale from the Leased Premises, and not use any portion of the Leased Premises for office, clerical or other non - selling purposes except minor parts reasonably required for the Lessee's business in the Leased Premises; e) abide by all rules and regulations. and general policies formulated by the Lessor, acting reasonably, from time to time relating to the delivery of goods to the Leased Premises; f) not allow or cause to be .committed any waste upon or damage to the Leased Premises or any nuisance or other act or thing which disturbs the quiet enjoyment of any other lessee in the City Market or which unreasonably disturbs or interferes with or annoys any third party, or which may damage the City Market; g) not allow or cause to be done any act in or about the Common Areas or the City Market which in the Lessor's opinion, acting reasonably, hinders or interrupts the City Market's flow of traffic in any way, obstructs the free movement or parties doing business in the City Market; h) not allow or cause business to be solicited in any part of the City Market other than the Leased Premises, nor display any merchandise outside the Leased Premises at any time without the prior written consent of the Lessor; i) use the name designated for the City Market by the Lessor from time to time and all insignia or other identifying names and marks designated by the Lessor in connection with the advertising of the business conducted in the Leased Premises. Notwithstanding the foregoing the Lessee will not acquire any rights in such names, marks or insignia and upon the Lessor's request the Lessee will abandon or assign to the Lessor any such rights which the Lessee may acquire by operation of law and will promptly execute any documents required by the Lessor to give effect to this subparagraph (i); j) not install or allow in the Leased Premises any transmitter device nor erect any aerial on the roof of any building forming part of the City Market or on any exterior walls of the Leased Premises or in any of the Common Areas. Any such installation shall be subject to removal by the Lessor without notice at any time and such removal shall be done and all damage as a result thereof shall be made good, in each case, at the cost of the Lessee, payable as Additional Rent on demand; k) not use any travelling or flashing lights or signs or any loudspeakers, television, phonograph, radio or other audiovisual or mechanical devices in a manner so that they can be heard or seen outside of the Leased Premises without the prior written consent of the Lessor. If the Lessee uses any such equipment without receiving the prior written consent of the Lessor, the Lessor shall be entitled to remove such equipment without notice at any time and such removal shall be done and all damage as a result thereof shall be made good, in each case, at the cost, of the Lessee, payable as Additional Rent on demand; 1) not install or allow in the Leased Premises any equipment which will exceed or overload the capacity of any utility, electrical or mechanical facilities in the Leased Premises or of which the Lessor has not approved. If the Lessee requires additional utility, electrical or mechanical facilities, the Lessor may in its sole discretion if they are available elect to install them at the Lessee's expense and in accordance with plans and specifications to be approved in advance in writing by the Lessor; Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 10 - m) not bring upon the Leased Premises any machinery, equipment, article or thing that by reason of its weight, size or use, might in the opinion of the Lessor, acting reasonably, damage the Leased Premises or overload the floors of the Leased Premises. Any such machinery, equipment, article or thing shall be subject to removal by the Lessor without notice at any time and such removal shall be done and all damages as a result thereof shall be made good, in each case, at the cost of the Lessee, payable as Additional Rent on demand; n) observe and comply with all federal, provincial or municipal laws pertaining to or affecting the Leased Premises, the Lessee's use of the Leased Premises or the conduct of any business in the Leased Premises, or the making of any repairs, replacements, alterations, additions, changes, substitutions or improvements of or to the Leased Premises, and the regulations of any insurance underwriters in respect of the insurance maintained by the Lessor in respect of the City Market, and carry out all modifications to the Leased Premises and the Lessee's conduct of business or in use of the Leased Premises which may be required by any such authorities. 7.03 Prohibited Activities a) The Lessee acknowledges that it is only one of many tenants in the City Market and that therefore the Lessee shall conduct its business in the Leased Premises in a manner consistent with the best interests of the City Market as a whole; b) The Lessor shall have the right to cause the Lessee to discontinue and the Lessee shall thereupon forthwith discontinue the sale of any item, merchandise, commodity or the supply of any service or the carrying on of any business, any of which is either prohibited by this Section 7.03 or which the Lessor, acting reasonably, determines is not directly related to the business set out in Section 7.01. The Lessee will not allow or cause the use of any part of the Leased Premises for any of the following businesses or activities: i. the sale of secondhand goods or surplus articles; insurance salvage stock, fire sale stock or bankruptcy stock; ii. the sale of goods, except as may be specifically permitted by the provisions of Section 7.01; iii. an auction, bulk sale (other than a bulk sale made to an assignee or sublessee pursuant to a permitted assignment or subletting hereunder), liquidation sale, "going out of business" or bankruptcy sale, or warehouse sale; iv. any advertising or selling procedures which would, or any sale or business conduct or practice which would, because of the merchandising methods or quality of operation likely to be used, in either case in the Lessor's opinion, tend to lower the character of the City Market or harm or tend to harm the business or reputation of the Lessor or reflect unfavourably on the City Market, the Lessor or other tenants in the City Market or tend to confuse, deceive, mislead or be fraudulent to the public; or v. a mail order business or a department store, junior department store or variety store. 7.04 Hazardous Substances The Tenant covenants and agrees to utilize the Leased Premises and operate its business in a manner so that no part of the Leased Premises or surrounding lands are used to generate, manufacture, refine, treat, transport, store, handle, dispose of, transfer, produce or process any Hazardous Substance, except in strict compliance with all applicable federal, provincial and municipal statutes, by -laws and regulations, including, without limitation, environmental, land use and occupational and health and safety laws, regulations, requirements, permits, statutes, by -laws and regulations. Further the Lessee hereby covenants and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the Lessor and those for whom the Lessor is in law responsible from any and all loses, costs, claims, damages, liabilities, expenses or injuries caused. or contributed to by any Hazardous Substances which are at any time located, stored or incorporated in any part of the Leased Premises. The Lessee hereby agrees that the Lessor or its authorized representatives shall have the right at the Lessee's expense, payable as Additional Rent within fifteen (15) days of receipt of an invoice therefor, to conduct such environmental site reviews and investigations as it may deem. necessary for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Section 7.04. The Lessee's obligations pursuant to this Section 7.04 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of the Term. Lease for Stall Space — City Market A,B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" -Page I I - ARTICLE VIII FIXTURES, ALTERATIONS AND REPAIRS AND LESSOR'S CONTROL OF CITY MARKET 8.01 Installations by the Lessee All equipment, fixtures and improvements installed by the Lessee in the Leased Premises shall be .new or completely reconditioned. The Lessee shall not make any alterations, additions or improvements or install or cause to be installed any trade fixtures, exterior signs, floor covering, interior or exterior lighting, plumbing fixtures, shades or awnings or make any changes to the store front without. first obtaining the Lessor's written approval and consent. The Lessee shall present to the Lessor plans and specifications in form, content and such detail as the Lessor may reasonably require for such work at the time approval is sought. The Lessee covenants that any work that may be done in respect of the Leased Premises by or on behalf of the Lessee shall be done in such a manner as not to conflict or interfere with any work being done or about to be done by the Lessor in or about the City Market, whether such conflict or interference'shall arise in relation to labour unions or otherwise and the Lessee shall obtain all requisite permits, licenses and inspections in respect of any such work done by or on the Lessee's behalf. Notwithstanding anything herein contained, the Lessee shall make no alterations, additions or improvements that are of a structural nature or that would lessen the value or Rentable Area of the Leased Premises or the City Market, or would interfere with the usage of the Common Areas. All alterations, decorations, additions and improvements made by the Lessee or made by the Lessor on the Lessee's behalf by agreement under this Lease shall immediately upon installation or affixation become the property of the Lessor without compensation therefor to the Lessee, but the Lessor shall be under no obligation to repair, maintain or insure the alterations, decorations, additions or improvements. Such alterations, decorations, additions and improvements shall not be removed from the Leased Premises without prior consent in writing from the Lessor. Upon expiration of this Lease, the Lessee shall, at the option of the Lessor, remove all trade fixtures and personal property and shall remove all such alterations, decorations, additions and improvements and restore the Leased Premises as required by the Lessor. 8.02 Maintenance and Repair by the Lessee The Lessee will at all times keep the Leased Premises (including exterior entrances and all glass and show windows) and all partitions, doors, fixtures, equipment and appurtenances thereof (including lighting, heating and plumbing fixtures, and the electrical and mechanical systems) in good order, condition and repair (including periodic painting or redecorating and preventative. maintenance as determined by the Lessor and including such repairs or replacements as are required to keep the Leased Premises in good repair and condition). All aforesaid maintenance, repairs, restorations and replacements shall be in quality and class equal to the original work or installations. 8.03 Signs, Awnings, Canopies The Lessee will not place or suffer to be placed or maintained on any exterior door, wall or window of the Leased Premises any sign, awning or canopy or advertising matter or other thing of any kind, and will not place or maintain any decoration, lettering or advertising matter on the glass of any window or door of the Leased Premises without first obtaining the Lessor's written approval and consent. The Lessee further agrees to maintain such sign, awning, canopy, decoration, lettering, advertising matter or other thing as may be approved in good condition and repair at all times, and in addition to the foregoing, the Lessee shall maintain any signs or displays of its goods or wares which may be seen from the exterior of the Leased Premises in a manner which is in keeping with the character of the City Market of which the Leased Premises form a part and which is designed to enhance the business of the Lessee. 8.04 Surrender of Leased Premises Subject to Article 10.01, the Lessee will leave the Leased Premises in good repair, reasonable wear and tear only excepted. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, at the expiration or earlier termination of the Term the Lessee shall surrender the Leased Premises in the same condition as the Leased Premises were in upon delivery of possession thereto under this Lease, reasonable wear and tear only excepted, and shall surrender all keys for the Leased Premises to the Landlord at the place then fixed for the payment of Rent and shall inform the Lessor of all combinations on locks, safes and vaults, if any, in the Leased Premises. Should the Lessee fail to remove its fixtures and personal property, such fixtures and personal property shall be deemed to be abandoned by the Lessee and may be appropriated, sold or otherwise disposed of by the Lessor without notice or obligation to compensate the Lessee or to account therefor. The Lessee's obligations to observe or perform this covenant shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of the Term of this Lease. Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 12 - the Leased Premises. Should the Lessee fail to remove its fixtures and personal property, such fixtures and personal property shall be deemed to be abandoned by the Lessee and may be appropriated, sold or otherwise disposed of by the Lessor without notice or obligation to compensate the Lessee or to account therefor. The Lessee's obligations to observe or perform this covenant shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of the Term of this Lease. 8.05 Lessee to Discharge all Liens The Lessee will ensure that no construction or other lien or charge, or notice thereof, is registered or filed against; a) the City Market or any part of it; or b) the Lessee's interest in the Leased Premises or any of the leasehold improvements in the Leased Premises. by any person claiming by, through, under .or against the Lessee or its contractors or subcontractors. If such a lien or charge or notice thereof is registered or filed and the Lessee fails to discharge it within five (5) days after written notice from the Lessor, the Lessor may discharge it by paying the amount claimed to be due into court or directly to the claimant and the Lessee will pay to the Lessor as Additional Rent on demand all costs (including legal fees) incurred by the Lessor in connection therewith, together with an administrative overhead charge of fifteen percent (15 %) thereon. 8.06 Rules and Regulations The Lessee will comply with the Rules and Regulations. The Lessor reserves the right from time to time to amend or supplement the Rules and Regulations. Notice of such amendments and supplements, if any, shall be given to the Lessee, and the Lessee agrees thereupon to comply with and observe all such amendments and supplements, provided that no Rule or Regulation shall contradict any provision of this Lease. The Lessor shall not be responsible to the Lessee for non - observance or violation of any of the provisions of such Rules and Regulations by any other tenant of the City Market or of the terms of any other lease of premises in the City Market and the Lessor shall be under no obligation to enforce any such provisions. All Rules and Regulations shall be enforced against the Lessee in a non - discriminatory manner. 8.07 Maintenance and Repair by the Lessor The Lessor shall, subject to the other provisions of this Lease, maintain and repair or cause to be maintained and repaired, the structure of the City Market, including without limitation, the foundations, exterior weather walls, subfloor, roof, bearing walls and structural columns and beams of the City Market. If, however, the Lessor is required to maintain or repair any structural portions or any other portion of the Leased Premises or the City Market by reason of the negligent acts or omissions of the Lessee, its employees, agents, invitees, suppliers, agents and servants of suppliers, licensees, concessionaires or subtenants, the Lessee shall pay on demand as Additional Rent, the Lessor's costs for making such maintenance or repairs, together with an administrative fee of fifteen percent (15 %) of such costs. 8.08 . Control of City Market by Lessor The City Market and the Common Areas are at all times subject to the exclusive control and management of the Lessor. Without limiting the generality.of the foregoing, the Lessor has the right in its control, management and operation of the City Market and by the establishment of rules and regulations and general policies with respect to the operation of the City Market or any part thereof at all times . throughout the Term to construct, maintain and operate lighting facilities and heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems; provide supervision and policing services for the City Market; close all or any portion of the City Market to such extent as may in the opinion of the Lessor's counsel be legally sufficient to prevent a dedication thereof or the accrual of any rights to any third party or the public; grant, modify and terminate easements or other agreements pertaining to the use and maintenance of all or any part of the City Market; obstruct or close off all or any part of the City Market for the purpose of maintenance, repair or construction, employ all personnel, including supervisory personnel and managers necessary for the operation, maintenance and control of the City Market; use any part of the Common Areas from time to time for merchandising, display, decorations, entertainment and structures designed for retail selling or special features or promotional activities; designate the areas and entrances and the times in, through and at which loading and unloading of goods shall be carried out; control, supervise and generally regulate the delivery or shipping of merchandise, supplies and fixtures to and from the Leased Premises, and other portions of the City Market; designate and specify the kind of container to be used for garbage and refuse in the manner and the times and places at which same is to be placed for collection (if the Lessor for the more efficient and proper operation of the City Market provides or designates a commercial service for the pickup and disposal of refuse and garbage instead of or in addition to the service provided by the municipality, the Lessee shall use same at the Lessee's cost); from time to time change the area, level, location, arrangement or use of the City Market or any part thereof, construct other. buildings or i Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 13 - improvements in the City Market and make changes to any part thereof; construct other buildings or improvements in the City Market and make changes to any part of the City Market; and do and perform such other acts in and to the City Market as in the use of good business judgment the Lessor determines to be advisable for the more efficient and proper operation of the City Market. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if as a result of the exercise by the Lessor of any of its rights as set out in this Section 8.08, the Common Areas are diminished or altered in any manner whatsoever, the Lessor is not subject to any liability nor is the Lessee entitled to any compensation or diminution or abatement of Rent nor is any alteration or diminution of the Common Areas deemed constructive or actual eviction, or a breach of any covenant for quiet enjoyment contained in this Lease. 8.09 Lessor's Right to Enter Leased Premises a) It is not a re -entry or a breach of quiet enjoyment if the Lessor or its authorized representatives enter the Leased Premises at reasonable times to: i. examine them; ii. make permitted or required repairs, alterations,. improvements or additions to the Leased Premises (including the pipes, conduits, wiring, ducts, columns and other installations in the Leased Premises) or the City Market or adjacent property; or iii. excavate land adjacent or subjacent to the Leased Premises; in each case (to the extent reasonably possible in the circumstances) without unreasonably interfering with the Lessee's business operations in the Leased Premises, and the Lessor may take material into and on the Leased Premises for those purposes. Rent will not abate or be reduced while the repairs, alterations, improvements or additions are being made. The Lessor will take reasonable steps to minimize any interruption of business resulting from any entry. b) At any time during the Term, the Lessor may exhibit the Leased Premises to prospective purchasers and during the six (6) months prior to the expiration of the term of this Lease, the Lessor may exhibit the Leased Premises to prospective tenants and place upon the Leased Premises the usual notice "To Let" which notice the Lessee shall permit to remain where placed without molestation; c) If the Lessee shall not be personally present to open and permit an entry into the Leased Premises, -at any time, when for any reason an entry therein shall be necessary or permissible, the Lessor or the Lessor's agents may enter the same by a master key, or may forcibly enter the same, without rendering the Lessor or such agents liable therefor, and without in any manner affecting the obligations and covenants of this Lease; d) Nothing in this Section contained, however, shall be deemed or construed to impose upon the Lessor any obligation, responsibility or liability whatsoever for the care, maintenance or repair of the City Market or any part thereof, except as otherwise in this Lease specifically provided. ARTICLE IX INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY 9.01 Lessee's Insurance a) The Lessee shall throughout the Term, at its own cost and expense, take out and keep in full force and effect the following insurance: i. All -risk insurance upon property owned by the Lessee or for which the Lessee is legally liable (including, signs and plate glass) and which is located within the City Market in an amount of not less than the full replacement cost thereof; ii. Comprehensive General Liability with minimum limits of at least Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) or such higher limits as the Lessor may reasonably require from time to time. This policy shall include: a) The City added as an Additional Insured; b) Inclusive limits for bodily injury and property damage; c) Personal injury liability; Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.S.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 14 - d) Tenant's Legal Liability; e) Contractual Liability with respect to this Lease; f) Premises, Property and Operations; g) Completed Operations; h) A Cross Liability Clause; i) A Thirty (30) days written notice of Cancellation shall be given to the City of Saint John. iii. The Lessee shall also provide any other form of insurance as the Lessee or the Lessor . may reasonably require from time to time in form, in amounts and for insurance risks against which a prudent tenant would insure. b) All policies shall be taken out with reputable and recognized insurers acceptable to the Lessor and shall be in a form satisfactory from time to time to the Lessor. The Lessee agrees that certificates of insurance of each such insurance policy will be delivered to the Lessor as soon as practicable after the placing of the required insurance. All policies shall contain an undertaking by the insurers to notify the Lessor in writing not less than thirty (30) days prior to any material change, cancellation or termination thereof; c) The Lessee agrees that if the Lessee fails to take out or keep in force any such insurance referred to in this Section 9.01, or should any such insurance not be approved by the Lessor and should the Lessee not rectify the situation immediately after written notice by the Lessor to the Lessee, the Lessor has the right without assuming any obligation in connection therewith to effect such insurance at the sole cost of the Lessee and all outlays by the Lessor shall be immediately paid by the Lessee to the Lessor as Additional Rent without prejudice to any other rights and remedies of the Lessor under this Lease. 9.02 Increase in Insurance Premium The Lessee will not allow or cause anything to occur in the Leased Premises which shall cause any increase of premium for any insurance on the Leased Premises or the City Market or any part thereof above the rate for the least hazardous type of occupancy legally permitted in the Leased Premises. If the Lessee is in default under this Section 9.02 the Lessee shall pay any resulting additional premium on any insurance policies taken out or maintained by the Lessor, or if any insurance policy upon the Leased Premises or the City Market or any part thereof shall be cancelled or refused to be renewed by an insurer by reason of the use or occupation of the Leased Premises or any part thereof or the acts or omissions of the Lessee, the Lessee shall forthwith. remedy or rectify such use or occupation upon request to do so in writing by the Lessor, and if the Lessee shall fail to do so within twenty-four (24) hours of such written request, the Lessor shall have the right to enter the Leased Premises and rectify the situation, without liability to the Lessee for any loss or damage occasioned by such entry and rectification, or shall be entitled to hold the Lessee liable for any damage or loss resulting from such cancellation or refusal, or the Lessor may at its option determine this Lease forthwith by leaving upon the Leased Premises notice in writing of its intention to do so, and thereupon Rent and any other payments for which the Lessee is liable under this Lease shall be apportioned and paid in full to the date of such determination of the Lease, and together with an amount equal to the Gross Rent payable for a period of one (1) year as liquidated damages, and the Lessee shall immediately deliver up possession of the Leased Premises, a schedule issued by the organization making the insurance rate on the Leased Premises, showing the various components of such rate, shall be conclusive evidence of the several items and charges which make the fire insurance rate of the Leased Premises. Bills for such additional premiums shall be rendered by the Lessor to the Lessee at such times as the Lessor may elect and shall be due from and payable by the Lessee when rendered, and the amount thereof shall be deemed to be and be paid as Additional Rent. 9.03 Loss or Damage The Lessor shall not be liable for any death or injury arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon, at or relating to the City Market, or damage to property of the Lessee or of others located on the Leased Premises, nor shall it be responsible for any loss of or damage to any property of the Lessee or others from any cause whatsoever, except any such death, injury, loss or damage results from the negligence of the Lessor, its agents, servants or employees or other persons for whom the Lessor is in law responsible. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Lessor shall not be liable for any injury or damage to persons or property resulting. from fire, explosion, falling plaster, steam, gas, electricity, water, rain, flood, snow or leaks from any part of the Leased Premises or from the pipes, appliances, plumbing works, roof or subsurface of any floor or ceiling or from the street or any other place or other tenants or persons in the City Market or by occupants of adjacent property thereto, or the public, or caused by construction or by any private, public or quasi - public work. All property of the Lessee kept or stored on the Leased Premises shall be so kept or stored at the risk of the Lessee only and the Lessee shall indemnify Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 15 - the Lessor and save it harmless from any claims arising out of any damages to the same, including, without limitation, any subrogation claims by the Lessor's insurers. In no event shall the Lessor be liable for any injury to the Lessee, its servants, agents, employees, customers and invitees or for any injury or damage to the Leased Premises or to any property of the Lessee, or to any property of any other person, firm or corporation on or about the Leased Premises caused by an interruption, suspension or failure in the supply of any utilities to the Leased Premises. 9.04 Indemnification of the Lessor The Lessee will indemnify the Lessor, and save harmless from and against any and all claims, actions, damages, liability and expense in connection with loss of life, personal injury and/or damage to property arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon or at the Leased premises, the occupancy or use by the Lessee of the Leased premises or any part thereof, or occasioned wholly or in part by any act or omission of the Lessee, its agents, contractors, employees, servants, licensees, or concessionaires or invitees. In case the Lessor shall, without fault on its part, be made a party to any litigation commenced by or against the Lessee, then the Lessee shall protect and hold it harmless and shall pay all costs, expenses and solicitors' and counsel fees on a solicitor and client basis incurred or paid by them in connection with such litigation. ARTICLE X DAMAGE, DESTRUCTION AND EXPROPRIATION 10.01 Total or Partial Destruction of Leased Premises If, during the Term, the Leased Premises are expropriated or totally or partially destroyed or damaged by any cause in respect of which the Lessor is insured, the following provisions shall have effect: a) If the Leased Premises are rendered partially unfit for occupancy by the Lessee, Gross Rent only shall abate in part only, in the proportion that the part of the Leased Premises rendered unfit for occupancy by the Lessee bears to the .whole of the Leased Premises or if the Leased Premises are rendered wholly unfit for occupancy by the Lessee the Rent hereby reserved shall be suspended in either event until the day following a reasonable period (taking into account the extent of the Lessee's restoration) following completion of the Lessor's restoration; b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (a), if the Leased Premises in the opinion of the Architect shall be incapable of being rebuilt and/or repaired or restored with reasonable diligence within 180 days of the happening of such destruction or damage, then the Lessor may at its option terminate this Lease by notice in writing to the Lessee given within thirty (30) days of the date of such destruction or damage and in the event of such notice being so given this Lease shall cease and become null and void from the date of such destruction or damage and the Lessee shall immediately surrender the Leased Premises and all interest therein to the Lessor and the Rent shall be apportioned and shall be payable by the Lessee only to the date of such destruction or damage and the Lessor may re -enter and repossess the Leased Premises discharged of this Lease; If the Leased Premises are capable of being rebuilt and/or repaired or restored within 180 days of the happening of such damage or destruction or if within the period of thirty (30) days referred to in Section 10.01(b) the Lessor shall not give notice terminating this Lease, the Lessor shall with reasonable promptitude proceed to rebuild and/or repair or restore the Leased Premises to the extent of the Lessor's repair obligations under the Lease and the Lessee shall immediately upon substantial completion of the Lessor's work and, within a reasonable period determined by the Lessor (given the extent of the Lessee's restoration) complete the restoration of the Leased Premises. The certificate of the Architect shall bind the parties as to the (i) extent to which the Leased Premises are unfit for occupancy; (ii) time required to rebuild and/or repair or restore the Leased Premises; and (iii) due completion of repairs. 10.02 Total or Partial Destruction of City Market In the event that a substantial portion of the City Market shall be expropriated or damaged or destroyed by fire or other cause, or in the event the costs as estimated by the Lessor of repairing, restoring or rebuilding will exceed by $250,000 or more the proceeds of insurance available to the Lessor, notwithstanding that the Leased Premises may be unaffected, or in the event the Lessor shall have the right, to be exercised by notice in writing delivered to the Lessee within sixty (60) days from and after said occurrence, to elect to cancel and terminate this Lease. Upon the giving of such notice. to the Lessee, the Term of this Lease shall expire upon the third (3rd) day after such notice is given, and the Lessee shall vacate the Leased Premises and surrender the same to the Lessor. 10.03 Abatement of Rent . Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 16 - Notwithstanding anything herein before contained, all abatements of Rent set out in this Article X shall be limited to an amount equal to the amount which the Lessor collects under any rental income insurance. 10.04 Expropriation Awards The Lessor and the Lessee will co- operate with each other if there is an expropriation of all or part of the Leased Premises or the City Market, so that each may receive the maximum award that it is entitled to at law. To the extent, however, that a part of the City Market, other than the Leased Premises, is expropriated, the full proceeds that are paid or awarded as a result, will belong solely to the Lessor, and the Lessee will assign to the Lessor any rights that it may have or acquire in respect of the proceedings or awards and will execute the documents that the Lessor reasonably requires in order to give effect to this intention. ARTICLE XI STATUS STATEMENT, SUBORDINATION AND ATTORNMENT 11.01 Status Statement Within fifteen (15) days after request, the Lessee will sign and deliver to the Lessor a status statement or certificate, stating that this. Lease is in full force and effect, any modifications to this Lease, the commencement and expiry dates of this Lease, the date to which Rent has been paid, the amount of any prepaid Rent or deposits held by the Lessor, whether there is any existing default and the particulars, and any other information required by the party requesting it. 11.02 Power of Attorney The Lessee hereby irrevocably appoints the Lessor as the attorney for the Lessee with full power and authority to execute and deliver in the name of the Lessee any instruments or certificates required to carry out the intent of Section 11.01 which the Lessee shall have failed to sign and deliver within fifteen (15) days after the date of a written request by the Lessor to execute such instruments. ARTICLE XII TRANSFERS BY LESSEE 12.01 Transfer Defined "Transfer" means, (i) an assignment, sale, conveyance, sublease, or other disposition of this Lease or the Leased Premises, or any part of them or any interest in this Lease (whether by operation of law or otherwise), or in a partnership that is a Lessee under this Lease, (ii) a mortgage, charge or debenture (floating or otherwise) or other encumbrance of this Lease or the Leased Premises or any part of them, or of any interest in this Lease or of a partnership, or partnership interest, where the partnership is a Lessee under this Lease, (iii) a parting with or sharing of possession of all or part of the Leased Premises, and (iv) a transfer or issue by sale, assignment, bequest, inheritance, operation of law or other disposition, or by subscription of all or part of the corporate shares of the Lessee or an "affiliate" (as that term is defined on the date of this Lease under the Canada Business Corporations Act) of the Lessee which results in a change in the effective voting control of the Lessee. "Transferor" and "Transferee" have meanings corresponding to the definition of "Transfer" set out above, (it being understood that for a Transfer described in clause (iv) the Transferor is the person that has effective voting control before the Transfer and the Transferee is the person that has effective voting control after the Transfer). 12.02 Consent Required The Lessee will not allow or cause a Transfer, without the prior written consent of the Lessor in each instance which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. Notwithstanding any statutory provisions to the contrary, Lessor's consent shall not be deemed to have been unreasonably withheld where Lessor refuses consent to a Transfer within twenty-four (24) months of either the Commencement Date or a previous Transfer. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no Transfer shall be effective and no consent shall be given unless the following provisions have been complied with: i. There is no default of the obligations of the Lessee under this Lease; ii. The Lessee shall have given at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the proposed Transfer and the effective date thereof to the Lessor; Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 17 - iii. A duplicate original of the documents affecting the Transfer shall be given to the Lessor within thirty (30) days after the execution and delivery thereof; iv. The Transferee, except in the case of a Transfer described in Section 12.01(iy), shall have assumed in writing with the Lessor the due and punctual performance and observance of all the agreements, provisions, covenants and conditions hereof on the Lessee's part to be performed or observed from and after the effective date of the Transfer. The Lessee acknowledges that the factors governing the granting of the Lessor's consent to any Transfer may include, without limitation, the restrictive clauses entered into with other tenants by the Lessor, the financial background, business history and the capability of the proposed Transferee in the Lessee's line of business, and the nature of the business practices of the proposed Transferee. The consent by the Lessor to any Transfer shall not constitute a waiver of the necessity for such consent to any subsequent Transfer. If a Transfer takes place, the Lessor may collect rent from the Transferee, and apply the net amount collected to the Rent herein reserved, but no such action shall be deemed a waiver of the requirement to obtain consent or the acceptance of the Transferee as lessee, or a release of the Lessee or any Indemnifier from the further performance by the Lessee of covenants on the part of the Lessee herein contained. Notwithstanding any Transfer, the Lessee shall remain fully liable under this Lease and shall not be released from performing any of the obligations of the Lessee under this Lease. Any Transfer, if consented to by the Lessor, may at the Lessor's option be documented by the Lessor or its solicitors, and any and all legal costs and the Lessor's then - standard fee with respect thereto or to any documents reflecting the Lessor's consent to the Transfer shall be. payable by the Lessee on demand as Additional Rent. 12.03 No Advertising of Leased Premises The Lessee shall not print, publish, post, display or broadcast any notice or advertisement to the effect that the Leased Premises are for lease or for sale or otherwise advertise the proposed sale or lease of the whole or any part of the Leased Premises and shall not permit any broker or other party to do any of the foregoing, unless the complete text and format of any such notice, advertisement or offer is first approved in writing by the Lessor. Without in any way restricting or limiting the Lessor's right to refuse any text or format on other grounds, any text or format proposed by the Lessee shall not contain any reference to the rental rate of the Leased Premises. ARTICLE XIII DEFAULT OF LESSEE 13.01 Right to Re -Enter When a) the Lessee shall be in default in the payment of any Rent whether lawfully demanded or not and such default shall continue for a period of five (5) consecutive days; or b) the Lessee shall be in default of any of its covenants, obligations or agreements under this Lease or of any term or condition of this Lease (other than its covenant to pay Rent) and such default shall continue for a period of fifteen (15) consecutive days or such longer or shorter period as the Lessor, acting reasonably, determines after five (5) days written notice by the Lessor to the Lessee specifying with reasonable particularity the nature of such default and requiring the same to be remedied; then and in any of such cases the then current month's Rent, together with the Rent for the three (3) months next ensuing shall immediately become due and payable, and at the option of the Lessor, the Terms shall become forfeited and void, and the Lessor may without notice or any form of legal process whatsoever forthwith re -enter upon the Leased Premises or any part thereof in the name of the whole and repossess and enjoy the same as of its former estate, - anything contained in any statute or law to the contrary notwithstanding, provided however, that such forfeiture shall be wholly without prejudice to the right of the Lessor to recover arrears of rent or damages for any antecedent default by the Lessee of its covenants, obligations or agreements under this Lease or any term or condition of this Lease and provided further that notwithstanding any such forfeiture the Lessor may subsequently recover from the Lessee damages for loss of Rent suffered by reason of this Lease having been prematurely determined. In addition, the Lessor shall have the right to remove and sell the Lessee's goods and chattels and trade fixtures and apply the proceeds thereof to Rent due under the Lease. 13.02 Right to Re -Let Should the Lessor elect to re- enter, as herein provided, or should it take possession pursuant to legal proceedings or pursuant to any notice provided for by law, it may either terminate this Lease or it may from time to time without terminating this Lease, make such alterations and repairs as inay be necessary in Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 18 - order to re -let the Leased Premises; and re -let the Leased Premises or any part thereof as agent for the Lessee for such term or terms (which may be for a term extending beyond the Term of this Lease) and at such rental or rentals and upon such other terms and conditions as the Lessor in its sole discretion may deem advisable; upon each re- letting all rentals received by the Lessor from such re- letting shall be applied; first, to the payment of any indebtedness other than rent due hereunder from the Lessee to the Lessor; second, to the repayment of any reasonable costs and expenses of such re- letting, including brokerage fees and solicitors' fees and of'costs of such alterations and repairs; third, to the payment of Rent due as the same may become due and payable hereunder. If such Rent received from such re- letting during any month be less than that to be paid during that month by the Lessee hereunder, the Lessee shall pay any such deficiency to the Lessor. Such deficiency shall be calculated and paid monthly. No such re -entry or taking possession of the Leased Premises by the Lessor shall be construed as an election on its part to terminate this Lease unless a written notice of such intention be given to the lessee or unless the termination thereof be decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any such re- letting without termination, the Lessor may at any time thereafter elect to terminate this Lease for such previous breach. Should the Lessor at any time terminate this Lease for any breach, in addition to any other remedies it may have, it may recover from the Lessee all damages it may incur by reason of such breach, including the cost of recovering the Leased Premises, and including the worth at the time of such termination of the excess, if any; of the amount of Rent and charges equivalent to Rent reserved in this Lease for the remainder of the Term hereof over the then reasonable rental value of the Leased Premises for the remainder of the Term hereof, all of which amounts shall be immediately due and payable from the Lessee to the Lessor. In determining the Rent which would be payable by the Lessee hereunder, subsequent to default, the annual Rent for each year of the unexpired Term shall be equal to the greater of: (a) the average annual Gross Rent and Percentage Rent payable by the Lessee from the Commencement Date to the time of default or during the preceding three (3) full calendar years, whichever period is shorter; and (b) Gross Rent payable hereunder, together with all Additional Rent which would have been payable during the calendar year in which this Lease was terminated, prorated over a full calendar year, if required. 13.03 Legal Expenses In case suit shall be brought for recovery of possession of the Leased Premises, for the recovery of Rent or any other amount due under the provisions of this Lease, or because of the breach of any other covenant herein contained on the part of the Lessee to be kept or performed and a breach shall be established, the Lessee shall pay to the Lessor all expenses incurred therefor, including reasonable solicitors' and counsel fees on a solicitor and his client basis. 13.04 Bankruptcy The Lessee covenants and agrees that if the Term or any of the goods and chattels of the Lessee on the Leased Premises shall be at any time during the Term seized or taken in execution or attachment by any creditor of the Lessee or if a receiver, interim receiver or receiver and manager is appointed for the assets or business of the Lessee or if the Lessee shall make any assignment for the benefit of creditors or any bulk sale or, becoming bankrupt or insolvent, shall take the benefit of any Act now or hereafter in force for bankrupt or insolvent debtors or if any order shall be made for the winding up of the Lessee, or if the Leased Premises shall without the written consent of the Lessor become and remain vacant for a period of fifteen (15) days, or be used by any other persons than such as are entitled to use them under the terms of this Lease, or if the Lessee shall without the written consent of the Lessor abandon or attempt to abandon the Leased Premises or to sell or dispose of goods or chattels of the Lessee or to remove them or any of them from the Leased Premises so that there would not in the event of such abandonment, sale or disposal be sufficient goods on the Leased Premises subject to distress to satisfy the Rent above due or accruing due, then and in every such case the then current month's Rent and the next ensuring three (3) months' Rent shall immediately become due and be paid and the Lessor may re -enter and take possession of the Leased premises as though the Lessee or the servants of the Lessee or any other occupant of the Leased Premises were holding over after the expiration of the Term and the Term shall, at the option of the Lessor, immediately without any notice or opportunity for cure provided to the Lessee, become forfeited and determined, and in every one of the cases above such accelerated Rent shall be recoverable by the Lessor in the same manner as the Rent hereby reserved and if Rent were in arrears and the said option shall be deemed to have been exercised if the Lessor or its agents given notice to the Lessee as provided for herein. 13.05 Lessor May Perform Lessee's Covenants If the Lessee shall fail to perform any of its covenants or obligations under or in respect of this Lease, the Lessor may from time to time at its discretion, perform or cause to be performed any such covenants or obligations, or. any part thereof, and for such purpose may do such things upon or in respect of the Leased Premises or any part thereof as the Lessor may consider requisite or necessary. All expenses incurred and expenditures made by or on behalf of the Lessor under this Section, together with an administrative fee equal to fifteen (15 %) percent thereon, shall be forthwith paid by the Lessee to the Lessor on demand as Additional Rent. 13.06 Waiver of Exemptions from Distress Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S.Trench Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 19 - Despite any applicable Act, legislation or any legal or equitable rule of law: (a) none of the inventory, furniture, equipment or other property at any time owned by the Lessee is exempt from distress; and (b) no lack of compliance with any requirement concerning the day of the week, time of day or night, method of entry, giving of notice, appraising of goods, or anything else, will render any distress unlawful where the Lessee owes arrears of Rent at the time of the distress. 13.07 Remedies Cumulative No reference to nor exercise of any specific right or remedy by the Lessor will prejudice or preclude the Lessor from exercising or invoking any other remedy in respect thereof, whether allowed at law or expressly provided for in this Lease. No such remedy will be exclusive or dependent upon any other such remedy, but the Lessor may from time to time exercise any one or more of such remedies independently or in combination. ARTICLE XIV MISCELLANEOUS 14.01 Overhoiding If the Lessee remains in possession of the Leased Premises after the end of the Term and without the execution and delivery of a new lease, there shall be no tacit renewal of this Lease and the Term hereby granted, and the Lessee shall be deemed to be occupying the Leased Premises as a Lessee from month to month at monthly rent payable in advance on the first day of each month equal to the sum of: i. one and one half (1 %) times the Gross Rent payable during the last month of the Term; and ii. one - twelfth of the Additional Rent payable by the Lessee for the Lease Year immediately preceding the last Lease Year of the Term; and otherwise upon the same terms and conditions as are set forth in this Lease, except as to duration of Term, and any right of renewal mutatis mutandis. 14.02 Successors This Lease applies to the successors and assigns of the Lessor and, if Article XII is complied with, the heirs, executors, administrators and permitted successors and permitted assigns of the Lessee. If there is more than one party named as Lessee, they are jointly and severally liable under this Lease. 14.03 Waiver Failure by the Lessor to require performance of any term, covenant or condition herein contained shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term, covenant or condition or of any subsequent breach of the same or of any other term, covenant or condition herein contained. The subsequent acceptance of Rent hereunder by the Lessor shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach of the Lessee of any term, covenant or condition of this Lease, other than the failure of the Lessee to pay the particular rent so accepted, regardless of the Lessor's knowledge of such preceding breach at the time of acceptance of such Rent. No covenant, term or condition of this Lease shall be deemed to have been waived by the Lessor, unless such waiver be in writing by the Lessor. 14.04 Accord and Satisfaction No payment by the Lessee or receipt by the Lessor of a lesser amount than the monthly Rent herein stipulated shall be deemed to be other than on account of the earliest stipulated Rent, nor shall any endorsement or statement or any cheque or any letter accompanying any cheque or payment as Rent be deemed an accord and satisfaction, and the Lessor may accept such cheque or payment without prejudice to the Lessor's right to recover the balance of such Rent or pursue any other remedy in this Lease provided. 14.05 Entire Agreement This Lease sets forth all the covenants, promises, agreements, conditions and understandings between the Lessor and the Lessee concerning the Leased Premises and there are no covenants, promises, agreements, conditions or representations, either oral or written, between them other than are herein and in the said schedules and rider, if any, set forth. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Lease shall be binding upon the Lessor or the Lessee unless reduced to writing and signed by them. 14.06 No Partnership Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 20 - other reason of a like nature not the fault of the party delayed in performing work or doing acts required under the terms of this Lease, then performance of such act shall be excused for the period of the delay and the period for the performance of any such act shall be extended for a period equivalent to the period of such delay. Notwithstanding anything. herein contained, the provisions of this Section 14.07 shall not operate to excuse the Lessee ' from the prompt payment of Gross Rent, Additional Rent or any other payments required by the terms of this Lease, nor entitle the Lessee to compensation for any inconvenience, nuisance or discomfort thereby occasioned. 14.08 Notices Any notice herein provided or permitted to be given by the Lessee to the Lessor shall be sufficiently given if delivered personally to the Common Clerk, or if transmitted by telecopier or if mailed in Canada, registered and postage prepaid, addressed to the Lessor at: C/O The Common Clerk, The City of Saint John, P. O. Box 1971, 15 Market Square, Saint John, New Brunswick, E2L 4L1, with a copy to Real Estate Services, The City of Saini John, P. O. Box 1971, 15 Market Square, Saint John, New Brunswick, E21, 4LI, and any notice herein provided or.pemiitted to be given by the Lessor to the Lessee shall be sufficiently given if delivered personally to the party being given such notice or to a responsible employee of the party being given such notice, or .if transmitted by telecopier or if mailed in Canada, registered and postage prepaid, addressed to the Lessee at the Leased Premises or at its head office at 413 Windsor Street, Saint John, New Brunswick, E2M 2Z5. Any such notice given as aforesaid shall be conclusively deemed to have been given on the day on which such notice is delivered or transmitted or on the third day that there is postal delivery following the day on which such notice is mailed, as the case may be. Either party may at any time give notice in writing to the other of any change of address of the party given such notice and from and after the giving of such notice the address therein specified shall be deemed to include any request, statement or other writing in this Lease provided or permitted to be given by the Lessor to the Lessee or by the Lessee to the Lessor. If there is more than one party named as Lessee, notice to one shall be deemed sufficient as notice to all. 14.09 Place for Payment of Rent The Lessee shall pay the Rent. Including all Additional Rent, at the office of the Lessor specified in Section 14.08 or as such place or places as the Lessor may designate from time to time by notice in writing: currently to the Cashier's Office, City Hall, P. O. Box 1971, 15 Market Square, Saint John, New Brunswick, E2L 4LL 14.10 Approval in Writing Wherever the Lessor's consent is required to be given hereunder or wherever the Lessor must approve any act or performance by the Lessee, such consent or approval, as the case may be, shall be given in writing by the Lessor before same and shall be deemed to be effective. 14.11 Governing Law The Lease is to be governed by and construed according to the laws of the Province of New Brunswick. 14.12 Captions and Section Numbers The captions, section numbers and article numbers appearing in this Lease are inserted only as a matter of convenience and in no way define, limit, construe or describe the scope or intent of such sections or articles or of this Lease, nor in any way affect this Lease. 14.13 Partial Invalidity If any term, covenant or condition of this Lease or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Lease and/or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each term, covenant or condition of this Lease shall be separately valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 14.14 No Option The submission of this Lease for examination does not constitute a reservation of or option for the Leased Premises and this Lease becomes effective as a Lease only upon execution and delivery thereof by the Lessor and the Lessee. 14.15 Time To Be of the Essence Time shall be of the essence of this Lease Lease for Stall Space — City Market A.B.S. French Inc. Schedule "C" - Page 21 - 14.16 Quiet Enjoyment The Lessor covenants with the Lessee for quiet enjoyment. 14.17 Riders and Schedules Schedules attached hereto form part of this Lease. 14.18 Rent Free Period The Lessor and the Lessee agree so long as the Lessee is not in default under this Lease, the Lessee shall not be responsible for Gross Rent for the months of December 2006, January and February 2007, during the term of this Lease. Utilities, Promotion Funds/Merchants' Association dues are payable during any and all rent free periods. 14.19 Basement Storage Space Where the Leased Premises includes any area of basement storage space, notwithstanding any provision herein contained, the Lessee acknowledges and agrees that water and sewer lines are located within the basement area of the Leased Premises and that there is a possibility that water and/or sewage may escape from the lines as a result of breakage, blockage, overflow or other cause, and may cause damage to anything stored in the basement area of the Leased Premises. The Lessee acknowledges and agrees that if it chooses to store anything, whether belonging to it or to others, in the basement area of the Leased Premises, it does so at its own risk and the Lessee hereby agrees to release and indemnify and save harmless the Lessor from and against any and all manner of actions, suits, damages, loss, costs, claims and demands of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of breakage, blockage, overflow or other problem of the water or sewage lines. 'r SCHEDULE "D" RULES AND REGULATIONS 1. All loading and unloading of goods shall be done only at such times, in the areas, and through the entrances, designated for such purposes by the Landlord. 2. The delivery or shipping of merchandise, supplies and fixtures to and from the Leased Premises shall be subject to such controls as in the judgment of the Landlord are necessary for the proper operation of the Leased Premises and/or the City Market. 3. All garbage and refuse shall be kept in the kind of containers specified by the Landlord and shall not be burned in or about the Leased Premises. 4. No radio, television, telegraphic or telephone or similar device and no water pipe, gas pipe or electric wire shall be installed or connected without obtaining in each instance the written consent of the Landlord. All such connections shall be installed in accordance with the Landlord's direction and without such direction no boring or cutting for wires or pipes shall be permitted. 5. The Tenant will be required to remain open, for business as follows: a. Stalls shall be open for business at all times while the market is open to the public. b. Year round stands shall be open for business at all rimes while the market is open to the public. b. The plumbing facilities shall not be used for any other purpose than that for which they are intended, and no foreign substance of any kind shall be thrown therein, and the expense of any breakage, stoppage or damage resulting from a violation of this provision shall be borne by the Tenant. 7. The Tenant shall use at the cost of the Tenant a national recognized pest extermination contractor. 8. The Tenant, its employees or agents, shall not mark, paint, drill or in any way deface any walls, ceilings, partitions, floors, wood, stone or iron without the written consent of the Landlord. 9. Except as permitted in the lease to which these rules and regulations are annexed, the Tenant shall not permit any cooking in the Leased Premises without the written consent of the Landlord. 10. No aisle; sidewalk, entry, passageway, elevator or staircase shall be obstructed or used by the Tenant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, contractors, customers, invitees or licensees for any purpose other than ingress to and egress from the Leased Premises. 11. The Tenant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, contractors, customers, invitees or licensees shall not bring in or take out, position, construct, install or move any safe or other heavy equipment or furniture without first obtaining the consent in writing of the Landlord. in giving such consent, the Landlord shall have the right in its sole discretion, to prescribe the weight permitted and the position thereof, and the use and design of planks, skids or platforms to distribute the weight thereof. All damage done to the City Market by moving or using any such safe, heavy equipment or furniture shall be repaired at the expense of the Tenant. The moving of all equipment and the furniture shall occur only during those hours when the City Market shall not be open for business or any other time consented to by the landlord. 12. All persons entering and leaving the building in which the Leased Premises are situated must do so during hours the City Market is staffed by City Market employees. The Landlord at its sole discretion may determine the hours the City Market is staffed. Tenants shall register in books if so required by the Landlord when accessing the Market "after Market hours ". The Landlord is under no responsibility for failure to enforce this rule. 13. The Tenant shall not place or cause to be placed any additional locks upon any doors of the Leased Premises without the approval of the Landlord and subject to any conditions imposed by the Landlord. 14. No one shall use the Leased Premises for sleeping apartments or residential purposes, or for the storage of personal effects or articles other than those required for the purposes permitted by the lease to which these rules and regulations are annexed. r SCHEDULE "D" RULES AND REGULATIONS Page 2 15. Subject to the Landlord's providing such service, the Tenant shall permit window cleaners to clean the windows of the Leased Premises from time to time and at reasonable times. 16. Any hand trucks, carryalls or similar appliances used in any building in the Shopping Centre shall be equipped with rubber tires, side guards and such other safeguards as the Landlord shall require. 17. No animals or birds shall be brought into the Leased Premises except as permitted by the lease to which these rules and regulations are annexed. 18. Except as permitted in the lease to which these rules and regulations are annexed, the Tenant shall not permit the delivery of any food or beverage to the Leased Premises without the approval of the Landlord. 19, The Tenant shall not solicit business in the common areas or distribute any handbills or other advertising matter in the common areas or in automobiles parked in the parking areas. 20. The Tenant may only sell merchandise that is approved by the Landlord through their lease or otherwise. 21. The Tenant shall not keep or display any merchandise on or otherwise obstruct the common areas adjacent to the Leased Premises. 22. The Tenant shall not use or permit any of the Leased Premises to be used in such a manner as to cause annoying noises or vibrations or offensive odours. 23. The Tenant is responsible to remove garbage from their premises and deliver to the compactor designated by the Landlord and to place the garbage in the compactor. 24. A set of plans must be presented and the approval must be given by the landlord for any improvements or painting, etc. to the stands (including signs). 25. Merchandise, displays, shelves, etc., are not to exceed the height of the bottom meat hook bars on each stand. 26. No solid dividers are to be placed between the top and bottom meat hook bars. 27. Displays underneath the stands must be set up 6" off the floor on legs or wheels so the floor can be swept and washed down properly. 28. Covers are not to be placed over merchandise on stands without the prior approval of the Landlord. 29. Signage is to be in keeping with the historic character of the City Market and must meet the following criteria: Materials: Wood and metal are considered to be appropriate materials. Plastic may be used provided that it looks like one of the acceptable materials. Internally- illuminated plastic faced box signs will not be acceptable; Number of Signs: Each tenancy will be permitted one bench -top sign on each bench (7'- 0" length), or one projecting sign on each aisle -side that identifies the business by name and type; Bench -top Signs: These signs are the preferred primary form of signage. They must be located Ito 2 inches above the top rail of the bench, and should display the business name. They will consist of a 8" high by 6' -0" long narrow band of material with the lettering printed, painted, composed of individual raised letters, or lettering cut into the material and painted a contrasting colour. The rear may not be used for signage over another tenancy; Projecting Signs: Projecting signs may be used and shall be constructed as two -sided signs. They may only be located at a bench post, and must be rigidly fastened in place. They shall be vertical in proportion. The maximum size for projecting signs shall be 18" high x 12" wide. Only one per tenancy per aisle side shall be permitted as Business identifications; Lighted Signs: Not permitted; Temporary Signs: Any number of signs advertising goods for sale, specials, etc. shall be permitted. They may not exceed. 8.5" x 1 I" in size, and must not excessively obscure the view through the bench between the first and last rail above the bench. r I ti SCHEDULE "'D1" APPLICATION FOR AGREEMENT HEAD OFFICE OR PROPRIETOR'S NAME ACCOUNT RECEIVABLE NUMBER STORE NAME AND NUMBER DATE OF LEASE MONTHLY CHARGES STORE ADDRESS DATE OF LAST PAYMENT HEAD OFFICE ADDRESS . BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER TRANSIT NUMBER BANK AND BRANCH NAME IN WHICH ACCOUNT STANDS IN BANK RECORDS SIGNING OFFICER SIGNATURE REQUEST FOR PRE- AUTHORIZED PAYMENTS I authorize (hereinafter referred to as the "Company' And /or to debit the account of the undersigned maintained with the financial institution indicated above, monthly, in accordance with the PAYMENT.AUTHORIZATION below, for the purpose of paying monthly rentals as noted above. "PLEASE ENCL05EAN UNSIGNED SAMPLE CHEQUE FROM YOUR BANK OR TRUST COMPANY" AUTHORIZATION TO HONOUR PAYMENTS NAME OF BANK ADDRESS You are hereby requested and authorized to pay and debit my /our account at your office or at another branch of your, institution if it is transferred there; all cheques drawn on you on my behalf and made payable to the Company or drawn on you by ; and all amounts specified on any magnetic or computer produced paper tapes requesting you to pay the Company or In consideration of your acting as aforesaid, it is agreed that your treatment of each cheque and /or tape and your rights with respect to it shall be the same as if it were signed by the undersigned personally, authorizing and requesting you to pay and credit such amount to the said Company Debiting my account and failure to pay shall give no liability on. your part, regardless of the loss or damage. i .W SCHEDULE "Di" -2- If the financial institution indicated above is not a bank in which THE BANK ACT OF CANADA applies, "cheque" as unused in this authorization shall include an `Order" that would be a cheque within he meaning of section 165 in THE BILLS OF EXCHANGE ACT (CANADA). Any delivery of this authorization to you will constitute delivery by the undersigned. (The signature appearing below must be the- same as the signature appearing in the signature file of the financial institution identified above.) DATE: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES) November 14th., 2006 The Common Council of Saint John Your Worship and Councillors. A particular part of a recent Council meeting caught my attention. It was the debate around the City Manager's recommendation dealing with the Fire Chief s second report on the LNG pipeline and Emera's close involvement with the public safety concerns of the Fire Chief. As you know, the original motion to accept the City Manager's recommendation was defeated by Council at its October 23`d meeting. At that time,the Mayor instead of announcing the decision of Council as required by the Procedural By -Law, took it upon himself to show the greatest personal annoyance with the decision of Council. There is no doubt, under Council's Procedural By -Law, the Mayor has the right to speak and endeavor to persuade Council during the debate, but not after the question has been decided by Council. A criticism by the Mayor of Council's decision after it is finalized and not properly before the Council is inappropriate and out of order. It shows and brings into the proceedings disrespect for the Council as a legal body. The next part of the Council proceedings was completely off the mark when the Mayor accepted Councillor Chang's suggestion to deal with the item again in the form presented. While the minutes approved by Council on November 6th shows a reference to the word "reconsider," the word reconsider was not contained in the actual motion put to Council by Councillor Chang. Ignoring that as perhaps minor, the Procedural By -Law requires that a motion to reconsider be voted upon and adopted before it is in order for Council to deal with the defeated item again. A motion to reconsider a vote on a debatable question, opens to debate the entire merits of the original motion. In this case, Councillor Chang did not want the original motion adopted, but only a part of it. Under these circumstances, the Procedural By -Law requires and allows for a motion to be made to amend the motion being reconsidered. This was not done in compliance with Council's Procedural By -Law. Instead, Council adopted and approved the minutes showing the following: "Resolved that Council reconsider the motion, `to endorse the commitments as provided by Emera Brunswick Pipeline from A — J listed in the report, Update — Risk Analysis — Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline; that Common Council accept the offer of financial support for the positions of Training Officer and Emergency Planner, and that the report be provided to the National Energy Board,' and endorse the recommendations as stated in the motion with the omission of recommendation number 2 in the report, to be considered after the hearings." While the intent may not have been altered, the concern about filling in and tidying up the minutes after the fact is obvious. Also, it is important to realize that Councillor Chang's eligibility to move a reconsideration motion was because of his prevailing side vote in defeating the original motion, and his right to make a motion to reconsider was not because of his desire to adopt only a portion. It is possible that with the original motion back before Council for debate and consideration, a member including the Mayor could persuade the Council to defeat any amending motion, and adopt the full original motion. The way this matter was handled and disposed of by Council is a disgrace to the process, and recalls for me what had been well said by one of the greatest of English writers on parliamentary law: "Whether these forms be in all cases the most rational or not is really not of so great importance. It is much more material that there should be a rule to go by, than what that rule is, that there may be uniformity of proceeding in business, not subject to the caprice of the chairman, or captiousness of the members." The object of the Procedural By -Law is to assist the Council to accomplish the work for which it was designed, in the best possible manner. All deliberative assemblies especially a legal body like a Municipal Council representing our third level of government, must have some system of conducting business, and some rules to govern their proceedings. It is surprising to see an important policy decision that sends a controversial report to the National Energy Board, with the potential for future controversy if not liability, resting on a decision that ignored all the basic and fundamental rules of procedure. Considering that this agenda item was not ordinary and was designed to establish a relationship with Emera, it raises a question about what was finally decided. It certainly raises a question of what standard is being used, and how much attention and concern is being given to the other routine matters that get into the minutes to represent the official voice of Council for the present record and the long term future. r truly, Fra yd n Rodgers Wineaarden estate Ltd 851 Route 970 Baie Verte, N.B. E4M 1Z7 Canada TeL (506)538 -7405 BN: 87176 9824 RT0001 November 13, 2005 To Mayor Norm McFarlane and City Councillors Saint John City Hall P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, N.B. E2L 4L1 RE: City Market rental stall #I - first year review Dear Mr. McFarlane and City Councillors, rTe e EST 1991 http://www.WinegardenEstate.com email: srosswog @nbnet.nb.ca after participating at the Saint John City Market with renting stall 41 committing to a 3 years contract, we must inform you after our first year's review that our store sales are well below expectations and predictions by your market manager during our initial contract negotiations. Our product selection was cut in half when the NB government decided not to include locally produced spirits to be sold at Farmers Markets limiting our selection to wines. We are doubtful that we will renew our lease in two years, because it is also difficult to motivate our next generation to stay in N.B. It is unbelievable that such unique N.B. products like Brandies and Liqueurs made from locally grown apples, maple, blueberries etc. are forbidden to show, sell and attract customers and tourists. It would be very helpful, if you could speak through the political way to the new liberal minister to get a farmer market sales permit for our entire selection approved, which is wines and spirits. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Regards, Werner Rosswog The first cottage Winery in New Brunswick and the first Wine- Distillery in Atlantic Canada offers a wide selection of Wines & Spirits.