2021-04-06_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jourCity of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
AGENDA
Tuesday, April 6, 2021
6:00 pm
2nd Floor Common Council Chamber, City Hall - Public Access to Meeting will be Electronic
Si vous avez besoin des services en francais pour une reunion de Conseil communal, veuillez contacter le
bureau du greffier communal au 658-2862.
Pages
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
2.1. Minutes of March 22, 2021 2 - 15
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
5. Consent Agenda
5.1. Parks and Recreation and the City's Organizational Structure 16 - 17
(Recommendation: Receive for Information)
5.2. Money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes - 439 Prince Street 18 - 70
(Recommendation in Report)
5.3. Tender for Asphaltic Concrete Mixes (Recommendation in Report) 71 - 73
5.4. Saint John Green Infrastructure — Funding Agreement (Recommendation in 74 - 117
Report)
5.5. Contract 2020-01: Waterloo Street (Haymarket Square to Castle Street) — 118 - 121
Water, Sanitary and Storm Sewer Renewal and Street Reconstruction
(Recommendation in Report)
5.6. Contract No. 2021-10: Sanitary Sewer Structural Lining — Phase IV (Various 122 - 124
Locations) (Recommendation in Report)
10
13
14.
15.
16.
17
Members Comments
Proclamation
7.1. National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week - April 11 to April 17, 2021
125 - 125
7.2. National Dental Hygienists Week - April 4 to April 10, 2021
126 - 126
Delegations / Presentations
Public Hearings - 6:30 p.m.
9.1. Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application — Lands adjacent to
127 - 191
2400 Ocean Westway - Applicant Request to Cancel Public Hearing
9.2. Proposed Zoning ByLaw Amendment - 545 Sandy Point Road with Planning
192 - 216
Advisory Committee report recommending Rezoning (1st and 2nd Reading)
Consideration of By-laws
10.1. Prince William Street Loading Zone Relocation - Traffic ByLaw Amendment
217 - 225
(1st and 2nd Reading)
10.2. Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment, Zoning ByLaw Amendment and
226 - 232
Section 59 Conditions - 2100 Sandy Point Road (3rd Reading)
Submissions by Council Members
Business Matters - Municipal Officers
12.1. Accessibility of Saint John Facilities
233 - 257
Committee Reports
13.1. Finance Committee: Cyberattack — Restoration Costs and Projected Recovery
258 - 265
Estimate
Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda
General Correspondence
Supplemental Agenda
16.1. Fundy North Fishermen's Association Correspondence
266 - 269
Committee of the Whole
17.1. Parking Commission
270 - 270
1
18. Adjournment
u
City of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
Tuesday, April 6, 2021
Committee of the Whole
1. Call to Order
Si vous avez besoin des services en frangais pour une reunion de Conseil communal, veuillez contacter le
bureau du greffier communal au 658-2862.
Each of the following items, either in whole or in part, is able to be discussed in private pursuant to the
provisions of subsection 68(1) of the Local Governance Act and Council / Committee will make a
decision(s) in that respect in Open Session:
5:15 p.m., 2nd Floor Boardroom, City Hall
1.1 Approval of Minutes 68(1)
1.2 Financial Matter 68(1)(c)
1.3 Financial Matter 68(1)(c)
On
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
MINUTES — REGULAR MEETING
COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
MARCH 22, 2021 AT 6:00 PM
MEETING CONDUCTED BY ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION
Present: Mayor Don Darling
Deputy Mayor Shirley McAlary
Councillor -at -Large Gary Sullivan
Councillor Ward 1 Blake Armstrong
Councillor Ward 1 Greg Norton
Councillor Ward 2 John MacKenzie
Councillor Ward 3 Donna Reardon
Councillor Ward 3 David Hickey
Councillor Ward 4 David Merrithew
Councillor Ward 4 Ray Strowbridge
Also Present: City Manager J. Collin
General Counsel M. Tompkins
Fire Chief & Chief Emergency Management Services K. Clifford
Chief of Staff & Chief Financial Officer K. Fudge
Commissioner Human Resources S. Hossack
Commissioner Public Works and Transportation Services M. Hugenholtz
Commissioner Utilities & Infrastructure Services B. McGovern
Commissioner Growth & Community Services J. Hamilton
Deputy Commissioner Administrative Services I. Fogan
Deputy Commissioner Parks & Public Spaces T. O'Reilly
Director Legislative Services / City Clerk J. Taylor
Administrative Assistant K. Tibbits
Administrative Officer R. Evans
1
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
1. Call to Order
To conform to the Government COVID-19 State of Emergency and Mandatory Order
masking requirements during Code Alert Level Yellow, Council Members and staff
participated by video conference. The City Clerk conducted roll call and all members of
Council were present.
To ensure public access and transparency the meeting is being video recorded and posted
to the City's website after the meeting has concluded.
2. Approval of Minutes
2.1 Minutes of March 08, 2021
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the minutes of March 08, 2021 be approved.
MOTION CARRIED.
3. Approval of Agenda
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
RESOLVED that the agenda of March 22, 2021 be approved with the addition of Item 17.1
City Market Lease with 690045 N.B. Ltd. dba Kim's Korean Food.
MOTION CARRIED.
4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
5. Consent Agenda
5.1 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
073: Spring 2021 — Refinancing Debenture Application, Common Council approve the
following:
RESOLVED that occasion having arisen in the public interest for the following Public Civic
Works and needed Civic Improvements that the City of Saint John proposes issue of the
following debentures to be dated on or after March 11t", 2021:
REFINANCE DEBENTURES
Debenture No. BE 23- 2011 $ 10,330,000
(General Fund — $7,330,000 - 5 years)
(General Fund — $3,000,000 - 10 years)
2
3
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
Debenture No. BE 24 - 2011 $7,000,000
(Water & Sewerage — 10 years)
TOTAL $ 17,330,000
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 $ 17,330,000.
5.2 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C
2021-075: Sale of City Owned Lot being PID No. 28126 off Millidge Street the City of
Saint John sell the property bearing PID No. 28126, situated off Millidge Street to Mr.
Ronald Green (the Purchaser) at a purchase price of $1,000.00 plus applicable taxes and
fees with all costs associated with the transaction to be borne by the Purchaser, and
further that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the documents necessary
to effect the conveyance of the subject property.
5.3 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
079: Economic and Community Recovery Program: On -Street Parking Subsidy Pilot
Program — Interim Update, the on -street parking pilot program, as implemented by
Council on January 25th, 2021 be extended for the month of April 2021, or until the
program funding provided to Uptown Saint John Inc runs out, whichever comes first.
5.4 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
081: Proposed Public Hearing Date — 300 Sydney Street and 1210 Loch Lomond Road,
Common Council schedule the public hearings for the rezoning application submitted by
Parsi Development NB Ltd. for the property located at 300 Sydney Street, PID 00000034,
and for the Section 59 Amendment submitted by 693383 NB Inc. for the property located
at 1210 Loch Lomond Road, PID 55008593, for Monday, April 19, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. at the
Council Chamber, City Hall 2nd floor, 15 Market Square, Saint John, NB.
5.5 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
024: Licence Agreement for Stage and Washroom at Pat Rocca Way (Market Square
Boardwalk), the City of Saint John enter into a Licence Agreement with The Hardman
Group Limited and North Market Wharf Cultural Association Inc. in the form as attached
to M&C #2021-024 for the placement of a stage and washroom building/structure on a
portion of PID No. 18614, situated adjacent to Pat Rocca Way, also known as Market
Square Boardwalk, and further that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute
the said License Agreement.
5.6 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
078: 2021 Engineering Inspection Services, Common Council authorize staff to establish
supply agreements with the seven (7) consulting firms identified in the report, at the
3
0
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
hourly rates provided in this report totaling $785,000 plus HST for the provision of
engineering inspection services for the 2021 Capital Construction projects.
5.7 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
084: Fire Service Review Successful Proponent, the proposal submitted by Pomax
Consulting Inc. for the Fire Service Review and Fifteen -Year Strategic Plan, in the amount
of $95,800.00 plus HST, be accepted; and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the necessary contract documents.
5.8 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
088: Fundy Quay — Infrastructure Funding — Letters of Offer, Common Council approve
the following:
1. The City accept the offer by the Regional Development Corporation for funding
from the Community Development Fund for the project entitled "13293 - Fundy
Quay: Infill" as presented to Council at its March 22, 2021 meeting and that the
Mayor and Common Clerk by authorized to execute the said offer; and,
2. The City accept the offer by the Regional Development Corporation for the project
entitled "12660 - City of Saint John — Infrastructure" as presented to Council at its
March 22, 2021 meeting and that the Mayor and Common Clerk by authorized to
execute the said offer.
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the recommendation set out in each consent agenda item respectively,
be adopted.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. Members Comments
Council members commented on a variety of community events.
7. Proclamations
8. Delegations/Presentations
8.1 Ability NB and an Accessible NB
Ms. Haley Flaro, Executive Director of Ability NB, reviewed the submitted presentation.
Mobility is the most prevalent disability in New Brunswick. Many people with a mobility
disability face barriers and these barriers are compounded due to the lack of accessible
4
5
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
transportation and inaccessible communities. Ms. Flaro suggested that the City review
areas such as accessible parking, accessible spaces, playgrounds with accessible features,
bylaws to incentivize visitable housing, and promoting accessible destinations.
In response to a comment regarding accessible parking initiatives in the uptown, Mr.
Collin stated that additional information is forthcoming to Council at the next meeting,
which will address accessibility issues including a discussion on accessible parking in the
uptown.
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Norton:
RESOLVED that the presentation by Ability NB be received for information.
MOTION CARRIED.
9. Public Hearings 6:30 PM
10. Consideration of Bylaws
(Being absent for the public hearing for 3396 Loch Lomond Road, Councillor Strowbridge
withdrew from the meeting)
10.1 Zoning ByLaw Amendment with Section 59 Conditions — 3396 Loch Lomond Road
(3rd ReadinO and ADDroval of Monev-in-Lieu of Land for Public Puraoses
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Reardon:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-108 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John," rezoning a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 8,227 square metres, located at 3396 Loch Lomond Road, also identified
as a portion of PID Number 00330126, from Rural Residential (RR) to Rural General
Commercial (CRG), be read.
MOTION CARRIED.
The by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-108 A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law
of The City of Saint John," was read in its entirety.
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Merrithew:
RESOLVED that Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on a portion of a parcel of land
having an area of approximately 8,227 square metre, located at 3396 Loch Lomond Road,
also identified as a portion of PID Number 00330126:
a. The parcel of land will be restricted to the following uses as identified in the Rural
General Commercial (CRG) Zone of the City of Saint John Zoning By-law:
5
X
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
• An Artist or Craftsperson Studio;
• Bed and breakfast;
• Business Office, subject to paragraph 11.11(3)(a) of the Zoning By-law;
• Contractor Service, Household;
• Dwelling unit;
• Garden Suite, subject to section 9.8 of the Zoning By-law;
• Home occupation, subject to section 9.9 of the Zoning By-law;
• Secondary suite, subject to section 9.13 of the Zoning By-law;
• Service and Repair, Household;
• Supportive housing, subject to section 9.14 of the Zoning By-law; and,
b. Only one of the above land uses mentioned in 2(a) can be established on the
site, in addition to a Dwelling Unit, at any one time.
c. The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with a detailed
site plan, prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the
Development Officer, illustrating the location of buildings and structures, garbage
enclosures, driveway accesses, vehicle parking, loading areas, landscaping,
amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and the
above site plan be attached to the permit application for the development of the
parcel of land.
d. The Development Officer shall not endorse any permit application for an
additional residential dwelling unless the existing shipping container in the area
have been removed.
Moved by Councillor Merrithew, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-108 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John," rezoning a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 8,227 square metres, located at 3396 Loch Lomond Road, also identified
as a portion of PID Number 00330126, from Rural Residential (RR) to Rural General
Commercial (CRG), be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-108 A Law to
Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John."
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
I
7
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
RESOLVED that Common Council accept a money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes
dedication for the proposed "Robert M. Landry Tentative Subdivision Plan" at 3396 Loch
Lomond Road.
MOTION CARRIED.
(Councillor Strowbridge re -joined the meeting)
10.2 Supplementary Report — 215 Somerset Street Rezoning Application (3rd Reading)
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-106 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John," rezoning a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 923 square metres, located at 215 Somerset Street, also identified as PID
No. 00025130, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to General Commercial (CG), be read.
MOTION CARRIED.
The by-law entitled, ""By -Law Number C.P. 111-106 A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law
of The City of Saint John," was read in its entirety.
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Merrithew:
RESOLVED that Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an
area of approximately 923 square metres, located at 215 Somerset Street, also identified
as PID Number 00025130:
(a) Any non-residential use of the property be restricted to the ground floor of the
existing building having an approximate floor area of 100 square metres and to the
following uses:
(i) Artist or Craftsperson Studio;
(ii) Business Office;
(iii) Catering Business;
(iv) Clothing Maker;
(v) Medical Clinic;
(vi) Instructional Service;
(vii) Personal Service;
(viii) Pet Grooming;
(ix) Retail General, as a secondary use with any above use;
(b) Signage be limited to a maximum of one sign, being either a ground sign, or a
wall sign, or a projecting sign, with a maximum sign face area of 1.88 square
metres, and in the case of a ground sign, that shrubbery be planted and
7
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
maintained with such sign;
(c) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed
site and floor plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of
the Development Officer, illustrating the location of buildings and structures,
garbage enclosures, driveway accesses, vehicle parking, loading areas,
landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site
features; and
(d) The above site and floor plans be attached to the permit application for the
development of the parcel of land, and that allrequired site improvements be
completed no later than September 30, 2021.
MOTION CARRIED.
Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-106 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John," rezoning a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 923 square metres, located at 215 Somerset Street, also identified as PID
No. 00025130, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to General Commercial (CG), be read a
third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, ""By -Law Number C.P. 111-106 A Law to Amend
the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John."
10.3 Zoning By -Law Amendment re: Fees Wd Reading)
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-107 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John," amending paragraph 12.4(8)m; amending
subparagraph 12.4(9)(a)(iv); deleting and replacing subsection 2.11(c); deleting and
replacing Schedule "B", be read.
I Al Is] 1101may_1ilk] ilk] 1"D
In accordance with the Local Governance Act sub -section 15(3) the by-law entitled, "By -
Law Number C.P. 111-107 A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John",
instead of being read in its entirety was read in summary.
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-107 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John," amending paragraph 12.4(8)m; amending
E:3
9
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
subparagraph 12.4(9)(a)(iv); deleting and replacing subsection 2.11(c); deleting and
replacing Schedule "B", be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number C.P. 111-107 A Law to
Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John."
(Having been absent for the public hearing for Item 10.4 and 10.5, Councillor Strowbridge
withdrew from the meeting)
10.4 Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law re: Fees (3rd Readin
Moved by Councillor Reardon, seconded by Deputy Mayor McAlary:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the Saint John
Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law", deleting and replacing subsection 6(2)(c); adding
subsection 6(11); and deleting and replacing Schedule K, be read.
101Eel I1[9I01PL1Nilk] II191
In accordance with the Local Governance Act sub -section 15(3) the by-law entitled, "By -
Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law"
instead of being read in its entirety was read in summary.
Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Reardon:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the Saint John
Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law", deleting and replacing subsection 6(2)(c); adding
subsection 6(11); and deleting and replacing Schedule K, be read a third time, enacted
and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
15L0111us] _0[4L1:NIt�I: 193
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the
Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law."
10.5 Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law Amendment — 22 Sydney Street
(3rd Reading)
Moved by Councillor Armstrong, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the Saint John
Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law" adding Schedule P — Tier Three Developments; and
adding subsection 8.3, be read.
10
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
In accordance with the Local Governance Act sub -section 15(3) the by-law entitled, "By -
Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law'
instead of being read in its entirety was read in summary.
Moved by Councillor Reardon, seconded by Councillor Merrithew:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the Saint John
Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law" adding Schedule P — Tier Three Developments; and
adding subsection 8.3, be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number HC-1, A Law to Amend the
Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law."
(Councillor Strowbridge re -joined the meeting)
10.6 By -Law respecting the Reduction of Single -Use Plastic Bags in The City of Saint John
(3rd Reading)
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number L.G.-12, a By -Law respecting the
Reduction of Single -Use Plastic Bags in The City of Saint John", be read.
MOTION CARRIED.
In accordance with the Local Governance Act sub -section 15(3) the by-law entitled, "By -
Law Number L.G.-12, a By -Law respecting the Reduction of Single -Use Plastic Bags in The
City of Saint John," instead of being read in its entirety was read in summary.
Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Deputy Mayor McAlary:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number L.G.-12, a By -Law respecting the
Reduction of Single -Use Plastic Bags in The City of Saint John", be read a third time,
enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number L.G.-12, a By -Law
respecting the Reduction of Single -Use Plastic Bags in The City of Saint John."
10.7 Weight Restriction By -Law Amendment on Wentworth Street (3rd Reading)
Mr. Collin advised that the developer has requested a change in date, with the intention
of going back to Council in the future with this request.
11
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Armstrong:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By -Law Number MV-17, A Law to Amend a By -Law
respecting Weight Restrictions within the City of Saint John enacted under the authority
of Section 262(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act" amending Schedule A by adding "Connection
Routes" — Wentworth Street between Broad Street and Leinster Street only between
March 23, 2021 and March 28, 2021 inclusive, be tabled.
MOTION CARRIED.
11. Submissions by Council Members
11.1 Municipal Election Candidate Sessions (Mayor Darling)
Moved by Councillor Norton, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the City Clerk holds a virtual information session or sessions that are open
to any interested candidates for Common Council prior to 9 April 2021; that Elections NB
be invited to attend and that the focus of the meetings be on explaining the processes
and procedures that highlight expectations, time commitments, workload, governance
and associated demands of being on Council; that the session or sessions clearly identify
where all relevant information on policies and backgrounds is located for public access;
that the City's website continues to maintain an "Elections Page" where the most
significant information is presented for easy access; and, that the sessions be recorded
and posted to the City's website.
MOTION CARRIED.
11.2 Livability and Road Construction (Mayor Darling)
Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Merrithew:
RESOLVED that before any tenders are approved for street reconstruction, Council be
presented details on how current and planned city policies have been followed; that the
concept of complete streets be embedded in our construction plans, and that
opportunities to enhance livability be presented; and furthermore, that appropriate
consideration be given to pedestrians, active transportation, those with mobility
challenges, and vehicles in the reconstruction of all streets included in our capital plans.
MOTION CARRIED.
12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers
12.1 Council Governance Items
12.1.1 Public Safety Committee
12
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
Moved by Councillor Reardon, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report entitled
M&C 2021-062: Expanding the Committee Structure — Public Safety Committee, Common
Council approve the creation of the Public Safety Committee and approve the submitted
(Exhibit A) Terms of Reference.
MOTION CARRIED.
12.1.2 Selection of Deputy Mayor
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
RESOLVED that the City of Saint John create a policy for the selection of Deputy Mayor in
which the candidate with the highest number of votes is appointed Deputy Mayor.
MOTION DEFEATED with Councillors Armstrong, Hickey, Norton, Reardon and Merrithew
voting nay.
Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Norton:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
083: Selection of Deputy Mayor, Council approve Option 3 for the selection of the Deputy
Mayor and direct staff to prepare a Procedural Bylaw amendment (s. 11.2 Deputy Mayor
Appointment process) for council's approval reflecting the following:
Option 3 — Council Nominates and Elects the Deputy Mayor
During the first meeting of council following the quadrennial election, councillors who are
interested in the deputy mayor position will self -identify declaring their interest and
stating their reasons at the meeting in Open Session; and,
At the second meeting of council following the quadrennial election, council members
will elect the deputy mayor by a show of hands and adopt a resolution to appoint the
deputy mayor for the 4-year term of council.
MOTION CARRIED with Deputy Mayor McAlary and Councillors Sullivan, Strowbridge
and MacKenzie voting nay.
12.1.3 O Canada at Council Meetin
In response to a comment, Mr. Collin stated that a separate initiative, to properly
acknowledge First Nations in Council proceedings, will be undertaken and brought back
to Council prior to the municipal election.
Moved by Councillor Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
12
13
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021-
080: Singing 0 Canada at Council Meetings the City Clerk's office be directed to proceed
with the development and implementation of a volunteer 0 Canada program to showcase
local talent at Council meetings; and that the report be received for information.
MOTION CARRIED.
13. Committee Reports
14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda
15. General Correspondence
15.1 SJ Community Arts Board — 2021 Funding Program (Recommendation: Direct
Commissioner of Finance to issues cheaues: Receive for information)
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that as requested by the Saint John Community Arts Board the Commissioner
of Finance be directed to issue cheques to be distributed to the grant recipients at a
forthcoming presentation; and that the letter be received for information.
MOTION CARRIED.
15.2 F. Fernandez: Request to Remove Heritage Conservation Area Designation — 191
Princess St. (Recommendation: Refer to City Manager)
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the request to remove the heritage conservation area and any other
heritage designation from the premises located at 191 Princess Street be referred to the
City Manager.
MOTION CARRIED.
15.3 Town of Grand Bay - Westfield: Parks and Recreation Master Plan Exercise
(Recommendation: Council expression of suaaort to Grand Bav-Westfield)
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
RESOLVED that on behalf of Common Council a letter expressing support for the Parks
and Recreation Master Plan be sent to the Town of Grand Bay -Westfield; and that the
letter be received for information.
MOTION CARRIED.
15.4 ME Carpenter: Essential Service (Recommendation: Receive for Information)
13
14
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
March 22, 2021 / le 22 mars 2021
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the letter from ME Carpenter: Essential Services, be received for
information.
MOTION CARRIED.
16. Supplemental Agenda
17. Committee of the Whole
17.1 City Market Lease with 690045 N.B. Ltd. dba Kim's Korean Food
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Merrithew:
RESOLVED that as recommended by Committee of the Whole, having met on March 22,
2021, the City enter into a lease with 690045 N.B. Ltd., doing business as Kim's Korean
Food, under the terms and conditions and in the form of lease document tabled for
Committee of the Whole at its meeting on March 22, 2021; and further, that the City
consent to the change of control of the current Lessee; and that the Mayor and the City
Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease Agreement, the Consent of Transfer and any
other documentation necessary to give effect to the Leasehold transaction.
MOTION CARRIED.
18. Adjournment
Moved by Deputy Mayor McAlary, seconded by Councillor Merrithew:
RESOLVED that the meeting of Common Council held on March 22, 2021 be adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
14
15
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
MC 2021-095
Report Date
March 31, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Growth and Community
Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation and the City's Organizational Structure
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Phil Ouellette / Tim
O'Reilly
Jacqueline Hamilton /
Michael Hugenholtz
John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council receive and file this report.
REPORT
As part of the 2020 organizational restructuring, Growth and Community Services
(GCS) has integrated the functions of Community Services into their team, which
was previously housed within the Parks and Recreation Team within the former
service area of Transportation and Environment Services. Staff are now prepared
to share some clarity and to articulate the high-level roles and responsibilities
between the "Parks and Recreation" functions held by Growth and Community
Services and those held by Public Works and Transportation (PWT).
All functions associated with the Parks and Recreation asset, facility, physical
space, and their corresponding renewal and maintenance will fall under the
responsibility of PWT. On the other hand, all functions associated with Parks and
Recreation programming, stakeholders, user groups and engagement will fall
under the responsibility of GCS. While clarifying roles and responsibilities, staff
from PWT and GCS acknowledge that there are some functions that will be
delivered in partnership, versus exclusively within the confines of only one service
area. For example, park master planning will be shared, where considerations on
the asset, its renewal and maintenance will rest with PWT, while the engagement
and policy improvements will rest with GCS. As it relates to the delivery of these
services, here is a breakdown of some, among others, of the functions that will be
supported by GCS: P.R.O. Kids, field and arena bookings, neighborhood and
community centre agreements, community grants and the Lands for Public
Purposes funding program. In turn, parks and recreation functions that will be
16
-2-
supported by PWT, include, among others: facility, park inspection and supported
by PWT includes facility, parks inspection and maintenance, signage and gates at
parks and related operational requests.
It should be acknowledged this new division of responsibilities between PWT and
GCS was designed to enhance service delivery by building new synergies with
other areas, including growth, planning, customer service, etc. In addition, it was
designed to build a new level of cooperation between two service areas to
enhance service. As is the case with any new model of delivering service, it is a
change, for stakeholders, municipal colleagues, regional counterparts, community
partners and Members of Council. Additional time will be required to undertake
this transition and to build familiarity with new processes and personalities that
may be involved in this new model of service delivery.
For members of the public, all inquires associated with Parks and Recreation
should be directed towards the City of Saint John's Customer Service Centre — 506-
658-4455, or 652-PLAY for inquiries associated with sports field information.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
Not applicable.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Parks and Recreation contributes to the quality of life and overall value -
proposition for the City of Saint John, which in turn, delivers on three of the four
major pillars of Council Priorities, including: Growth and Prosperity; Valued Service
Delivery; and, Vibrant, Safe City.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
Not applicable.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
This report was assembled after strategic exercise between staff of PWT and GCS
to clarity roles and responsibilities.
ATTACHMENTS
n/a
17
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
March 24, 2021
The City of Saint ]ohn
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes
439 Prince Street (File)
The Planning Advisory Committee considered the attached report at its March
23, 2021 virtual meeting.
The applicant, Richard Turner of Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc., appeared
before the Committee in agreement with the staff report and recommendation.
The applicant provided a presentation in support of the application and to
address local resident concerns.
Ron Pearman, Pat Burke, and Ase Kelly Berg appeared before the Committee
and expressed concerns about the development. These concerns included the
development of a three -storey building on Block A, site drainage, traffic, snow
removal, a retaining wall located on Block J, and the lack of curbside garbage
pickup. Another local resident, Ronnie Cousins, attended the meeting but did not
speak.
The applicant further addressed resident concerns and expressed a willingness
not to seek a building permit for the construction of a building on Block J until
such time that the deteriorating retaining wall was addressed. The applicant and
City staff indicated that curbside garbage pickup will be possible once the
proposed private streets are constructed to Lancaster Avenue.
After considering the report and recommendation, presentations, and the
attached correspondence from fourteen residents, as recommended by staff, the
Committee resolved to recommend the acceptance of a money in -lieu of Land for
Public Purposes.
The Committee also consented to the divesting of three existing Land for Public
Purposes parcels.
Page 1 of 2
18
Fallsview Village 439 Prince Street (File) March 24, 2021
The Committee approved the extension of Bridgeview Court (private street) to
Lancaster Avenue and granted the variance to allow for the continuation of part -
lots with the recommended condition by staff and a further condition that no
building permit be approved for a building on Block J until such time that the
Building Inspector is satisfied with respect to the condition of the site with respect
to a retaining wall.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Common Council accept a money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes
dedication for the proposed Fallsview Village tentative subdivision at 439 Prince
Street.
Respectfully submitted,
Alex Weaver Crawford
Chair
Attachments
Page 2 of 2
19
� L1pyk ■
L
s� j`R 1
439 Prince Street
Planning Advisory Committee Meeting
March 23, 2021
Growth & Community Services 20
SAINT JOHN
t
BIL
CK
7PUgtee LOW
FW
Storm water control
area
T
7 T
111L jfo�K ji�
r
IF
00 -K
i}
HUC3HES Tentative Layout 21 ProjectW� �ffy
FaUsview Village Yl9lR9 MCB 22-lan-2021
SURVEYORS -ENGINEERS (Formedy Rockingstone Estates) see
HORZ. 1: 300
a �
iilil-1 -
PAC Approvals
2005 Rock i ates
(formerly Harbour7WEsctates)
Land for Pub
S L,
subject
property
2WO
p since
m
426
lic Purposes
A I I I I I I I
4 0 4 -� ��.•,,
4-unit V
townhouse LPP
subj :ct property
LPP
LPP
"el
W
f �
485
' LancastE
Map 1: 439 Prince Street Aerial Photography
Engagement
Letters sent to all property owners within 100
metres of the subject property on March 12,
2021.
Eight emails have been received from
neighbouring property owners.
-10=40 -, 0'**. -
6 n4% F- - - I
Staff Recommendation
1. That Council accept a money in -lieu of
LPP dedication for the proposed
subdivision.
2. That PAC consent to the divesting of three
LPP parcels.
3. That PAC approve the extension of the
private street Bridgeview Court to
Lancaster Avenue.
Staff Recommendation
4. That PAC grant a variance that would allow
the Development Officer to continue
approving part -lots, on the condition that
documents, acceptable to the
Development Officer, are registered to
ensure property owners are included into
the existing trustee association.
nI _10=40 -, 0'**. -
�?4 ---Mjj
t
BIL
CK
7PUgtee LOW
FW
Storm water control
area
T
7 T
111L jfo�K ji�
r
IF
00 -K
i}
HUC3HES Tentative Layout 28 ProjectW� �ffy
FaUsview Village Yl9lR9 MCB 22-lan-2021
SURVEYORS -ENGINEERS (Formedy Rockingstone Estates) see
HORZ. 1: 300
The City of Saint John
Date: March 19, 2021
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting: March 23, 2021
SUBJECT
Applicant: Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc.
Landowner: Viva Development Inc.
Location: 439 Prince Street (File)
PID: 55176036, 55193031, 55193023, 55193015, 55193122
Plan Designation: Stable Residential
Zoning: Low -Rise Residential (RL)
Application Type: Subdivision and Variance
Jurisdiction: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory
Committee to advise Common Council concerning the acceptance
of money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes.
The Community Planning Act requires the consent of the Planning
Advisory Committee when considering the divesting of Land for
Public Purposes.
The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory
Committee to grant variances from the requirements of the
Subdivision By-law. Conditions can be imposed by the Committee.
Page 1 of 8
29
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
The Subdivision By-law authorizes the Planning Advisory
Committee to approve an access other than a public street when
advisable for the development of land.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposal involves the construction of eight townhouse buildings on the remainder of the
property located at 439 Prince Street. The applicant is seeking approval for the acceptance of
money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes, the divesting of three existing Land for Public
Purposes parcels, the approval of private street extensions, and the approval of a variance to
allow for the continuation of part -lots.
After careful consideration, staff recommends approval of the application with a condition to
ensure that new part -lot purchasers are included into the existing trustee association, which will
maintain the private streets and other trustee lands.
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council accept a money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes dedication for
the proposed Fallsview Village tentative subdivision at 439 Prince Street.
2. That the Planning Advisory Committee consent to the divesting of three existing Land for
Public Purposes parcels at 439 Prince Street, also identified as PID numbers 55193023,
55193015, 55193122.
3. That the Planning Advisory Committee approve the extension of the private street
Bridgeview Court to Lancaster Avenue, including the release of Parcels A & B being
portions of the private streets Rockingstone Drive and Bridgeview Court, as illustrated on
the attached Fallsview Village tentative subdivision plan.
4. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant a variance from the requirements of the
Subdivision By-law allowing the Development Officer to endorse subdivision plans that
create part -lots for the eight townhouse buildings of the proposed Fallsview Village
subdivision, on condition that documents, acceptable to the Development Officer, be
registered to ensure property owners of the part -lots are included into the Rockingstone
Garden Homes Inc. trustee association with the same rights and responsibilities as
existing members.
DECISION HISTORY
On November 9, 1999, the Planning Advisory Committee (Committee) considered an
application from the previous developer, Home Harbour Estates Limited, proposing a
development of 12 townhouse buildings with approximately 85 dwelling units, three private
streets, and common amenity spaces. The private streets and amenity spaces were proposed
Page 2 of 8
30
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
on trustee lands — lands held in common by the stakeholders of the development (i.e.,
developer and property owners). Individual dwelling units would be subdivided into part -lots and
conveyed by deed to future property owners (Submission 1). The Committee tabled the matter
to allow the developer to undertake suggested changes to the tentative subdivision plan.
On March 22, 2005, the Committee considered an application from 629652 NB Inc. (Norman
Ganong) proposing to undertake the townhouse development, now to be known as
Rockingstone Estates and consisting of 10 townhouse buildings with approximately 80 dwelling
units, three private streets (Rockingstone Drive, Bridgeview Court, Cascade Court) and
common amenity spaces.
On March 22, 2005, the Committee recommended:
That Common Council assent to the submitted photo -reduced tentative subdivision plan
of Harbour View Estates Subdivision, now to be known as Rockingstone Estates, and to
any required municipal services or public utility easements.
2. 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.
3. That Common Council assent to the proposed Land for Public Purposes dedication of
approximately 1,715 square metres.
On March 22, 2005, the Committee approved the proposed three private streets, provided they
had minimum rights -of -way of six metres and turnarounds with diameters of 15.24 metres and
were constructed in accordance with detailed engineering plans approved by the Chief City
Engineer, which included asphalt surfaces, concrete curbing, full municipal services (sanitary
sewer, water, and storm), underground public utilities, and street lighting.
The Committee also approved the proposed street names and granted the following variances
that:
1. Reduced the minimum dwelling unit width requirement from 6 metres to approximately
5.49 metres;
2. Reduced the minimum separation distance requirement between buildings from 21
metres to approximately 16 metres;
3. Reduced the minimum front yard requirement from 7.5 metres to approximately 5.5
metres along Prince Street and no required setback along Lancaster Avenue, on
condition that no building be closer than 3.05 metres from the edge of the any existing
sidewalk or curb along Lancaster Avenue; and
Page 3 of 8
31
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
4. Allowed for the creation of double -frontage lots.
On March 29, 2005, Common Council (Council) adopted the Committee's recommendation.
In 2008, 629652 NB Inc. developed the initial phase involving the townhouse building at 14-32
Rockingstone Drive and the adjacent portion of Rockingstone Drive (private street) from Prince
Street.
On June 16, 2020, the Committee considered an application by the new developer, Viva
Development Inc., to construct a four -unit townhouse building at 17-23 Bridgeview Court. The
Committee granted the following variances which:
Allowed Bridgeview Court to continue without a pedestrian walkway at its turnaround;
and
2. Allowed the Development Officer to endorse a subdivision plan that created part -lots for
a townhouse building at 17-23 Bridgeview Court, on condition that documents,
acceptable to the Development Officer, be registered to ensure property owners of the
part -lots are included into the Rockingstone Garden Homes Inc. trustee association with
the same rights and responsibilities as existing members.
ANALYSIS
Proposal
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc., on behalf of the developer, Viva Development Inc., is
seeking permission to construct eight townhouse buildings having a total of 39 dwelling units on
Blocks A, C, D, E, F, G, I, J (Submission 2). The proposed development also involves the
extension of Bridgeview Court and Rockingstone Drive, both private streets, to Lancaster
Avenue and the consolidation of two small portions of these existing private streets into the
developable lands (Submission 3).
The applicant is proposing that part -lots be created to provide ownership of the individual
dwelling units. The common areas, including the private streets, amenity spaces, and a central
storm water control area, will be held as trustee lands by the trustee association comprised of
the developer and the part -lot owners of the existing and proposed development. If approved,
the building situated on Block A will be constructed this year. There are three existing buildings
on the site having a total of 20 dwelling units (Blocks B, K, H).
Infrastructure Development has confirmed that municipal services were installed along the
proposed extensions of the Rockingstone Drive and Bridgeview Court private street rights -of -
way. Underground public utilities will need to be extended to provide service to the proposed
dwelling units. The applicant is aware of the requirement for street construction and extension of
underground public utilities.
Page 4 of 8
32
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
Site and Neighbourhood
The Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) hospital originally occupied the 1.8-hectare site, which
is located between Prince Street and Lancaster Avenue in West Saint John (Map 1). However,
as discussed in the Decision History, in 2005 this property was approved to permit a townhouse
development with private streets and common amenity space.
The site contains three townhouse buildings and portions of two private streets — Rockingstone
Drive and Bridgeview Court. One of these townhouse buildings, located at 17-23 Bridgeview
Court, is under construction. The remainder of the site is undeveloped (Attachment 1).
The Cedar Hill Cemetery is on the opposite side of Lancaster Avenue and the Hillcrest Baptist
Church is to the southeast. An office and apartment building are adjacent to the west at 489 &
491 Prince Street. Another apartment building is across the street at 430 Prince Street, which
was previously used as the Red Cross Lodge. A low -density residential neighbourhood is
located to the east.
Municipal Plan and Zoning
The Municipal Development Plan (Municipal Plan) has designated the property Stable
Residential. This designation includes areas within the Primary Development Area that have the
potential to accommodate additional development, at a scale and density consistent with the
surrounding neighbourhood. The property is zoned Low -Rise Residential (RL). This zone
permits low -density residential housing, including townhouse buildings with a maximum of six
dwelling units.
Money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes
The Subdivision By-law requires ten percent of the area of a proposed subdivision to be vested
to the City of Saint John as Land for Public Purposes (LPP). Such land dedications must be
assented to by Council. However, at the discretion of Council, a money in -lieu of LPP dedication
may be required instead.
The Subdivision By-law only encourages the acquisition of land dedications involving a
pedestrian walkway between streets, or land required to support the City's Trails and Bikeways
Strategic Plan. Otherwise, the Subdivision By-law encourages the acceptance of money in -lieu.
The proposed subdivision, which involves the creation of eight lots (i.e., Blocks A, C, D, E, F, G,
I, J) and associated trustee lands, does not meet the LPP acquisition requirements of the
Subdivision By-law and, therefore, the acceptance of money in -lieu is recommended.
The Act requires that money in -lieu of LPP represent eight percent of the market value of the
land at the time of subdivision. A surplus of LPP provided by the former developer will be
included into the money in -lieu calculation. This surplus is discussed in the next section of this
report.
Page 5 of 8
33
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
Divesting of Land for Public Purposes
The Rockingstone Estates townhouse development involved a central LPP area of
approximately 1,715 square metres. In 2009, a 227-square metre portion (PID 55193122) of this
central LPP area was vested to the City. Two other LPP dedications were also vested in 2009 —
a 216-metre parcel (PID 55193015) and a 171-square metre parcel (PID 55193023).
At that time, a public pedestrian walkway from Lancaster Avenue to Prince Street, through this
private townhouse development and adjacent central LPP area, was seen as supporting the
City's 2010 Trails and Bikeways Strategic Plan (Strategic Plan), which was developed to
determine and achieve better connectivity within the community.
In 2013, the City adopted a Parks and Recreation Strategy Plan (PIaySJ). Benefiting from the
goals and direction of the 2011 Municipal Plan emphasizing the development and improvement
of Primary Corridors in Urban and Suburban Neighbourhood Intensification Areas, PIaySJ
revised the trails and bikeways routing.
PIaySJ promotes a public trail using the sidewalks along Lancaster Avenue, Prince Street, and
Riverview. The need for a public walkway and associated central LPP area is no longer
supported through the subject property and the existing LPP parcels should now be divested.
The Act requires the concurrence of the Committee to divest existing LPP. On February 8,
2021, Council resolved to convey these three LPP parcels to the developer, Viva Development
Inc., subject to the concurrence of the Committee. Given the routing change introduced by
PIaySJ, it is appropriate for the Committee to concur to the divesting of these three LPP parcels,
which will be incorporated into the proposed subdivision development.
Part -Lot Variance
For decades, the City of Saint John approved townhouse developments with private streets and
common amenity spaces over trustee lands. Unique to Saint John, trustee lands have been
developed under the Companies Act, allowing the stakeholders of these townhouse
developments to own, through a non-profit association, the trustee lands where private streets
and common amenity spaces were located. These trustee associations collect fees for the
maintenance of the private streets and common amenity spaces.
During the development of the new 2016 Subdivision By-law, it was decided, based on
stakeholder feedback, that a change in the manner of regulating townhouse developments with
private streets was needed to better ensure the long-term sustainability of these developments.
A Development Officer prohibition was introduced to the new Subdivision By-law that no longer
allows for the approval of lots or part -lots for new townhouse developments on private streets.
Instead, like other New Brunswick communities, including the cities of Moncton and Fredericton,
ownership of the dwelling units in a townhouse building abutting a private street will be
regulated by the Condominium Property Act of New Brunswick.
Page 6 of 8
34
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
Rockingstone Estates is the only remaining townhouse development with private streets and
trustee lands to be completed.
The granting of the variance to allow further part -lots for the remainder of the Rockingstone
Estates will allow the subdivision to be governed by a much larger trustee association having
complete ownership of all the private streets and common amenity spaces in the development.
Further, allowing the townhouse development to be completed as originally proposed will
achieve optimal use of the site.
Given the extent to which Rockingstone Estates has been developed with part -lots abutting
private streets, and the benefits of allowing this development to be completed, it is
recommended that the Committee grant the variance to allow the Development Officer to
approve subdivision plans to create part -lots for the remaining townhouse buildings.
A condition is recommended that documents, acceptable to the Development Officer, be
registered to ensure that future property owners of these proposed part -lots are included into
the Rockingstone Garden Homes Inc. trustee association with the same rights and
responsibilities as existing members.
Last year, the Committee granted a variance with the same condition for the townhouse building
under construction at 17-23 Bridgeview Court (Decision History).
Subdivision Approvals and Variances
With respect to the approval of subdivisions, the Act does not impose a time limit on subdivision
assents or the authorization of subdivision agreements. The Act also does not impose a time
limit on the approval of a private streets' or variances by the Committee. However, changes to
the Subdivision By-law (and Zoning By-law) can invalidate previous subdivision approvals.
Council adopted a new Zoning By-law on December 15, 2014 and a new Subdivision By-law on
March 21, 2016. The March 22, 2005 Council assent and authorization for one or more
City/Developer Subdivision Agreements remain valid. The Fallsview Village tentative plan is
consistent with the previously approved Rockingstone Estates tentative plan. The March 22,
2005 Committee approval for the private streets and variances for reduced minimum dwelling
unit widths, reduced minimum building separation, minimum front yards, and the creation of
double -frontage lots remain valid. The Development Officer can consider any further variances
necessary for this proposed townhouse development.
Conclusion
The acceptance of money in -lieu of LPP, the divesting of three existing LPP parcels, the
changes to the private streets, and the continuation of part -lots are all appropriate to allow for
the completion of this townhouse development.
1 The Subdivision By-law defines a Private Street as a thoroughfare not owned by The City of Saint John suitable for
the passage of motor vehicles that serves a Cluster Townhouse Dwelling (i.e., townhouse building).
Page 7 of 8
35
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. 439 Prince Street (File) March 19, 2021
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No other alternatives were considered.
ENGAGEMENT
Public
In accordance with the Committee's Rules of Procedure, notification of the proposal was sent to
landowners within 100 metres of the subject property on March 12, 2021.
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Author Manager
Mark O'Hearn, CPT Jennifer Kirchner, RPP, MCIP
Contact:
Mark O'Hearn
Telephone:
(506) 649-6075
Email:
Mark. OHearn@saintjohn.ca
APPENDIX
Map 1: 439 Prince Street Aerial Photography
Attachment 1: 439 Prince Street Site Photography
Submission 1: Harbour View Estates (Rockingstone Estates)
Submission 2: Fallsview Village
Submission 3: Fallsview Village Boundary Adjustment
Submission 4: Block A Building Plans
Page 8 of 8
36
".0,
4-unit
townhouse
subject
property
LPP
subject property
LPPa
LPP
�*q
Map 1: 439 Prince Street Aerial Photography
r
z�
1 ?.
i
—
A
i
-• F
. lr
Ie'dud
.. _ .WAY_,•.-. Fm
�'�'�-": —
AttIchment
Princ treet Site Photography
L.O.
a
�p+GC
6 Vt
ij
3 pVaL1�
yNP„�o�r j � li.T .it � � � 7;J• lPJ• J s ° •F O 4
�r1 yy
L J a =—
. 3 �
7 a S 10 1I I= av+ i
77
u
' sln �, Sri o4 aw
•'w-sYszrtar�
lANcazT[n Avnu[
TENTATN[ Su ISON PLAN
NANHOIMI VIEW ESTATT:S
SUYLMY UM
1N w•• • ,�, F.. • r+ w .AA. ---4 LANCASM AVENUE SM
p...•. 1... ►'� .NICE STREET
CITY SANT Jow
.ROVVICE O. NEW W WNSVACX
n M. LUMVMYS rd lLM
,�r�stee
0
o
�
6.28 --.
ro 0
t0 be remOVed
area
Curb In
this
r
/
0
TO
0
i
TEMPORARY SIGN
CONCRETE PAD
FOR BUS STOP
C.0
TRANSFORMER &
UTILITY BOXES
/
Cb
CO C
ti
C CO
HUC;HES
SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS
-_ 6`oGK
,ems
PRNNGe
y �0000
L �O
Trustee Lands/
Storm Water Control area
7--
2.00
FX1s Ing Part Part
C / Lot 1 Lot 2 Part
Lot 3
/ S.49
co
/ B O
K
?ID 501 A06Ino.
02022 Canada
ROCKINGSTONE DRIVE
1 1�
1
3.04 3.55
Part Part Part Part Part Part
Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3
5.49
LO
LCK
„
N
Tentative Layout
Fattsview Village
(Formerly Rockingstone Estates) 40
w
N
Notes: Notes:
Each building block will be divided into individual Part Lots to be conveyed as separate Contours derived from SNB Lidar data.
ownership along common walls.
(Building block shown with heavy line around it) Notes:
Parcels 'A" &'B" are lands currently owned by Rockingstone Garden Homes Inc. that
are planned to be transferred back to the developer.
Notes: Parcel „C" is planned to be transferred to Rockingstone Garden Homes Inc. to
Areas shaded thus : accommodate the street width
are currently Lands for Public Purposes that are planned to be transferred back to the Parcels 'A ", "B" & "C" shown as
developer.
I 4.54
TLo
Partt 6
4.54
Part Part
Part Lot 2 Lot 3
Lot 1
LD�K
b,
e�
IONS,cee a
Part
Part Lot 6
Lot 5
Part
Lot 4
5.49
�(P
N
w
LANGASTER A/ �
00\0,
�rus�ee
o�
1
� de
�i10
�rus�ee �o
Project No. CADD By Date
Y19189 MCB 22-Jan-2021
Scale
HORZ. 1:300
ENDORSEMENTS
To be released by Rockingstone Garden
HomeDevelopment added d •t Properties JViva 67
I
\ / U
.3
N
13
m
3
N
Z
/ � P ran o 12m W�dei
IL
O
Z
Existing Municipal
Services Easement &
Public Utility Easement
See Plan No. 25916017
498
5
1 � 22 86
495
orc Parcel "B"
88 26 00 arc COurt / 8� 496 (132m2
69 f)
6.33 68 /
o \dgev `e \ash°r\es)
g <c
o r <P rev ale gc a
o
255 r / To be released by Rockingstone Garden
PID 55193031 Q - 55191 arde / Homes Inc. & added to adjacent Viva
+I � � P\9 e G t Development Inc. Properties
Viva Development N _ N N k�ngs�or ?rope o�-16 / / PID 55176036
Inc. Property N L E N R°c es arc' 200g-
/ Viva Development Inc. Property
Doc. 38973005 N U N NO ��356g3 Reg% Doc. 38973104 Reg. 2019-04-26
Reg. 2019-04-26 L- oc. 9
0 `9 O See Plan No. 25916017
� See Plan No. 25952046
00 See o See Plan No. 26939927
Ln 83 See P ion No See Plan No. 29579431 PID 55193015
55 /On NO. 269,399217
s39 °>> L.F.P.P.
92� See Plan
5e1�'y l RockNo. 25916017
80 481
in --7
54 / (Pri 9stOne
480 Q O / & w/dfh vor�eDri V e
0)s) Existing Municipal Services Easement &
'-'-7�o cV / Public Utility Easement
/ =o See Plan No. 25916017
co
a)
Q) Quo
LEGEND
ROUND IRON BAR FOUND Q
SQUARE IRON BAR FOUND �■
co
IRON PIPE FOUND
STANDARD SURVEY MARKER FOUND
STANDARD SURVEY MARKER PLACED Q
WOODEN POST PLACED
CALCULATED POINT O
TABULATED POINT
TRAVERSE CONTROL POINT 0
N.B. GRID CO-ORDINATE MONUMENT A /
HYDRO POLE / UTILITY WIRE ------ _
FOUNDATION Fd n .
STREET R.O.W. C r
UTILITY EASEMENT \ (20.12r
ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE �f
CENTRELINE — \ \ wide)
FENCE —X X X—
STRUCTURE
ell
�h��lAi`Ti�J
ua�
4h
��
0
h�
i 7Ilee
ti
Areas of
'�
• 7
�P
�
-O
S u rvey$
Lancaster Ave
�4�
R9Lk11�5t1]I12 dY
Church
rBiHG[e[y
�h�
po
Key Plan
Scale 1 5,000
Registration
Data
Owner Name ---
PID : - - -
Effective Date ---
Instrument : Transfer # ---
Owners
Owner Names
NOTES
1. Directions are N. B. Grid azimuths derived from G.P.S. observations
on N.B. Mon's. ---- (based on NAD83 CSRS HPN Value on N.B.
Mon. ---).
2. All distances are in metres; to convert to imperial equivalents divide
by 0.3048.
3. Area of survey outlined thus 0 peripheral information
compiled from various sources.
4. All document and plan references refer to the Registry Office for
Saint John County or the Land Titles District of New Brunswick.
5. Field survey completed on
6. All computations performed and coordinates shown on this plan
are based on New Brunswick Stereographic Double Projection and
the NAD83(CSRS) Reference System as realized by Service
New Brunswick High Precision Network coordinate survey monuments.
Purpose Of Plan
to create Parcel "A" & Parcel "B" from PID 55197255 to be
consolidated with PID 55193031 & PID 55176036 respectively. Parcel "A"
& Parcel "B" are not to be conveyed as separate building lots.
New Brunswick Grid Co —Ordinate Values
Sta. X Y Rmks.
Scale Factor ADDlied-------
tentative Subdivision Plan
Fallsview Village Boundary Adjustment,
(Formerly Rockingstone Estates)
Bridgeview Court,
City of Saint John,
Saint John County, New Brunswick
HUGHES SURVEYS 8c CONSULTANTS INC.
Surveyed by Mar. 03, 2021
Date
6 0 6 12 18 24
1 : 300
meters
Dwg. No. Disk No. Topos Disk No.
S19189A 2019 ------ 2019
wn. Dy JOD IVO. Nev. No.
M.C.B. I Y19-189
ap Ner.
G/08-T1B-SE2
EA
LU
cn
O � rl
_ C4
I I I
LU z I
I I I
m LD
I S _I 8 it e ,OL
v) 0
z O O � O
1 cv rn al y1 �I 'I m1 coe m c \
F I O GFfi ^O
LU
r1 Ln LU a
C
-- --JI 6ma FI J Lu a LU
LJ U) > w 0 w
I Q� El
LJ r7 U - U U Li- LL0�/�LuWCL O r Q z0_ LL
I I I I I I I I I
I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I I
z
I I I I =D
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I II I I I II
I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I Z
I I I I m I I I I I O
I I I 6y I I I I I
„9 -�, Q
Q - - - _ I
„9 - s L J LJJ
J
J ml w
J 1 LU
LJ Fm �P v r1
�� rn
LL w ez J v w
r7 w Q sv I-1
e� LJ
LJ aF
m
I I I a o
� ee to cc a m
XR
o
0
V C U U NU]
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
C
O
V O V Z V C
'�I y' mI al eeI i;
I I
n n
I I J I I I
I I I I I I
r-1
I I I I I
IL I
I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I V I I I I I
I a l I I I I
_Y y I 1=IQ I I I I
I cv I I I I I
i
I UVEi I Fz LJ I I
r- - - - - - - - - - J I - - -
L
cp 11 L L1 r1
e� � I I r I F1
a= I I II L I I I I I
----
ILL
I I
NOLVIMS N011rardRS
said
r
I I I II L I I I I I
L JI
- -
m J HHk
m
rrE:l
>c
I !� I I I I I I
I I I I L J
� I
I I I I I 7 1
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I L1
I I I I I I I
I I L1 I I
I I 1 1 L-L
_ I I I I
NOLLraraS — — —_ NOlyraraRS
Raid
I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
m I I l a l I I I I
y
co
cxanml I ^I� I I I I
sy I I� I I I I
F
I N I I I I I
I I I I
Fz m l m
89 Fi LJ
0o c.> ti
J I
r I
L r1
e r
a ^ � L
6 A
z L - -
NOI�LraraRS — NOI,�raraRS
Raid — — — — � — — — — — — — RNid
r- - - - - -
11 Ir I
I I I II L I I I I I
II L JI
L- - - - - - - - - - -
I I I z J I I I
I o I z
I �Gm a 1 Elf rr I I
=F Im IM I I I
" " = Im
ems' I I I I I I
x z
m I ti m I I I I I I
V Gal i GA
z x I I I I I I
- 1
I I I I I I
I I I I I H
I I I I I I I
I I L1 I I
NOIJraamid — — — — — NOLLVard
acid - - -
r--- -
0 I I I I L I I I I I
LJ L�
a= I I I I L I I I I I
cl s� J - -- - ----JTT - --
1777T
c F
I U v�i 3 1 I I I I I
I I m I I I I I
I V I I I I I
y 1= lin
IIIIIIHIM
a l7; Z
z
Q r
I I I I I I r
Q
LU
I i 1 L J J I I W
w
LJJ o
LJ O LJ <
of
m
I
I
I
I
m
O
a.
Z
I
I
I
I
I
I
F
z
6 V]
F
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
sNlvra
a
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
Im
�Nlvra
o
al
m
e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I,
Im
�Nl�ira
o
o
eo
m
F
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I�
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
42
z
O
cn
Iz
F-za
DO
C\3
��
9=�
Ecc
C\,P � .� CG
ZcD7C0�7
Ido 1�
11 l➢
W
z
O
o
�
_
I
®
Q
�
z
till
E
6 P
_ d �
s =E(:,4 E�
`CL
1
W 6 V �
!
6 6 = m
E.
M
6 U 6
Z
OOQ CO F m
o�.cncono�..
� C , �
X C = X
CH
OW.. i OW.
_CQ
F X F
c7 F
S Off.
6 O.
S E-
V]
o� o
C U C
O O O O
G m COF E Um
w m a o z z a
F m- rFia Cc 2 n
LK F Z X Z U C I] X
C E_ Y C Y
CC K La7,�F d' C d'CQ F
F U Lz. i C V C, M C V u 5
J
Q
W
0
I>7
W
m
y
W O
O
W
rZr
W
CJ
,� ,�
6 C
W fs
C
C U
.-a
F=. O
E-
2 W v]
U
E
O F
G.
@j
G. Z
L/') C¢
L1.
cn
V]
O
.-a 9. __4
O
91.
O
F C'
%]
C
C O
C
E C
��
¢
y
T
oE-
E_ C!
7 0� 6
x 0
C x
21
N uV
,z W E-F
�
O C, W
Oa. 6 U+ m
COY
„0
�
I
¢ LOB
W
C C
U
Z 6
w f-ll Z 6 X
W
cn Q w
�
7i.. GWc.
xO
COY m
CFCoia
C
CD
O
q p
Q
�00..
6 -,�
Cm
O
d CF/] Z 2-cn 6
O CC O O L O
07 CU U m
U U
QQ
E-
r7 O
cn=
O Z
� d
cn P O -4 cn
x
F i0
d C
tc Z
a. Cx7 CO cp V] CD W R,
Z Y
Y Z ZIP
>5
¢
Z
o a
z o
;
z z c5
CK Q
Z >G U cn Z U Z cn U X
c=a
ev F O O c cn
c, V]
W
m U
Ga7 fn _ _ Vi Gal Y
w cn
la
E¢-
w W a
6 C C/]
F
is Y
rSr
E-� y- C'2 C'2 - y F
mh4c
E-
If—
aEO-
Q
J_
/U
LU
I= C!]
d
Cs.
W
C
z Q
z
w F C/]
F cn z
o
cD
6 Z O
i
C
6
w Q
W o p
W
Z
o Q w
!
o
E O =
O =
a
L/] W O
a
W U
o I= W
E-
z
O W C
W
7
fllCD
"c
C W
cn
6 d. O
U
6 F
V7 U
C/]
C/7 W
I= z ;7.
c a.
Y 6
W
i
K]
w w
PQ
F l0 tX
w
l0
Z 6 L]7 n.
C G
O
m
�
W
C
cc�
¢ �
C OQq
6
O
E-
M Z C
C�7
W
r
cF;.
S
Qo�
C!]
ma
O
U m U
9 o
Q
O F
C O
C U
W
Y
G
o m c_c E 6-
au
6 CY. O.
C
i Y
� Z C7 O C7
Cn
C 6 6
cnC00
L1 Cl] is
=
IU3.
O
�
sMCsO0.0Cxs
W QZ7
M.F F CV CV 2
F
P.
E-
X
C 94 _Z -..I-.\-I 6 .\-� d.
O. Z PC NCO x xCO
pq
-m
E�-U W M. NM M 2,2�
O
Z
O
O m
� to
F a CD
x ¢ O
F
O
F
O
a
O..
6
O
F,
D4
1
F
m
k O
CO O
U
� o \
z o s
= w
C
E—
~ O O
2 �
c�nooa.o�
T Cs
E- O EC- V
SUSI8
IVOR gQ
,LU
O
2
z�
�z
OLU
p__q O
zJ
>j
Lr)o
U
LCL
L_I
O oC
o� 0�O
/�
LL
F
C
I
I
Q
I
F
cn
I
O Q
W
d mS),
F
S
G.
C,2
d.
I= cn
Rom.
CD
C
O'er
F i
x
cc
Q O Q
C!J
J
I
o
z
z
z �
0
�
0
U)
z0
CD
C\J
I
LU
/
CDw
�/ )
^ v'
l��
m
_ I
�
\
w
w
\
\
LL0
��
8/I L -19
SURSI8
IVfl83 5I
C/]
C
w
_ V
cn z
Q x F
W �cn
O C
F-
110/I I -18 -18 119/I [ -19
o�
o z s
C Y 6 6 E-
__lm I V] I
Z 6 2
CAP E--
02 O
U
w -
1 0 o I I I
Q
C a E cn
I � `awe CD
z_ O� z 1 cn p on . co n.
-a l rz to o. w
I W I d I
ml cn
c
� W G
z , _ � Q
O_ C M �_ F O� �_ _
O O] C�2 _ L]�.. C m PQ CV F
E-
U
PQ
�_ C � !_ C/] 'S' F Y m I O'O'
W FCLzlm O=m 6z m ! MSE-C/]
C_n C S C O
= Y S O �
v) v m E-m cn cn co.. ocn cz c.��E-m cn cnc
V X
C! M
CO CO N
_ O CI] r C Y O w u Y e.G C�2
O mC Y
�l Q C G\2 C CC La. d IY C\t C/S Z� S .--•
u
—
Uo
e
O �
z
W_
W
d
V
rm:.i o
cn
�
w m a
Q x m z
U Z L1 U O
m 6 V]
C a C W G
E� E� W
O U O G1 G1
m U ^ U
� � Z
Se
ti
W
119
F -1
m L J
O
O
Z
O
cn
:.l
J
a
LU w
c�
V]
43
0
I
cn
O
I
O
0
I
A -191 „ 0 -,zz
I
-----� „osX„os
cn
_J
cc
® r,A-,9r
.
- E
t=
Z X C12
CID
x
/ \ Y
- co
O O
co C\2
X X
C\\P CJ
O
A \
co
C t M
a
r cm
ct
� '
4 ea
VFWOs 7
c
Q '
x C..;
7 ca
I �
8Xz-� _
b
9/9X9/z I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
`�
24
-"
1
II
U
= Z
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
0�60 _�
I
I cD
„6 -,9
- -
- --
1.0
I�
1
� � I
-:rCM
\ I
eat M
„z -JI 119 -,E J -19 „t -,z
I
_ - o co CQ
E-
Y ^ _
C U
I �+ O
I -,i
® A� IA ((�l
E ^
c.5
A
w Ic:
- �
CIO
I w
-
0
F
ria
w
cn
_ J
cc
S \
O ^ o cc
® %uo -19 'i caAC o cD I
® �o
OCQ
z C 07
x
- - co
cn co
as a<
I \ cit
CV M
cc
T \
E- m
F
cc
CQ
I I I I I w
VFWI L�DQ _'
-C
X o
I c m
_
j :0V
9/9X8/z
x
'a
co
m
C
I� co
I
„6 -,9
-----
6 Gal C c\O O
C\4 M
„9 -,s „� -,5 „� -,z
co SCo
I
M
x
X Y
\o
,A -,i � co � I
\ E-
0
w
- - - - -
cFis
I
I �
j
9/9X8/z I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
��
x
11
I
I
I
I
LL'
I �p
I
„6 -,9
- -
,A -,t
C\O O
� c�
c� mi
I
c
z x C12 C!,
\ w-
x m co
O
I
\ cn
�a
1109X„09
,A -,8E
c
w m
w en
cn Q
w m
w erJ
zn Q
w m
w era
� a
8Xz-E
8/9Xo/E
8Xz-C
8/9Xo/8
8Xz-E
8/9Xo/E
8Xz-8
8/9XIDA
9XZ-�
8/9XIDA
————— — — — — —-
- - - - - - - - - -
I,I
II
II
I 1
I'I
en
c
I
II
II
II
III
II
II
II
Q III
mI
I
o
01
1
I
xI
1
O
II
�
II
II
I
rn
II
I _
R II- TT -Ir -1 -17 71 - Ir 11- R -II- TT -II- -11'Il II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
III II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II I II II II II II I II II II
;r,
c�
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_II_ ll _II_ JJ _IL 11 _ IL JI_ LL _II_ L._II_ J�
- - - - - - - - - - z
-II- r -17 71 - IT' 11- R -11- 7 -1F 11
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
;�
III II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
III II II II II II II II II II II II II II
LL -II_ ll _IL _J _IL LI _ 11 JI_ LL _II_ ll _11_ J�
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ri
1
I
II
11
_
I
III
II
rn
o
I
SI�1
d
I
1
�
mII
�II
XI
I
III
11
II
III
II
o
II
I
11
11
11
- - - - - - - - - - -
11
-I
co
11
I
11
I�
I
�I
III
o
I
m
I
11
11
11
111
11
11
11
d 111
m11
0
0 1
1
I
Q11
d,111
11
11
I
_
a-
I
�
11
II
11
I
R -II- 7 -Ir 7 -17 71 - Ir 11- R -11- 7 -11- -11
'Il II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
11 II II II II II II II II II II II II II
111 II II II II II II II II II II II II II
11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
;r,
11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
c�
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_II_ ll _II_ JJ _IL 11 _ IL JI_ LL _II_ ll _II_ J4
----------z
-II- TT -II- ll -17 71 - IT' 11- R -II- TT -II- 11
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
;�
iv
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
III II II II II II II II II II II II II II
LL _II_ ll _IL _J _IL LI _ 11 JI_ LL _II_ ll _11_ J�
-
11
---------------- - - -
I
I
II
I�
11
_
I
III
�I
rn
o
I
I
I
�
s 1�l
d 1
wl
mII
0
I
11
11
I11
II
1
I
ec
o
I
11
I
11
- - - - - - - - - - -
11
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ z
-II- TT-17 71 - IT' 11- R -11- 7 -11- -11
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
;�
III II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
�t
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
III II II II II II II II II II II II II II
LL _II_ ll _IL _J _IL LI _ 11 JI_ LL _II_ Li -II_ J�
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ri
1
I
II
I
11
_
I
III
rn
11
0
�
dl
I
I
ml
o III
�11
�11
II
1j1
II
II
II
III
j1
II
I
II
I
ca
0
I
III
I�
,A -,9
LL
cn
0
_ C Q
z
z Q c�
O
LU
~ 2: 0 o LD
Dz
O 0 0 o
z J LL.
LU
::D > C
u-)w z o
0 o v0
� > m
� 0 U U W U
OC CL 0 Q -< Q
a- LL
„4 -,ll
e�
U 0-M)
oa
-------------
0 Ml
� z
0 o FHH1
I; In x
Jm
sf7 ..a
a 1 c"
O I I S I I G�r.7 I �
Ch I Q
L_Jc _JL_
I GIJ I
C�4
cc \ 1cc
1 OD
x e
cc x cc
Lumn 9NI7IV8
\ x
cc I
- -I- - - - - - - - -I- - - -I- - - - - - - - - - -I-
m
I I '
c _
----------- - --
---- - - - - -- C�
I-
M ;Q � I
I x C CM M
I
8/9x9/Z 9NI7IV8 �' ® I
I
I
I cox e� I
c'� co eo
I
M I
c x gA rn
to
r--�-,�- -Q:i- -, cc o
i� e0 I I s \ I
d O
M
C\x �• o o cG I �y 1 9
�,J L'----J md- - z
.~ n CA lgwl .M-i C� E-
24 ^
c\x
o m co e
E— C/]
I co C
CD 0 `I
Q0
I
I
oO I
I I I to
m o I
E-_
E- U' x I
F I
I m ea s oc .zr
In _a
i\t o �� cc x�;.4
x I I
x x oeo - --
c.x r-- -1 r- -, E-
I
can x I
m co L- - -IJ__
O I I w I QQ I C
' M I CIO
e L_Jc _JL_ o _J C\2
212 \o I
co C12 a0 I rn
e K I
\ \cc I
8/9x9/� 9NIU M
ico
x o
c�IOci c Ca •� d I
zn d ` C\2\xt I
- -i- - - - - - - - -I- - - -I- - - - - - - - - - -I- - C'2 mi
I c\x
I I -
�, „M 4 -,G 1,t 0 I'm 0 -,g „� -18 „8 -19 I :n
0 0 _ C\x
-I- - - - - - - - - - -I- -
C":) I � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I c\'� I I
X cm I
I' c M A
M I c.�l 'ci w oa I
9NI7IV8 CIO Q
L \ 8/9x9/Z
cc
\. I
VD
^ M
I � CAP
r--w-,�- CDie0 I y I I z I \ I
I p I d M O
iro C x I Al n i wm co
x x 10 L--- uJ L„7-
' C\P C _
E_ x e0 U_j _a
Ec
6 C\P I -
00
C� Qj 1 1
\
ai
I
M
I
I I '
O
ca 0 I eo
I
• I
� I
I
I I -
o
„M 4 -,L j 4,0 „z/I 0 -19 J -18 „8 -19
CID
I I
c c� c
124 I
M M
d E I
9NI7IV8 w'� Q
L \ en 8/9x9/Ecc
I
I
CM
Vb
I
^ I
I CAP
to j�� I a'
r--a --Ir- m -� co 0
i- CO I y I S C I
oI 1 0 1 1 CIO o c I co
x M PC; I
c\e o o cn 1 z 1 1 9 -' m I F I
x x C I L_--_"JL____J _ E_
CQ
B ch m M- c� c�aD
C C\P
_x ^
ah sa
O m eo
E- ❑c O I
I c0 I O
0 .I
I o
o�Ooo I
a I
I
I
J
„0 -,8E
Q
J
0
0
LL.
zo
0
U
L.0
45
r�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I�I
L _ .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
„0 -IRE
F7
I
� I
I
I
I
I
— � I
I
� I
I
L I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
� I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_ I
� I
I � I
I I
I I
I I
I I
' ' I
' ' I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
� I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I �
I � I
I I I
I i I
I I I
' ' I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J _X
L 1 L
A -,0C
� r �
I �
I Ilap I
li I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I I
I � I
212
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I �
I I �
I I I
1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I i
-
I I �
I I
I I
I I
I L I L
I -
I I �
I I as
I I
I I
I
I I
I - I
I � I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I -
0
I i
I I c9
I I
I I I
I � I
I I
I I o
I I i
I I �
I
I I
I I
I
I - I
I � I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I �
I I I
I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I i
I
I I cox
I I
I I
I I -
I I �
I I '
I I as
I I
I I
I I
I I
I - I
I � I
I � I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I -
I I o
I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I
I
I I -
I z`
I i
I I
I I
I I
I �
I �
I ... I
I �
I � I
I I
I
I �
I I
I
I �
I '
I
I , '
I � I
L--1-
„ti -19
M.
O'Hearn, Mark
From: Ronnie Cousins <cousinsronnie5@gmail.com>
Sent: March 17, 2021 6:41 pm
To: O'Hearn, Mark
Cc: Melanson, Ken
Subject: Fallsview Village Variance Application
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Please email me the information on the subdivision and variance application for 439 Prince Street as soon as available.
Once again, I have concerns, and in fairness they relate to the lack of information in your letter. Your letter, dated March
5th but with a meter stamp date of March 11th, arrived in my mail box today, March 17th. And the letter states "If you
have any questions or would like a copy of the report available between 4:00 p.m. and 4:30 pm on Friday, March 19,
2021....
If this is to go before PAC on Tuesday, March 23 at 6:00 p.m., I'd appreciate the opportunity to review and understand
the proposal so I can provide my comments.
I'm all for development within the city but as an adjacent property owner, I would like my voice to be heard.
Thank you.
Ronnie Cousins
28 Rockingstone Drive
1
47
From: Allen Fraser
To: OneStoo
Subject: Fallsview Village
Date: March 18, 2021 8:47:01 PM
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it appears to be sent from a
Saint John employee, please forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-
6047. * *
I am a resident of Bridgeview Court and my only question being Where are there spaces for visitor and overflow
parking? The current street cannot accommodate on street parking.
Allen Fraser
7 Bridgeview Court
Sent from my iPad
From: Dianne THOMAS
To: OneStop
Subject: Variance application for Fallsview Village
Date: March 18, 2021 12:17:55 PM
[ External Email Alert] "Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
Firstly, I have not yet received any notification of this application. When I purchased the
property at 3 Bridgeview Court, it was on the understanding that Bridgeview was going to be a
cul-de-sac and that there would be plenty of green space. When it says " money in lieu ", who
gets the money? With eight units on the side of Rockingstone, where are they going to put the
snow ? I also have concerns regarding potential flooding as there are going to be multiple units
uphill from me. If this happens, who is liable? I do think there should be a road onto Lancaster
Ave., but would like to see it attached to Rockingstone, not Bridgeview. Will the new road be
for residents and guests only, or will it become a short - cut from Lancaster to Prince? I have
no idea where visitors are going to park and even now, with the construction crew, there are
some speeding issues. Garbage pick up could create some issues as well. As I am not a planner
or surveyor, I would like to see a clearer depiction of what the plan would look like with
several public spaces removed. If you would prefer to respond via phone , I can be reached at
214-5626
Very concerned citizen,
Dianne Thomas
ie
From: Karen Gallant
To: neSto
Subject: Fallsview Village
Date: March 18, 2021 7:22:22 PM
[ External Email Alert] "Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
Hi there, Firstly thank you for all that the team of the city are doing for us.
My home is at 500 Havelock. I am at the corner of Havelock/Dunn and Lancaster Avenue.
I'm glad to hear someone is developing this land. I grew up using the DVA.
Great news hope it all goes through. BUT: I have been arguing with various planners over the
years trying to get back a crosswalk where I live.. How many cars have to squeal their tires
because they jammed their breaks in front of my house/Olsens/?
How many more near misses of people being hit because people think it's a freeway? What
does it take for the city to at the very least put in a crosswalk with proper signage/electronics
to let Children cross the street trying to go to school? It's sad, I pay my taxes, I support, clean
the streets the sidewalks everything I can to help but Inhave no voice, no one cares unless it's
their family or friends get hurt.
If anyone would like to contact me with your plan to add crossealk street lights or at least
bring back the flashing yellow light, I'd be more than happy to discuss. I spent 9 months
working from home listening and watching that street corner.
My local city representative couldn't do anything and Greg had small kids.
Respectively
Karen Gallant
6506431
Get Outlook for Android
50
Westport Adult Residential Facility
427 Prince St. West
Saint John, NB, E2M 1R2
506-674-2069
warf@bellaliant.net
March 18, 2021
Dear Planning Advisory Committee,
co
W MAR Z 1 1011 �
Z
We want to be the first to congratulate the developer for improving a
sore spot that has been left dormant for far too long, the old DVA
Hospital which is now called, "Fallsview Village." We wish the
developer every success!
There are some very important issues that must be addressed with
the layout of the complexes in regards to location.
Enclosed is a copy of the Tentative Layout that you sent to us. I've
highlighted in black marker the location of the tentative buildings
and their closeness to the wall that is used as a property line between
the property above and the property below.
Our major issue is that the wall is very old. It is already showing
signs of decay and is cracking in the area that is of great
concern. If new structures were to be built on the "subject
property" it will undoubtedly increase stresses on the cement
wall.
In the area that is of concern, Efflorescence has settled in and there is
a moisture content. The outer crust of the cement wall is gone.
51
Perhaps without development on the subject property, the wall may
continue to last our lifetime. But we want the developer to succeed.
We are requesting that " Lot 1 and Lot 2 of Block J" be removed
from the developers plan. By removing these two buildings, it may
prolong the longevity of the old cement wall structure.
The remaining "Lots 3 and 4 of Block J and the Lots of Block I" the
bulk of the cement wall is underground.
We also would like for the developer to remove the trees that are
currently growing along the upper part of the wall. It is a known
fact that any tree root system will weaken any foundation if there is
even a hair line crack. The wall is already compromised!
Also something to note is that we have, snugged up against the
corner part of the cement wall (marked in two red dots), two
Propane tanks (city approved the location). Beside that is a back-up
generator for the care home in the event of a power outage. The
generator automatically runs at 9 pm for 15 minutes each day on a
maintenance schedule.
There is one Special Care (427 Prince) and one Community Living
Care (429 Prince) facilities just below the subject property. We must
look out for our residents and to their safety.
We realize that by removing "Lot 1 and Lot 2 of Block J" it will
mean a loss of revenue for the city of Saint John, but it's also vital
that our voice be heard. We are not speaking for ourselves but for
our residents, the vulnerable society, and to their safety.
52
I am requesting that these, my words, be brought before council,
on our behalf, on Tuesday March 23 and that the developer is
made aware of our requests. I also invite the developer to come
and look at the wall from our perspective.
Thank you for serving us, as we serve you.
Karl Rideout owner/operator
cc: emailed Deputy Mayor Shirley McAlary
cc: emailed Blake Armstrong Ward 1
53
C14
%
C:)
U
:*
a,
oo
it
l3
co L
Ti
z
f—Oo
tK
54
13
O'Hearn, Mark
From: Pat Burke <pmburke@gmail.com>
Sent: March 18, 2021 3:12 pm
To: O'Hearn, Mark
Subject: Fallsview Village Development
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spa msample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Hi Mark - as followup to our call please send me the link for the planning committee meeting.
I basically have 2 concerns:
1) How will the winter street cleaning (snow removal) be done after the road connections are
completed. When I originally moved in I was told by my real estate agent that it was her
understanding from the original developer that once a certain percentage of the complex was
completed that the road would be turned over to the city. I now understand this is not the case.
2) garbage collection - the current situation is to have our garbage to the entrance from Prince St.
This was fine but since more units have been sold the pile of garbage is becoming an eyesore and no
longer manageable, I can't imagine what it will be like once the remaining units are completed and
sold. In addition a number of the residents are in their late sixties or 70's and it is becoming a chore to
get the garbage bags to this location especially in winter. I can see trash collection becoming a big
mess.
Thanks
Pat Burke
pmburke(a)-gmail.com
11 Bridgeview Crt.
ReplyForward
1
55
O'Hearn, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Loretta Boyle <Inboyle@bellaliant.net>
March 20, 2021 8:22 pm
O'Hearn, Mark
Viva development Inc.
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Mark O'Hearn
I am a resident at 5 Bridgeview Crt. and am responding to the letter sent to residents concerning changes proposed to
development. Let me state up front I am thankful to see the progress in our neighbourhood , great for city and us as
home owners but...
My first issue is there has been no designated guest parking and even now its an issue .. with more people comes a
bigger need. I am under assumption any development of this size has to provide some guest parking?
There is the issue of garbage placement which already been problematic , winter it is worse , lak of room on Prince St. so
is city going to provide that solution ?
Removal of two cul de sacs to make a through street from Bridgeview to Cascade. It removes green space , will cause
more traffic besides the fact that when we bought here it was a cul de sac. That also causes the problem of snow
removal in winter. Where will snow be put now, am dead set against making this one big joining street.
I also saw that the units on entrance to development has changed for 4 garden homes to 5 townhouses , and loss of
more grass on that side. It will affect snow removal again and where the land is sloped at that end it causes flooding now
, ice in winter poor street conditions leading into out court and above as well. What has been considered for run off at
other end? Where is all the water going to go ? in basements?
I do hope these points are taken seriously, a lot of seniors will be in the garden homes , we want green space , sidewalks
and no extra traffic.
Will be waiting for hearing to see results.
Thank you for your consideration and fairness.
Loretta Boyle
5 Bridgeview Crt.
1
56
O'Hearn, Mark
From:
Susan MORRIS <patrickandsusan@rogers.com>
Sent:
March 20, 2021 4:53 pm
To:
O'Hearn, Mark
Subject:
439 Prince Street
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spa msample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Good day Mark
I am writing today with a concern I have about the subdivision plan I was sent for fallsview Village on Prince street
I own the property at 423 prince and there is a lager old retaining wall that is on The property that is being develmont.
It is right next to my property
As the develmont gets large on the 439 prince street I feel this wall has not been address and more building on the
property may have a impact on the safety of this old wall.
It probley should of been remove when the hospital was torn down but it was left for some reason. The wall already
had pieces coming out of it, so I feel this should be addressed before there is anymore building on that land to stress the
wall .I do not require the work to stop I would just like a engineer from the city to take a look at this and see if my
concern are valid. I in no way want to stop
Any new construction in the west side I just want to make sure everything is safe
Thanks
Susan and Patrick Morris
423 Prince Street
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
57
O'Hearn, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
bgboyle@bellaliant.net
March 21, 2021 10:13 am
O'Hearn, Mark
concerns variance application 439 Prince St
BridgeviewVariance.docx
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Good Morning.. Please find attached a letter sharing my concerns, and also others on Bridgeview Ct, with regards to the
application for variance .
Thank You
Brian Boyle
5 Bridgeview Ct
506-647-0752
PS.. O'Hearn not a common name so I am wondering if you were involved in Lancaster Minor Hockey say 25ish years ago
and perhaps played with my son Alex? .. just thought I would ask..
1
58
Dear Mr. M. O'Hearn;
I am Brian Boyle and reside at 5 Bridgeview Ct. and I am writing in reference to the letter
received from you on Mar 18 dated Mar. 5 sent by you regarding the subdivision and variance
application for Fallsview Village (formerly Rockingstone Estates). As a reside of Bridgeview Ct. I am quite
concerned with the variance plans set forth by the newer owners to change the existing plans told the
us, the residents of Bridgeview, upon purchasing our homes. I will list items of concern as follows;
--Bridgeview Ct. is occupied by seniors who purchased homes here for reason which included
being told it would remain a dead-end Cul-de-Sac so there would be no thru traffic and therefore remain
as quite a street as possible. This Cul-de-Sac setup also makes available some small amount of visitor
parking, as there is nothing in variance application for city by-laws requirements of one visitor parking
spot per unit and 1 extra for every four units. We do not want Bridgeview to be a "shortcut" from
Lancaster Ave. to Prince St. for anyone.
Secondly regarding the Cul-de-Sac variance, the application would get rid of green space set forth in
original plans between the cul-de-sacs of Bridgeview and the temporarily names Cascade Ct coming off
Lancaster Ave., green space that is important to all residents of the "Village".
Thirdly regarding Cul-de-Sac variance, the runoff of water during a rainstorm flows down Bridgeview
Ct. and will flow down Cascade Ct. and without green space to absorb some of that water and proper
drainage to go with it, there will be some wet basements.
--Separation of PID 55193106 from the larger property and selling as separate entity takes away
from the green space promised in original proposal, and they will be flooded during rain storms if there
is acceptance of application.
--We were told the covenants supplied/or told to us and later plans indicated that town houses
would not be built in the space indicated in drawing as'Block A' but would be garden homes. In this
application they want to tear up curbing and get rid of more green space at entrance of Rockingstone
Drive. This also is unacceptable to the residents as again, we were told there would be plenty of green
space. We were told these covenants would be upheld by the new owners as well. The taller town
house setup will block evening sun as well, although not as big a problem as the other items.
In Summation, there is no reason the current developers cannot stick to original plans for the
property. It was originally to be set up as upscale development for the area and new structures do not
match in structural integrity and color as was put forth in development plans. We as residents of
Bridgeview appreciate being consulted and will whole-heartedly this application is not accepted and the
original plans, as pictured on posters placed for advertising of property, remain in play leaving ours
street as a cul-de-sac which all the seniors now enjoy..
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Brian Boyle
5 Bridgeview Ct,
506-647-0752
59
O'Hearn, Mark
From: Burgess, Aimee
Sent: March 22, 2021 8:51 am
To: Kirchner, Jennifer; O'Hearn, Mark
Subject: FW: Fallsview Village Subdivision and Variance Application Comments/Concerns
From: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca>
Sent: March 22, 2021 8:34 AM
To: Burgess, Aimee <aimee.burgess@saintjohn.ca>; Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: FW: Fallsview Village Subdivision and Variance Application Comments/Concerns
Paula Hawkins
One Stop Development Shop
Customer Service Centre
Ground Floor — City Hall
(506) 658-2911
Paula. hawkins(a)saintiohn.ca
From: Eric <jayzeus@gmail.com>
Sent: March 22, 20217:48 AM
To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Re: Fallsview Village Subdivision and Variance Application Comments/Concerns
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintiohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Hello,
I would like to make a number of comments and concerns regarding the proposed subdivision and variance application
of Fallsview Village (formerly Rockingstone Estates):
1. The new road to Lancaster Avenue has the potential to introduce non-resident traffic onto private roads
travelling to/from Prince Street. What traffic control measures will be used to mitigate safety concerns of speed
and volume?
2. How does the proposed road layout with limited width and shoulder accommodate:
1. Snow plow operations during the winter?
2. Bi-directional vehicle travel?
3. Storm water management?
4. Emergency vehicle response, especially where a response vehicle needs to overtake a vehicle to access
or exit a home?
1
61
3. Would the characteristics of the proposed private road layout affect a potential turnover to the City for future
services (snow plow, maintenance, .etc.)?
4. How does the limited lot space given to residential units in the subdivision and their close proximity to each
other allow for continued snow removal by residents?
5. How are fire hydrants planned into the development?
I would also like minutes of the applicable Planning Advisory Committee meeting and to be sent any reports that could
resolve my concerns.
Thank you,
Eric Arsenault
2
62
O'Hearn, Mark
From:
Thibault, Brenda
Sent:
March 22, 2021 8:55 am
To:
O'Hearn, Mark
Subject:
FW: 439 Prince Street(File)
Hi Mark,
Can you respond to the question in the last paragraph?
Brenda
-----Original Message -----
From: OneStop <onestop @saintjohn.ca>
Sent: March 22, 2021 8:39 AM
To: Thibault, Brenda <brenda.thibault@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: FW: 439 Prince Street(File)
Paula Hawkins
One Stop Development Shop
Customer Service Centre
Ground Floor —City Hall
(506)658-2911
paula.hawkins@saintjohn.ca
-----Original Message -----
From: Paul Gibbons <gibbons.pf@gmail.com>
Sent: March 19, 2021 12:33 PM
To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: 439 Prince Street(File)
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it appears to be sent from
a Saint John employee, please forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at
649-6047. * *
Good day,
On behalf of myself(Paul)and my wife Kelly,owners of property located at 477 Lancaster Ave.
First for clarification,the letter we received from the City of Saint John was addressed to Paul and Kelly
Gibbons and Susan Rideout,this was sent to our home address at 429 Elmore Cres.
Susan Rideout does not reside there nor is she known to us.
1
63
To the subject matter,we are pleased to see developments in the area that has been previously started then
stopped.
We will ask the question of how far to the east will the two blocks of 4 housing units be?
There is a concrete retaining wall that divides the properties,this wall would have been from the DVA Hospital
which originally was on the site.
Thankyou
Paul and Kelly Gibbons
2
64
O'Hearn, Mark
From: OneStop
Sent: March 22, 2021 3:30 pm
To: O'Hearn, Mark
Subject: FW: Fallsview Village
-----Original Message -----
From: PEARMAN <ron.pearman@rogers.com>
Sent: March 22, 2021 3:26 PM
To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Fallsview Village
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it appears to be sent from
a Saint John employee, please forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at
649-6047. * *
To whom it may concern.
I would like to participate in your Tuesday, March 23, 2021 Committee's meeting via Microsoft teams.
I did send my views on the changes but did missed the fact on Block A site changes, they want to change the
four garden homes that were supposed to be built and put five Town House which are three floor above
grade. My concern is we will lose green space coming in off Prince ST as more land is needed and these new
places which are three floors will Block the sun Q Fall and through the winter when we need sun to help melt
ice and snow off Bridgeview Court road and drive ways. Yes my home is next to these new places so my
windows on that side will be void of sunshine.
I was the first home buyer and saw the Blue Prints the builder had some 11 years ago and there were four
garden homes that was going to be built there. The new developer has signage showing the same four garden
homes outside across from my home on the lawn laying down as the wind blow it down.
You can reach me at 506-639-5148 or e-mail at ron.pearman@rogers.com I live at 113ridgeview Court.
Sent from my Wad
1
65
From:
O"Hearn, Mark
To:
Rick Turner
Cc:
Burgess, Aimee
Subject:
FW: Fallsview Village Subdivision and Variance Application 439 Prince Street
Date:
March 22, 2021 1:26:11 PM
For your information.
Mark O'Hearn
Planner - Urbaniste
Growth and Community Services - Service de la croissance et de la communaute
City of Saint John - Ville de Saint John
506 649 6075
From: Ronnie Cousins <cousinsronnie5@gmail.com>
Sent: March 22, 2021 12:25 pm
To: O'Hearn, Mark <mark.ohearn@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Fallsview Village Subdivision and Variance Application 439 Prince Street
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to snamsampleAsaintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
Please forward my comments to the PAC re the above application for their Tuesday meeting.
Recommendation #1: Acceptance of money in lieu of Land for Public Purposes dedication for the
proposed subdivision: If this money in lieu relates to Parcels A, B and C, please record my
objections for the following reasons:
Parcel A: Parcel A represents a significant portion of land, which to this point has been used as guest
parking and for placement of snow from road plowing. Although it has been suggested to the
developer that guest parking be provided, this has not come to pass. The roadways in the
development are too narrow to accommodate parked vehicles. The most recent artist's rendering
for Block A on the Fallsview sign shows 4 garden homes (one storey), with a green belt to the left
and right front of the units. Similar to the existing garden homes, the driveways are shorter and
shared between 2 units. In winter, the snow from the driveways can be placed on the lawn area of
each home. One level garden homes would be more appropriate (perhaps similar in size to the the
original garden homes located in Block B).
The proposal to erect FIVE three storey townhouses requires removal of a significant portion of the
curb and landscaping at the entrance to Fallsview Village. The outer wall of the end unit adjacent to
Prince Street would be 2 meters from the property line. Snow clearing of the driveways at the
townhomes is an issue. Apart from a small green area between the curb and the stairs to the main
floor (shared by 2 units), the rest is asphalt. A very limited quantity of snow can be shovelled under
the stairs and on the small roadside green area. For lack of other alternatives, as tenants/owners of
the 10 existing townhouses, we shovel our snow across the roadway and over the sidewalk to the
storm water control area. Although it appears some effort has been made with the 5 townhouses to
show a separation between the 3 driveways (and the two end units could shovel their snow to the
side), I believe this small separation between driveways would be insufficient to hold a winter's
worth of snow from 3 driveways.
More importantly, the driveways backing on to the roadway, particularly from the first two units will
create traffic safety issues, for the property owners and traffic entering and existing Fallsview Village.
Each winter the corner at Rockingstone Drive and Prince Street is the iciest portion of the entire
development. For lack of other space, snow from the roadways (both Rockingstone Drive and Prince
Street) accumulates on the city sidewalk and green space, reducing visibility at the corner. As the
number of units increases, there will be increased traffic turning into and out of the development.
As my neighbour on Bridgeview Court has pointed out, plowing of our narrow, private roads creates
its own problems in terms of where to push the snow. For the most part, what is designated as
Parcel A has been one of the areas where the roadway snow has been deposited. The addition of
another 39 units over time will only exacerbate the issue.
Parcels B & C: On Page 23, dealing with the extension of the private street Bridgeview Court to
Lancaster Avenue, including the release of Parcels A & B.... am I correct that this should actually be
Parcels B & C? I suggest there is no logical reason to extend Bridgeview Court to Cascade Court to
access Lancaster Avenue. Those of us who live in Fallsview Village use Prince Street if we're headed
uptown, or Lancaster Avenue if we choose to travel the Reversing Falls Bridge. The entrance to
Lancaster Avenue will be on an incline, accessing Lancaster Avenue on a hill just beyond a curve. The
other issue with extending Bridgeview Court to Lancaster Avenue would be increased traffic on
PRIVATE ROADS for people looking for a shortcut. Ultimately, the homeowners will also be faced
with the cost of snowplowing and maintenance of a non -essential road, and further add to the issues
of where to place winter snow accumulations.
Parcel B was to eliminate a turn -around at the end of a cul-de-sac, and given the tentative layout,
and the positioning of Block C, I could support a reasonable relocation of Parcel B in order to
accomodate a turnaround. Parcel C should remain green space. With a turn -around at the end of
both Bridgeview Court and Cascade court, rather than a roadway, snow disposal will be less of an
issue.
RECOMMENDATION #2: Can you confirm that PID 55193023 is the parcel which intersects Block F?
Assuming this is correct, I have no issues with this recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION #3: My comments are above, under parcels B & C.
RECOMMENDATION #4: Part -Lot Variance (Page 27) "For decades, the City of Saint John approved
townhouse developments with private streets and common amenity spaces over trustee lands.
67
Unique to Saint John, trustee lands have been developed under the Companies Act, allowing the
stakeholders of these townhouse developments to own, through a non-profit association, the
trustee lands where private streets and common amenity spaces were located. These trustee
associations collect fees for the maintenance of the private streets and common amenity
spaces ........ Rockingstone Estates is the only remaining townhouse development with private streets
and trustee lands to be completed."
Under the restrictive covenants, Schedule "E". #2, "the trustee lands (Rockingstone Garden Homes
Inc.) shall be reserved and maintained for the common benefit and enjoyment of the individual
purchasers." Common amenity spaces are defined as communal space provided for the active or
passive recreation and enjoyment of all occupants of a residential development. Previous variances
approved by the PAC have included reducing the minimum dwelling unit width from 6 meters to
approximately 5.49 meters; reducing the minimum separation distance requirement between
buildings from 21 meters to approximately 16 meters; reducing the minimum front yard
requirement from 7.5 meters to approximately 5.5 meters along Prince Street; no required setback
along Lancaster Avenue, on condition that no building be closer than 3.05 meters from the edge of
the existing sidewalk and lastly to allow Bridgeview Court to continue without a pedestrian walkway
at its turnaround.
The previously granted variances have all led to reduced green space within the development, and
ceding Parcels A, B, and C to the development under the current proposal will further reduce green
space. It would be more appropriate to work with the developer, particularly related to the
development on Block A; and relocating the turnaround at the end of Bridgeview Court. All this
should be done taking into account the need for a small amount of guest parking, and a viable plan
for areas where snow can be placed from road plowing. I assure you I am not anti -development but
green space in a neighbourhood is also important.
Thank you for your consideration.
Ronnie Cousins
28 Rockingstone Drive
.:
E.
R E/
0
FF I
!10
LWr
`l�.11u[•
i
w
F
ION
4 r
"- -prppp
r iI-
dL pr s 1
Y
P.
+ � '■'ail LAL wo Poo p
1 I �- 5
SO
y �. L.-�'! R ` � i + � 1, k _ � ,i _ Jt J�i �r�� fJ /�! L _ � � # t a f t # Jt l ., all
A
C�
IF
y - }a J Y • r • I r _}
�L`I. ~ice I- +'Y- La _�_ -JFy'`*
t # f!. I+�•ti•� r �. '' 'L! F � F: �• _ i -d ,+ + F�f 'y-• �_ F'}b �Tl
` I� -'l+'. YTL 1fJ i_I fir' �+ I r �� 'Z� • f'� �RJ� JIFi'r' rYL ,h �i�_��,{�ti Jy■:,r �•:ti1 I - 11 r�S~4I t
./ 'Y ^•�- �.'i- f�{_' �, . y '{, 11' �\ 1 !' +T~L J•I - !�'' i'1` �• +y •i.lY +• ' F� +fr ,I■ J�, rrFSy.f+ r i3
r F I F !
i
i
i
t
Ffill—
t AMW f+
V
41
�x
mr f� y
411'+A di
� r
F W-W '.
L
irF
+ f
irk
1'
P.
+ y
y - 7
J•
_ F k
1
I
,4 +
lip
ti
I
r�
a
�r
66
F + i '
# _
,
+ .06.
5 a + or
r
mA
pr
hr
- # _ jkr
F
4-* r f
x IL,
f
A y h
j Y
qr
A
T JPF
kr
�• -IF, Jar ' 4
dr
" I 9w )" T 0 . �k At
. i16
IF
r !
_w� - Wi
dp
Vo it � y rt
From: Tom Barker
To: OneStoo
Subject: Variances on Bridgeview and Rockingstone
Date: March 22, 2021 2:16:06 PM
[ External Email Alert] "Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
Hi,
I looked at the proposed changes for development on our streets and there is a
significant change to the original proposal. I am not opposed to the change to open up
Bridgeview court to Lancaster but I do not agree with the addition of Plan A development on
the entrance int Rockingstone. I do not want to see the loss of any green spaces in the
original proposal.
Thank you!
Tom Barker
Dip. in BS.., MTS, MA.
70
COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-101
Report Date
March 30, 2021
Meeting Date
April 6, 2021
Service Area
Public Works &
Transportation Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT. Tender for Asphaltic Concrete Mixes
OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION
This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council.
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Amy Dobson
Michael Hugenholtz
John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the seasonal tender for the supply of asphaltic concrete mixes be awarded as
follows:
• Pre -Construction Season (start of plant until May 2, 2021) - NRB Construction Company Ltd.
• Construction Season (May 3 to November 5, 2021) — NRB Construction Company Ltd.
• Post Construction Season (November 6, 2021 to plant close) — Galbraith Construction Ltd.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Every year the City of Saint John issues a tender for the supply of asphaltic concrete mixes to secure a
source of asphalt for its various roadway maintenance initiatives. The tender closed on March 30, 2021,
with two bids meeting the City's requirements. The bid received from NRB Construction Company Ltd.
had the earliest opening date before construction season and the lowest bids for the construction
season. Galbraith Construction Ltd. has lowest bid for the after -construction season. Both bidders had
the same closing date for the after -construction season.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
This is an annual program.
REPORT
Each year the City of Saint John tenders for the establishment of a supply agreement for the provision of
asphaltic concrete mixes to guarantee a supply of asphalt. This product is used by Public Works and
71
I rm
Transportation Services for a variety of tasks, including asphalt restoration of utility cuts, roadway and
sidewalk repairs, roadway overlays, and miscellaneous maintenance projects.
There are traditionally three seasons for asphalt: the normal construction season when production is
high and product is readily available; and the pre and post -construction seasons, when production is low
and higher costs are incurred to produce the product. Bidders are asked to quote a price for the pre-
season, another price for the construction season, and a third price for the post -season. In this instance,
we recommend the earliest opening date for pre -construction season and the bidder with the lowest bid
for the remainder "seasons".
MTO Performance Graded Asphalt Cement Price Index
City of Saint John makes use of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation performance grade asphalt
cement price index in all its asphalt related tenders. In summary, an end of season adjustment is made
for each monthly change in the MTO Price Index and applied to the asphalt at time of purchase, with the
Tender Opening date being the base month. Adjustments are only made if month over month price
fluctuation is greater than 5%.
The formula is:
PA = Payment adjustment for asphaltic cement in dollars
T = Posted MTO Price Index for the month of tender opening
P = Posted MTO Price Index for the month the asphalt was purchased
Q = Quantity of asphaltic cement in tonnes
When P > 1.05 T, the Contractor receives additional payment as follows:
PA = (P—1.05T) x Q.
When P < 0.95 T, the City receives a credit as follows:
PA = (0.95T — P) x Q.
This is a way for the City to share in some of the risk of price fluctuations, leading to lower overall prices
for asphalt.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The asphaltic concrete mixes procured through this award are used in various roadway surface
maintenance programs such as: the Saint John Water cut reinstatement program, patch work, and the
overlay program; all of which align with the Council's goal of investing in strategic road improvements.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
The total estimated value of the 2021 supply contract is approximately $875,000 for all of Public Works
and Transportation Services' roadway maintenance programs (being $550,000 +/- for the patch work,
roadway and sidewalk maintenance, and the overlay programs; and $325,000 +/- for the Saint John
Water cut reinstatement program).
72
am
The purchase of asphaltic concrete mixes is a planned expenditure and funds to cover the programs are
included in the 2021 Operating Budget. The supply agreement does not require us to purchase any
minimum amounts so there is no risk to the City.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
A public tender call was issued on March 15, 2021 and closed on Tuesday, March 30, 2021 with two
compliant bids received. The results of the tender (excluding HST and haulage rates) are:
GALBRAITH
NRB CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
CONSTRUCTION LTD.
LTD.
Before
Const.
After
Before
Const.
After
Season
Season
Season
Season
Season
Season
Start
May 03
Nov. 06
Start date
May 03 —
Nov. 06 til
date til
— Nov 05
til Close
til May 2
Nov 05
Close
May 2
1
SUPERPAVE 19.5mm /TONNE
$ 70.00
$ 70.00
$ 70.00
$ 82.00
$ 64.00
$ 92.00
3 to <3 million ESALS
2
SUPERPAVE 9.5mm/TONNE
$ 73.00
$ 73.00
$ 73.00
$ 85.00
$ 67.00
$ 95.00
(.3 to <3 million ESALS)
3
SUPERPAVE 4.75mm/TONNE
$ 100.00
$ 100.00
$ 100.00
$ 105.00
$ 87.00
$ 115.00
(.3 to <3 million ESALS)
OPENING DATE
April 26th, 2021
April 201h, 2021
CLOSING DATE
November 26th, 2021
November 26th, 2021
Staff of Supply Chain Management and Public Works & Transportation Services have reviewed the
tenders and have found them to be complete and formal in every regard. Staff believe that all tenderers
have the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work. Due to the fact that the low bidder in
the "Before Season" (Galbraith Construction Ltd.) does not open their plant until after NRB Construction
does, the "Before Season" will be awarded to NRB Construction Company Ltd. With the exception
mentioned above, all items are being awarded to the lowest bidder.
The above process is in accordance with the City's Procurement Policy and Supply Chain Management
support the recommendation being put forth.
ATTACHMENTS
No attachments
73
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-102
Report Date
March 31, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT. Saint John Green Infrastructure — Funding Agreement
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Michael Baker
J. Brent McGovern
John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City enter into an Agreement with the Regional
Development Corporation for funding under the Canada — New Brunswick
Integrated Bilateral Agreement for Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program for
the project entitled "Saint John Green Infrastructure" in the form as presented to
Council at its April 6, 2021 meeting; and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the said Agreement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The overall infrastructure funding package for the Saint John Green Infrastructure
project is comprised of full street reconstructions of 79 Central Peninsula blocks
which include new watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, curb, sidewalk, street
surface and landscaping. The purpose of this report is to bring forward an
infrastructure funding agreement for the Saint John Green Infrastructure projects.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS
M&C 2021-051— Utility and General Fund — Revised 2021 Capital Programs
REPORT
In 2017 the Government of Canada announced a $33 billion, ten-year funding
agreement with the provinces / territories under four different funding streams
(public transit, green infrastructure, community cultural and recreation
infrastructure as well as infrastructure needs for rural and northern communities).
The Province of New Brunswick signed the Bilateral agreement with the Federal
Government in March 2018. The agreement provides for more than $673 Million
dollars in Federal funding over the next decade. Projects are required to be cost
74
sa
shared based on the following breakdowns Federal 40%, Provincial 33.33%, and
Municipal 26.67%.
On May 7, 2019, the Province issued a Call for Proposals under the Bilateral
agreement requesting municipalities to submit an "Expression of Interest" (i.e.,
Application) by June 28, 2019.
In response to the Provincial Call for Proposals, the City of Saint John on June 28,
2019 submitted two Expressions of Interest funding applications: one for the
Fundy Quay project and a second one for various sanitary and storm sewer
separation projects under the Green Infrastructure funding stream. The City's
Green infrastructure application included a funding request for 37 individual
projects.
The City had received notification in March of 2020 that the City's original
submission would not be receiving infrastructure renewal funding under the
Bilateral program. However, the City reapplied for Bilateral Funding in the summer
of 2020 with a similar submission to the City's original submission however the
funding timelines were adjusted to be between 2021 and 2026.
The City's Green Infrastructure submission focused on climate change, tax base
growth and infrastructure renewal in the City's Central Peninsula. The Green
Infrastructure funding will optimize the use of the City's assets, improve
environmental performance and importantly, support growth of the urban core
and priority growth areas, making these areas more sustainable and attractive to
development.
The City's submission included the reconstruction of approximately 7.8 kilometers
of Central Peninsula roads which is equates to 79 total blocks. The 37 individual
projects include new underground infrastructure, rebuilt roadways, and sidewalks
as well as street beautification. Many sections of the roads to be reconstructed
have the City's oldest wastewater infrastructure, which includes combined terra
cotta sewers dating back to 1872.
In addition to updating City infrastructure that is well beyond its useful life, the
funding will allow the vision from the City's Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan,
MoveSJ, PlanSJ and other City plans and once completed the Strategic Plan to be
incorporated into the reconstruction work over the next 6 years.
75
am
The overall total funding approval for Saint John under the New Brunswick
Integrated Bilateral Agreement for Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program is
$38,948,554 after considering the eligible HST rebate (40% Federal = $15,579,422;
33.33% Provincial = $12,981,553; 26.67% Municipal = $10,387,579). This equates
to 73.33% funding from others (Federal and Provincial commitments) for the
completion of 37 individual projects between 2021 and 2026.
The cost and associated approximate cash flow impacts for the City are detailed
below.
Approximate Project Cash Flow
Federal
Share of Costs
Provincial
Share of
City of Saint John Share of
Date
(40%)
Costs (33.33%)
Costs (26.67%)
April 1, 2021 to
$
3,175,736
$
2,646,182
$
2,117,421
March 31, 20to
April 1, 2022 to
$
2,852,902
$
2,377,181
$
1,902,173
March 31, 20to
April 1, 2023 to
$
2,397,671
$
1,997,860
$
1,598,647
March 31, 20to
April 1, 2024 to
$
2,207,236
$
1,839,179
$
1,471,675
March 31, 20to
April 1, 2025 to
$
2,455,708
$
2,046,219
$
1,637,344
March 31, 20to
April 1, 2026 to
$
2,490,169
$
2,074,932
$
1,660,320
March 31, 2027
Totals ($)
$
15,579,422
$
12,981,553
$
10,387,579
Overall Total ($)
$
38,948,554
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The report aligns with being fiscally responsible and providing valued service
delivery by identifying within the asset management plan municipal infrastructure
requirements that can leverage funding available.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
The City of Saint John will receive funding from the Federal and Provincial
Governments for expenditures to upgrade municipal infrastructure which
supports strong life cycle maintenance of our assets and upholds the long-term
financial sustainability of the City of Saint John.
76
-4-
The City's estimated cost for completing 37 projects between 2021 and 2026
would be $ 10,387,579 which would be split between the General Fund
($5,567,742) and Utility Fund ($4,819,837). The individual project budgets will be
added to the 2022 through 2026 Capital Budget Programs.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
The Canada — New Brunswick Integrated Bilateral Agreement has also been
reviewed by the General Counsel's office.
ATTACHMENTS
Agreement with the Regional Development Corporation for funding under the
Canada — New Brunswick Integrated Bilateral Agreement for Investing in Canada
Infrastructure Program for the project entitled "Saint John Green Infrastructure"
77
New A-il quveau
Brunswick
C A N A D A
March 23, 2021
His Worship Don Darling
Mayor of Saint John
P.O. Box 1971
15 Market Square
Saint John, New Brunswick E21- 41-1
SUBJECT: Project No.: 11971
Project Name: Saint John Green Infrastructure
Mr. Mayor:
I am pleased to inform you that under the Canada — New Brunswick Integrated Bilateral
Agreement for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program, your project entitled
"Saint John Green Infrastructure" has been approved. Funds allocated to the project are
from Infrastructure Canada (INFC) and the Regional Development Corporation (RDC).
You will receive a financial contribution of 73.33% ($28,560,975) of the eligible
expenditures for this project, 40% ($15,579,422) INFC and 33.33% ($12,981,553) RDC.
The maximum eligible expenditure, including your 26.67% ($10,387,579) portion, is
$38,948,554. The funds allocated to your project are subject to terms and conditions
outlined in the agreement and schedules of the enclosed Integrated Bilateral Agreement
Contribution Agreement.
Any claim for reimbursement of the contribution must be supported by copies of invoices
and proof of payment of those invoices. All payments will be done by electronic funds
transfer. Please complete the attached direct deposit service form.
Please be advised that as per the agreement, all communication activities related to the
aforementioned project are to be undertaken jointly with the Federal and Provincial
Governments.
I would appreciate if you could confirm your acceptance of the conditions by signing the
enclosed agreement and returning it and the direct deposit service form to RDC at
IBA-EBICaD-gnb.ca. Please feel free to contact Sarah Robichaud, Project Executive, at
506-453-5644 or sarah.robichaudO-gnb.ca if you have any questions or concerns.
Regional Development Corporation/Socl&6 de d6veloppement r6gional
P.O. Box/C.P. 6000 Fredericton New Brunswick/Nouveau-Brunswick E3B 51-11 Canada
www.gnb.ca
T A
79
I look forward to the successful completion of this project.
Sincerely,
Cade Libby
President
Enc. Integrated Bilateral Agreement Contribution Agreement
Direct Deposit Service Form
cc: Hon. Arlene Dunn
Jennifer Brennan, RDC
:1
LIM
Canada
Brunswick
INTEGRATED BILATERAL AGREEMENT CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made as of the date of last signature.
BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK,
as represented by the Minister of Regional Development Corporation ("New
Brunswick")
AND: CITY OF SAINT JOHN
in the Province of New Brunswick ("Recipient")
Individually referred to as a "Party" and collectively referred to as the "Parties".
WHEREAS CANADA AND NEW BRUNSWICK entered into a funding agreement, the Canada — New
Brunswick Integrated Bilateral Agreement for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program,
effective March 18, 2018, to establish the terms and conditions whereby Canada will provide
funding to New Brunswick for Projects;
AND WHEREAS Canada agrees to deliver up to a maximum of $673,217,568 to New Brunswick in
four key areas: public transit; green infrastructure; community, culture and recreation
infrastructure; and rural and northern communities infrastructure;
AND WHEREAS New Brunswick agrees to enter into Agreements with Recipients for funding, namely
the present Integrated Bilateral Agreement Contribution Agreement (Agreement);
AND WHEREAS this Agreement is made pursuant to the Canada - New Brunswick Integrated
Bilateral Agreement for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program and therefore all relevant
provisions of that Funding Agreement shall apply;
NOW THEREFORE, in accordance with the mutual covenants and agreements herein, the Parties
agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the terms and conditions whereby New
Brunswick will provide funding to the Recipient for the Project described in Schedule A.
Page 1 of 33
2. ANNEXES AND SCHEDULES
The following schedules are attached to, and form part of this Agreement:
Schedule A — Project Description
Schedule B — Eligible and Ineligible Expenditures
Schedule C —Communications Protocol
Schedule D — Detailed Claim Form
Schedule E — Progress Report Form
Schedule F —Completion Documents
- F.1 Declaration of Substantial Completion
- F.2 Project Completion Form
3. INTERPRETATION
3.1 DEFINITIONS
In addition to the terms and conditions defined in the recitals and elsewhere in this
Agreement, a capitalized term has the meaning given to it in this section.
"Agreement" means this Integrated Bilateral Agreement Contribution Agreement and all
schedules, as may be amended from time to time.
"Agreement End Date" means the date at which the final payment is made to the
Recipient which will, in any case, be no later than March 31, 2027.
"Asset" means any real or personal property or immovable or movable asset, acquired,
purchased, constructed, rehabilitated or improved, in whole or in part, with contribution
funding provided by New Brunswick under the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
"Asset Disposal Period" means the period ending five (5) years after a Project is
Substantially Completed.
"Canada" means the Government of Canada, as represented by the President of the
Queen's Privy Council for Canada, Minister of Infrastructure, Communities and
Intergovernmental Affairs.
"Communications Activity" or "Communications Activities" means, but is not limited to,
public or media events or ceremonies including key milestone events, news releases,
reports, web and social media products or postings, blogs, news conferences. Public
notices, physical and digital signs, publications, success stories and vignettes, photos,
videos, multi -media content, advertising campaigns, awareness campaigns, editorials,
multi -media products and all related communication materials under this Agreement.
"Contract" means an agreement between the Recipient and a Third Party whereby the
latter agrees to supply a product or service to a Project in return for financial
consideration.
"Effective Date" means the date of last signature of this Agreement.
Page 2 of 33
"Eligible Expenditures" means those costs incurred and paid that are eligible for
reimbursement by New Brunswick, with funds from New Brunswick and Canada, as set
out in Schedule B that have been approved as part of a Project approval.
"Fiscal Year" means the period beginning April 11 of a calendar year and ending on March
315t of the following calendar year.
"IBA Funding Agreement" means the Integrated Bilateral Agreement for the Investing in
Canada Infrastructure Program, which sets out the roles and responsibilities of Canada and
New Brunswick for the delivery of the program, including attached Schedules.
"Incurred" means an event or transaction has taken place for which an obligation to pay
exists, even if an invoice has not been received, such that the underlying evidence
indicates there is little or no discretion to avoid the obligation. The value of the obligation
is to be calculated in accordance with recognized Canadian accounting standards.
"Joint Communications" means events, news releases, and signage that relate to this
Agreement and are collaboratively developed and approved by Canada, New Brunswick
and, where applicable, the Ultimate Recipient, and are not operational in nature.
"Oversight Committee" means the committee established under the IBA Funding
Agreement consisting of representatives from Canada and New Brunswick.
"Person" means, without limitation, a person, New Brunswick, an Ultimate Recipient, a
Third Party, a corporation, or any other legal entity, and their officers, servants,
employees or agents.
"Project" or "Projects" means the project approved by New Brunswick and Canada under
the IBA Funding Agreement as described in Schedule A.
"Substantial Completion" or "Substantially Completed" means, when referring to a
Project, that the Project can be used for the purpose for which it was intended.
3.2 ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement comprises the entire agreement between the Parties. No prior document,
negotiation, provision, undertaking or agreement in relation to the subject of the Agreement
has legal effect, unless incorporated by reference into this Agreement. No representation or
warranty express, implied or otherwise, is made by New Brunswick to the Recipient except
as expressly set out in this Agreement.
3.3 DURATION OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement will be effective as of the Effective Date and will terminate on the
Agreement End Date.
Page 3 of 33
0
4. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES
4.1 COMMITMENTS BY NEW BRUNSWICK
a) New Brunswick agrees to provide funding from Canada and New Brunswick to the
Recipient in accordance with Schedule A.
b) Subject to paragraph 4.2 c) the Parties agree that New Brunswick's role is limited to
providing funding to Projects and that New Brunswick and Canada will have no
involvement in the implementation of any Project or its operation. New Brunswick
and Canada are neither a decision -maker nor an administrator of the Project.
4.2 COMMITMENTS BY THE RECIPIENT
a) The Recipient agrees to complete the Project, claim only for Eligible Expenditures in a
diligent and timely manner, and is responsible for any unapproved expenditures and
cost overruns.
b) The Recipient will be responsible for the costs of producing and installing federal and
provincial program signs. Signage costs are an Eligible Expenditure.
c) If the Project is not completed or is cancelled, the Recipient agrees to return any
previous payments to New Brunswick within thirty (30) days of written notification to
that effect.
d) The Recipient shall allow any authorized representative of New Brunswick or Canada
reasonable access to the project site to assess the Project's progress, to review all
records and accounts maintained and to carry out the evaluation process required for
the implementation of the IBA Funding Agreement. The Recipient shall provide all
records and accounts as requested by New Brunswick.
e) The Recipient agrees to bear all operating expenditures of the Project.
f) If the Project total estimated Eligible Expenditures exceeds twenty-five million dollars
($25,000,000), the Recipient will report on community employment benefits provided
to at least three (3) target groups (apprentices, Indigenous peoples, women, persons
with disabilities, veterans, youth, new Canadians, or small -medium-sized enterprises
and social enterprises).
Page 4 of 33
4.3 APPROPRIATIONS
Notwithstanding New Brunswick's obligation to make any payment under this
Agreement, this obligation does not arise if, at the time when a payment under this
Agreement becomes due, the Legislature of New Brunswick or the Parliament of Canada
has not passed an appropriation that is sufficient and constitutes lawful authority for
making the payment. New Brunswick and Canada may reduce or terminate any payment
under this Agreement in response to the reduction of appropriations or departmental
funding levels in respect of transfer payments, the program under which this Agreement
was made or otherwise, as evidenced by any appropriation act of the provincial or federal
Crown's main or supplementary estimates expenditures. New Brunswick and Canada will
not be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, exemplary or punitive damages,
regardless of the form of action, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, arising from any
such reduction or termination of funding.
5. FISCAL YEAR BUDGETING
a) The amount of contribution funding payable by New Brunswick and Canada each
Fiscal Year is set out in Schedule A.
b) If the actual amount payable by New Brunswick and Canada in respect of any Fiscal
Year is less than the estimated maximum amounts in Schedule A, the Recipient may
request that New Brunswick and Canada re -allocate the difference between the two
amounts to a subsequent Fiscal Year. Subject to Section 4 (Appropriations), New
Brunswick and Canada agrees to make reasonable efforts to accommodate the
Recipient's request. The Recipient acknowledges that requests for re -allocation of
New Brunswick and Canada's contribution funding to a Project will require
appropriation adjustments or provincial and federal Crown approvals.
c) In the event that any requested re -allocation of New Brunswick and Canada's
contribution funding to a Project is not approved, the amount of New Brunswick and
Canada's contribution payable in accordance with Schedule A may be reduced by the
amount of the requested re -allocation. If the contribution payable by New Brunswick
and Canada in accordance with Schedule A is so reduced, the Parties agree to review
the effects of such reduction on the overall implementation of the Project and to
adjust the terms and conditions of this Agreement as appropriate.
6. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
6.1 The Recipient shall not change the Project scope, timing or location without the prior
written approval of New Brunswick. The Recipient will promptly inform New Brunswick
should the project be cancelled.
Page 5 of 33
0
6.2 For the duration of the Project, the Recipient will provide New Brunswick with progress
report forms as set out in Schedule E, updated every year on May 15 and November 15.
6.3 The Recipient will be responsible for arranging the engineering design, calling of public
tenders, and awarding of the contract to the successful bidder, and overall management
of the contract. The Recipient will award and manage all contracts in accordance with
their relevant policies and procedures and, if applicable, in accordance with the
Agreement on Internal Trade and applicable international and interprovincial trade
agreements, and all other applicable laws, including the ProcurementAct, SNB 2012, c.20.
If New Brunswick determines that a Contract is awarded in a manner that is not in
compliance with the foregoing, upon notification to the Recipient, New Brunswick may
consider the expenditures associated with the Contract to be ineligible.
6.4 The Recipient agrees to ensure that the Project work shall be carried out in accordance
with all federal, provincial, or municipal (local government) rules, regulations and laws
governing such work and in accordance with the best general practices then current at
the time of construction of the project. In addition, the Project must also:
- Meet or exceed any applicable energy efficiency standards for buildings outlined
in the Pan -Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change.
Meet or exceed the requirement of the highest published accessibility standard in
a jurisdiction, in addition to applicable provincial building codes and relevant
municipal by-laws.
6.5 The Recipient consents to the participation of New Brunswick or its representative at all
public tender openings if requested by New Brunswick.
6.6 New Brunswick reserves the right to request additional information for review and
approval purposes, including assessment of risks, or to make a determination as per
Sections 8 (Environmental Assessment and Licensing) and 9 (Aboriginal Consultation).
6.7 Repair, restoration or replacement of property that was required to be removed, altered,
damaged or destroyed in the course of carrying out the Project will be performed to bring
the property to its pre-existing condition, meaning the same condition that the property
was in at the time of the removal, alteration, damage, or destruction. Except as may be
required by law, the work and materials required to bring the property to its pre-existing
condition shall not exceed the quality or quantity as originally existed. Eligible
Expenditures will not include any expenditures for enhancements or improvements.
7. ASSETS
7.1 DISPOSAL OF ASSETS
a) Unless otherwise agreed to by New Brunswick, the Recipient agrees to retain title and
ownership of an Asset for the Asset Disposal Period.
Page 6 of 33
b) If at anytime within the Asset Disposal Period, the Recipient sells, leases, or otherwise
disposes of, directly or indirectly, any Asset purchased, acquired, constructed,
rehabilitated or renovated, in whole or in part, under this Agreement, other than to
Canada, New Brunswick, a Local Government, or with New Brunswick's written
consent, the Recipient may be required to reimburse New Brunswick any funds
received from New Brunswick and Canada for the Project and will notify New
Brunswick in writing within ninety (90) business days of the transaction.
7.2 REVENUE FROM ASSETS
The Recipient acknowledges that New Brunswick and Canada's contributions to a Project
is meant to accrue to the public benefit. The Recipient will notify New Brunswick in
writing within ninety (90) business days of the end of a Fiscal Year if any Asset owned by
a for -profit Recipient is used in such a way that, in the Fiscal Year, revenues are generated
from it that exceed its operating expenses. New Brunswick and Canada may require the
Recipient to immediately pay to New Brunswick and Canada a portion of the excess in the
same portion as the total cost of the Asset. This obligation will only apply during the Asset
Disposal Period.
7.3 REPAYABLE CONTRIBUTIONS
Any funding provided to a Recipient that is a private sector body intended to allow the
business to generate profits or to increase the value of the business, will be repayable to
New Brunswick and Canada.
8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND LICENSING
8.1 The Project may be subject to, among others, New Brunswick Regulation 87-83
Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation —Clean Environment Act. That Regulation
contains a list of undertakings found in Schedule A of the Regulation, which are required
to be registered and screened to determine whether a full Environmental Impact
Assessment is warranted. If the project requires registration, a determination on the
project must be obtained from the Minister of Environment and Local Government prior
to any site work on the Project beginning.
8.2 The Project may also be subject to, among others, Canadian Environmental Assessment
Act (2012). This Act contains a list of physical activities found in Regulations Designating
Physical Activities of the Act, which are required to be a designated project for an
environmental assessment. If the Project is a designated project under the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Act (2012), a decision statement must be obtained prior to
any site work on the Project beginning.
Page 7 of 33
8.3 If the Project requires registration under New Brunswick Regulation 87-83 Environmental
Impact Assessment Regulation — Clean Environment Act and/or is deemed to be a
designated project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (2012), no site
preparation, vegetation removal or construction will occur for a Project and no funds will
be advanced to a recipient for expenditures related to construction work until New
Brunswick and Canada are satisfied that all requirements under this act, other applicable
federal environmental assessment legislation that is or may come into force during the
term of this Agreement, and other applicable agreements between Canada and Aboriginal
groups are met and continue to be met.
8.4 The Recipient will obtain all necessary licenses, permits, and approvals required for the
Project by applicable legislation, regulations and by-laws be they Federal, Provincial or
Municipal.
9. ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION
9.1 Funding for the Project is conditional upon New Brunswick and Canada being satisfied
that obligations with respect to the legal duty to consult, and if applicable, requirement
to accommodate Aboriginal groups are met.
9.2 No site preparation, vegetation removal or construction will occur for a Project and New
Brunswick and Canada has no obligation to pay any Eligible Expenditures that are capital
costs, as determined by New Brunswick and Canada, until New Brunswick and Canada are
satisfied that any legal duty to consult, and where appropriate, to accommodate
Aboriginal groups or other federal consultation requirement has been met and continues
to be met. If required, New Brunswick and Canada must be satisfied that for each Project:
a) Aboriginal groups have been notified and, if applicable, consulted;
b) If applicable, a summary of consultation or engagement activities has been
provided, including a list of Aboriginal groups consulted, concerns raised, and how
each of the concerns have been addressed, or if not addressed, an explanation as
to why not;
c) Accommodation measures, where appropriate, are being carried out by the
Recipient and these costs may be considered Eligible Expenditures; and
d) Any other information has been provided that New Brunswick and Canada may
deem appropriate.
9.3 The Recipient will comply with all obligations (i) under Applicable Law; (ii) as required by
regulatory bodies having jurisdiction overthe subject matter of the project; and (iii) under
common law, to engage in Aboriginal consultation and consider Aboriginal interests.
Page 8 of 33
10. CLAIMS AND PAYMENT
10.1 Each claim for reimbursement of Eligible Expenditures shall be submitted on forms herein
provided in Schedule D. Claims will include copies of invoices along with all supporting
documents, proof of payment of each invoice submitted for reimbursement, and such
other documents as may be requested by New Brunswick.
10.2 When any other federal or provincial assistance is given or is to be given in respect of the
Project which was not taken into consideration in the original application, the
contribution hereunder may be reduced by a corresponding amount.
10.3 New Brunswick reserves the right to withhold any or all reimbursements of Eligible
Expenditures until completion documents provided in Schedule F are completed and
returned to New Brunswick by the Recipient.
10.4 New Brunswick will not pay interest for failing to make a payment under this Agreement.
10.5 New Brunswick will not pay capital costs for a Project until the requirements under
Section 8 (Environmental Assessment and Licensing) and Section 9 (Aboriginal
Consultation), if applicable, are, in New Brunswick's opinion, satisfied to the extent
possible at the date the claim is submitted to New Brunswick.
10.6 No claim for reimbursement shall be paid by New Brunswick unless it is received on or
before January 311 of the year following the Fiscal Year in which the Eligible Expenditure
is incurred and in all circumstances, no later than March 31, 2027.
11. REPORTING
The Recipient will provide to New Brunswick at minimum on a semi-annual basis a Project
progress report in a format acceptable to New Brunswick and in accordance with
Schedule E (Progress Report Form); and will submit, in a format acceptable to New
Brunswick, a final project report in accordance with Schedule F (Completion Documents).
12. RETENTION OF CONTRIBUTION
New Brunswick will retain a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of its contribution funding
for this Project under this Agreement. The amount retained by New Brunswick will be
released by New Brunswick when:
a) The Recipient fulfils all of its obligations for the Project under this Agreement;
b) The Recipient submits an attestation, from a delegated official and in a format
acceptable to New Brunswick, that the Project has been Substantially Completed and
contribution funding under this Agreement has been spent on Eligible Expenditures;
Page 9 of 33
a
and
c) The Parties jointly carry out a final reconciliation of all claims and payments in respect
of this Agreement and make any required adjustments.
13. AUDITS
The Recipient agrees to allow New Brunswick reasonable and timely access to all its
documentation, records and accounts and those of their respective agents or third Parties
related to the Project, and all other relevant information and documentation requested
by New Brunswick, or their designated representatives, for the purposes of audit,
evaluation, and ensuring compliance with this Agreement.
14. RECORD KEEPING
The Recipient will keep proper and accurate financial accounts and records, including but
not limited to its contracts, invoices, statements, receipts, and vouchers in respect of the
Project, for at least seven (7) years after the IBA Funding Agreement End Date and will
provide New Brunswick and their designated representatives with reasonable and timely
access to documentation for the purposes of audit, evaluation, and ensuring compliance
with this Agreement.
15. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
a) The Parties will keep each other informed of any issue that could be contentious.
b) If a contentious issue arises, the Oversight Committee will examine it and will, in good
faith, attempt to resolve the contentious issue as soon as possible, and, in any event,
within thirty (30) business days from the receipt of notice of such contentious issue.
Where the Oversight Committee cannot agree on a resolution, the matter will be
referred to the Parties for resolution. The Parties will provide a decision within ninety
(90) business days from the date of referral to the Parties.
c) Where the Parties cannot agree on a resolution, the Parties may explore any
alternative dispute resolution mechanisms available to them to resolve the
contentious issue.
d) Any payments related to any contentious issue raised by either Party may be
suspended by New Brunswick together with the obligations related to such issue,
pending resolution.
e) The Parties agree that nothing in this section will affect, alter or modify the rights of
New Brunswick to terminate this Agreement.
Page 10 of 33
91
16. DEFAULT
16.1 EVENTS OF DEFAULT
The following event constitutes the "Event of Default" under this Agreement:
a) The Recipient has not complied with one ore more of the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
16.2 DECLARATION OF DEFAULT
New Brunswick may declare default if:
a) The Event of Default occurs;
b) New Brunswick gives notice to the Recipient of the event, which in New Brunswick's
opinion constitutes an Event of Default; and
c) The Recipient has failed, within thirty (30) business days of receipt of the notice, either
to remedy the Event of Default or to notify and demonstrate to the satisfaction of
New Brunswick that it has taken such steps as are necessary to remedy the Event of
Default.
16.3 REMEDIES ON DEFAULT
In the event that New Brunswick declares default, New Brunswick may exercise one or
more of the following remedies, without limiting any remedy available to it by law:
a) Suspend or terminate any obligation by New Brunswick to contribute or to continue
to contribute funding to the Project, including any obligation to pay an amount owing
prior to the date of such suspension or termination;
b) Require the Recipient to reimburse New Brunswick all or part of the contribution paid
by New Brunswick to the Recipient; or
c) Terminate this Agreement.
17. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
In no event will New Brunswick or Canada, its officers, servants, employees or agents be
held liable for any damages in contract, tort (including negligence) or otherwise, for:
a) any injury to any Person, including, but not limited to, death, economic loss or
infringement of rights;
Page 11 of 33
92
b) any damage to or loss or destruction of property of any Person; or
c) any obligation of any Person, including, but not limited to, any obligation arising from
a loan, capital lease or other long-term obligation
in relation to this Agreement or the Project.
18. INDEMNIFICATION
The Recipient will at all times indemnify and save harmless New Brunswick and Canada,
its officers, servants, employees, or agents, from and against all actions, claims, demands,
losses, costs, damages, suits or other proceedings, whether in contract, tort (including
negligence) or otherwise, by whomsoever brought or prosecuted in any manner based
upon or occasioned by:
a) any injury to any Person, including, but not limited to, death, economic loss or any
infringement of rights;
b) any damage to or loss or destruction of property of any Person; or
c) any obligation of any Person, including, but not limited to, any obligation arising from
a loan, capital lease or other long-term obligation
in relation to this Agreement or the Project, except to the extent to which such actions,
by claims, demands, losses, costs, damages, suits or other proceedings are caused by the
negligence or breach of this Agreement by an officer, servant, employee or agent of New
Brunswick or Canada in the performance or his or her duties.
19. COMMUNICATIONS
19.1 No public announcement of an activity related to the Project shall be made by the
Recipient without the prior written consent of New Brunswick.
19.2 The Parties shall comply with the communications guideline set out in Schedule C referred
to as the Communications Protocol.
20. GENERAL
20.1 SURVIVAL
Any provision in this Agreement which imposes an obligation after the termination or
expiration of this Agreement, shall survive the termination or expiration of this
Agreement.
Page 12 of 33
93
20.2 NO AGENCY, PARTNERSHIP, JOINT VENTURE, ETC.
a) No provision of this Agreement and no action by the Parties will establish or be
deemed to establish a partnership, joint venture, principal -agent relationship or
employer -employee relationship in any way or for any purpose whatsoever between
New Brunswick and the Recipient or between New Brunswick and any third party.
b) The Recipient will not represent itself, including in any agreement with a third party,
as a partner, employee or agent of New Brunswick.
20.3 ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES
All accounting terms will have the meanings assigned to them, all calculations will be
made and all financial data to be submitted will be prepared, in accordance with the
public sector accounting standards in effect in Canada.
20.4 COUNTERPART SIGNATURE
This Agreement may be signed in counterpart, and the signed copies will, when attached,
constitute an original Agreement.
20.5 SEVERABILITY
If for any reason a provision of this Agreement that is not a fundamental term of this
Agreement between the Parties is found to be or becomes invalid or unenforceable, in
whole or in part, and if both Parties agree, it will be deemed to be severable and will be
deleted from this Agreement, but all the other terms and conditions of this Agreement
will continue to be valid and enforceable.
20.6 AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may be amended from time to time on written agreement of the Parties.
20.7 WAIVER
A Party may waive any of its rights under this Agreement only in writing. Any tolerance
or indulgence demonstrated by the Party will not constitute a waiver.
Page 13 of 33
0
20.8 FORCE MAJEURE
If any of the obligations within this Agreement is prevented, restricted or interfered with
by reason of earthquake, fire, flood or other casualty or due to strikes, riot, storms,
explosions, acts of God, war, terrorism, or a similar occurrence or condition beyond the
reasonable control of the Parties, the Party so affected shall, upon giving prompt notice
to the other Parties, be excused from such performance during such prevention,
restriction or interference, and any failure or delay resulting therefrom shall not be
considered a breach of this Agreement.
21. OTHER
21.1 New Brunswick and the Recipient acknowledge that the financial contribution by Canada
underthis Agreement and, in consideration of that contribution and notwithstanding that
Canada is not a signatory to this Agreement, the Parties agree that the terms of this
Agreement applicable to or with respect to Canada, are for her sole benefit.
21.2 Nothing in this Agreement is to be construed as authorizing one Party to contract for or
to incur any obligation on behalf of the other or to act as an agent for the other. Nothing
in this Agreement is to be construed as authorizing the Recipient or any third Party to
contract for or to incur any obligation on behalf of either Party or to act as an agent for
either Party.
21.3 If there is a conflict between this Agreement and the IBA Funding Agreement, the
provisions of the IBA Funding Agreement will apply.
21.4 The Recipient will ensure that no current or former public servant or public office holder
to whom any post -employment, ethics and conflict of interest legislation, guidelines,
codes or policies of Canada or New Brunswick applies will derive direct benefit from the
Project's funding, unless the provision or receipt of such benefits is in compliance with
such legislation, guidelines, policies or codes.
21.5 This Agreement is subject to the provincial Right to Information and Protection of Privacy
Act as well as the federal Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act.
21.6 In the event of a breach of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement by the
Recipient, no further contributions shall be made by New Brunswick and all previous
payments shall be returned to New Brunswick within thirty (30) days of written
notification to that effect.
22. NOTICE
Any notice provided under this Agreement may be delivered in person, sent by email,
facsimile or mail, addressed to:
Page 14 of 33
95
For New Brunswick:
Regional Development Corporation
P.O. Box 6000
Fredericton, NB E313 51-11
Phone: (506) 453-2277
Fax: (506) 453-7988
Email: IBA-EBI@gnb.ca
or such other address, email or facsimile number, or addressed to such other person as New
Brunswick may, from time to time, designated in writing to the Recipient; and
for the Recipient:
City of Saint John
P.O. Box 1971
15 Market Square
Saint John, NB E21- 41
Phone: (506) 648-3713
Email: cityclerk@saintjohn.ca
Or such other address, email or facsimile number, or addressed to such other person as the
Recipient may, from time to time, designate in writing to New Brunswick.
Such notice will be deemed to have been received, if sent by mail or email, when receipt is
acknowledged by the other Party; by facsimile, when transmitted and receipt is confirmed;
and in person, when delivered.
23. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
The Recipient will comply with all applicable laws, regulations, all requirements of
regulatory bodies having jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Project and any
common law obligations to consult with, and where appropriate, will engage in Aboriginal
consultation and consider Aboriginal interests.
24. GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement is governed by the laws applicable in the Province of New Brunswick.
25. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
This Agreement is binding upon the Parties and their respective successors and assigns.
Page 15 of 33
0
SIGNATURES
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
SOCIETE DE DEVELOPPEMENT REGIONAL
Original signed by:
11a, �
Cabe Libby
President
CITY OF SAINT JOHN
- ZLL� -3(� 2,0-z-(
Date
I/We hereby confirm that I/we have the authority to bind the CITY OF SAINT JOHN
Original signed by:
Don Darling
Mayor
Jonathan Taylor
Common Clerk
Date
Date
Page 16 of 33
97
SCHEDULE A — PROJECT DESCRIPTION
RECIPIENT: City of Saint John PROJECT NUMBER: 11971
PROJECT TITLE: Saint John Green Infrastructure
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project consists of upgrading and separating a portion of Uptown Saint John's aging
combined sewer system into dedicated sanitary and storm water systems, which have a high risk
of failure. The scope of the project includes: Excavation and rehabilitation of the water and sewer
pipe systems that are in sections throughout the Uptown peninsula; Design and construction of
additional wastewater infrastructure to direct raw sewage discharges; Analyzing and improving
inflow, infiltration, and cross connections in select areas to increase capacity to manage and treat
wastewater. and restoration of 7.5 kilometers of the affected roadway, including curb, sidewalk,
and landscaping medians. This project will provide residents with safe and reliable potable water
and prepare the community for future growth and development.
ELIGIBLE PROJECT EXPENDITURES:
The Canada — New Brunswick Integrated Bilateral Agreement for the Investing in Canada
Infrastructure Program shall contribute a financial incentive of 73.33% of the aforementioned
eligible project expenditures of $38,948,554 being an amount not exceeding $28,560,975. Subject
to this Agreement, the Recipient shall be responsible for contributing at least 26.67% of the Eligible
Expenditures of the project implemented under this Agreement.
Expenditure overruns will not be considered as Eligible Expenditures and will be the responsibility
of the Recipient. No contribution shall be made under the Canada — New Brunswick Integrated
Bilateral Agreement for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program with respect to any
expenditure incurred other than the eligible project expenditures.
Page 17 of 33
FINANCING OF PROJECT:
Funding
Source
Fiscal Year
2021-2022
Fiscal Year
2022-2023
Fiscal Year
2023-2024
Fiscal Year
2024-2025
Fiscal Year
2025-2026
Fiscal Year
2026-2027
Totals
Funding
Percentage
Canada
$3,175,736
$2,852,902
$2,397,671
$2,207,236
$2,455,708
$2,490,169
$15,579,422
40%
New
Brunswick
$2,646,182
$2,377,181
$1,997,860
$1,839,179
$2,046,219
$2,074,932
$12,981,553
33.33%
Recipient
$2,117,421
$1,902,173
$1,598,647
$1,471,675
$1,637,344
$1,660,320
$10,387,579
26.67%
Total
$7,939,339
$7,132,256
$5,994,179
$5,518,090
$6,139,271
$6,225,421
$38,948,554
100.00OA
New Brunswick will reimburse 73.33% (40% Canada and 33.33% New Brunswick) of eligible costs on
each claim submitted for reimbursement up to the total approved contributions.
FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND/OR IMPACT ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS: No.
FEDERAL INDIGENOUS CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS: No.
ADDITIONAL CONDITION:
The Recipient will demonstrate to New Brunswick's satisfaction that all funding to complete the
Project has been secured, prior to New Brunswick paying eligible costs.
The Proiect may not proceed with construction until Canada and New Brunswick can confirm that
the obligations for environmental assessment, Aboriginal consultation and every additional
condition have been met.
FORCASTED CONSTRUCTION START DATE (YYYY/MM/DD): 2021/04/01
FORCASTED CONSTRUCTION END DATE (YYYY/MM/DD): 2026/10/31
PROJECT CATEGORY OUTCOMES/BENEFITS that will need to be quantified:
Green Infrastructure - Environmental Quality
• Increased capacity to treat and/or manage wastewater and/or stormwater
• Increased access to potable water
• Improved and more reliable road, air and marine infrastructure
Page 18 of 33
SCHEDULE B — ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES
ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES
Eligible Expenditures will include the following:
a) All costs considered by New Brunswick and Canada to be direct and necessary for the
successful implementation of an eligible Project, excluding those explicitly identified in the
Ineligible Expenditures section below, and which may include capital costs, design and
planning, and costs related to meeting specific program requirements, including completing
climate lens assessments and creating community employment benefit plans; and
b) The incremental costs of employees of a Recipient may be included as Eligible Expenditures
for a Project under the following conditions:
- The Recipient is able to demonstrate that it is not economically feasible to tender a
Contract; and
- The arrangement is approved in advance and in writing by New Brunswick and Canada.
INELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES
Ineligible expenditures will include the following:
a) Costs incurred before Project approval date of 2021/02/05 and any and all expenditures
related to contracts signed priorto Project approval, except for expenditures associated with
completing climate lens assessments;
b) Costs incurred for cancelled Projects;
c) Costs of relocating entire communities;
d) Land acquisition;
e) Leasing and, buildings and other facilities; leasing equipment other than equipment directly
related to the construction of the Project; real estate fees and related costs;
f) Any overhead costs, including salaries and other employment benefits of any employees of
the Recipient, any direct or indirect operating or administrative costs of Recipients, and more
specifically any costs related to planning, engineering, architecture, supervision,
management and other activities normally carried out by the Recipient's staff, except in
accordance with Section b) of Eligible Expenditures;
g) Financing charges, legal fees, and loan interest payments, including those related to
easements (e.g. surveys);
Page 19 of 33
100
h) Any goods and services costs which are received through donations or in kind;
i) Provincial sales tax, goods and services tax, or harmonized sales tax for which the Recipient
is eligible for a rebate, and any other costs eligible for rebates;
j) Costs associated with operating expenses and regularly scheduled maintenance work;
k) Costs related to furnishing and non -fixed assets which are not essential for the operation of
the Asset/Project; and
1) All capital costs, including site preparation and construction costs, until New Brunswick and
Canada has confirmed that environmental assessment and Aboriginal consultation
obligations as required under Section 8 (Environmental Assessment and Licensing) and 9
(Aboriginal Consultation) have been met and continue to be met.
Page 20 of 33
101
SCHEDULE C—COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL
1. Purpose
a) This communications protocol outlines the roles and responsibilities of each of the
Parties to this Agreement, as well as those of Canada, with respect to communication
activities related to the Project.
b) This communications protocol will guide the planning, development and
implementation of all Communications Activities to ensure clear, consistent and
coordinated communications to the Canadian public.
c) The provisions of this communications protocol apply to all Communications Activities
related to the Agreement and any Projects funded under the Agreement. Such
Communications Activities may include, but are not limited to, public or media events,
news releases, reports, wen and social media products or postings, blogs, project signs,
digital signs, publications, success stories and vignettes, photo compilations, videos,
advertising campaigns, awareness campaigns, editorials, and multi -media products.
2. Guiding Principles
a) The Parties recognize the importance of managing the delivery of coherent
Communications Activities based on the principle of transparent and open discussion
and collaboration.
b) Communications Activities undertaken in accordance with this communications protocol
should ensure that Canadians are informed of infrastructure investments made to help
improve their quality of life and that they receive consistent information about funded
Projects and their benefits.
c) The Communications Activities undertaken jointly by Canada, New Brunswick and the
Recipient shall recognize the funding of all Parties to the Project.
3. Governance
a) The Oversight Committee shall be responsible for monitoring the implementation of this
communications protocol.
b) New Brunswick is responsible for communication the requirements and responsibilities
outlined in this communications protocol to the Recipient and for ensuring their
compliance.
c) New Brunswick shall communicate to the Recipient any deficiencies and/or corrective
actions identified by Canada or by the Oversight Committee.
4. Joint Communications
a) Canada, New Brunswick and the Recipient will have Joint Communications about the
funding of the Project.
Page 21 of 33
102
b) Joint Communications under the Agreement should not occur without the prior
knowledge and agreement of all Parties, where applicable.
c) All Joint Communications material will be approved by Canada and New Brunswick prior
to release, and will recognize the funding of all Parties.
d) Each of the Parties may request Joint Communications to communicate to Canadians
about the progress or completion of the Project. The requestor will provide at least 15
business days' notice to the other Parties. If the communications activity is an event, it
will take place at a mutually agreed date and location.
e) The requestor of the Joint Communications will provide an equal opportunity for the
other Parties to participate and choose their own designated representative (in the case
of an event).
f) New Brunswick or the Recipient will be responsible for providing onsite communications
and logistics support. Any related costs are eligible for cost -sharing in accordance with
the formula outlined in the funding agreement.
g) Canada and New Brunswick have an obligation to communicate in English and French.
Joint Communications products must be bilingual and include the Canada and New
Brunswick wordmark and other Parties' logos. Canada and New Brunswick will provide
the translation and final approval on products.
h) The conduct of all Joint Communications will follow the Table of Precedence for Canada.
S. Individual Communications
a) Notwithstanding Section 4 of this communications protocol (Joint Communications),
Canada and New Brunswick retain the right to meet its obligations to communicate
information to Canadians about the Agreement and the use of funds through their own
Communications Activities.
b) Canada, New Brunswick and the Recipient may each include general program messaging
and examples of projects funded through the Agreement in their own Communications
Activities. The authoring Party will not unreasonably restrict the use of such products or
messaging by the other Parties, and if web or social media based, from linking to it.
c) Canada, New Brunswick or the Recipient may issue digital communications to
communicate progress of the Project.
d) Where a web site or web page is created to promote or communicate progress on a
funded Project, it must recognize federal and provincial funding through the use of a
digital sign orthrough the use ofthe Canada wordmark and the following wordings, "This
project is funded in part by the Government of Canada". The Canada wordmark or
digital sign must link to Infrastructure Canada's website, at www.infrastructure.ea.ca.
Canada will provide and publish guidelines for how this recognition is to appear. The
Recipient will also recognize the funding of New Brunswick in a similar manner.
e) The Recipient will be required to send a minimum of one photograph to each of the
Parties of the construction in progress, or of the completed project, for use in social
media and other digital individual Communications Activities. Sending the photos will
constitute permission to use and transfer of copyright. Photographs are to be sent to
INFC.Photos@canada.ca along with project name and location.
Page 22 of 33
103
6. Operational Communications
a) The Recipient is solely responsible for operational communications with respect to
Projects, including but not limited to: calls for tender, or construction and public safety
notices. Operational communications as described above are not subject to the federal
official language policy.
b) Canada does not need to be informed on operational communications. However, such
products should include, where appropriate, the following statement, "This project is
funded in part by the Government of Canada". As appropriate, operational
communications will also recognize the funding of New Brunswick is a similar manner.
7. Media Relations
a) Canada and New Brunswick will share information promptly with the other Party should
significant media inquiries be received or emerging media or stakeholder issues arise to
a Project or the overall fund.
8. Signage
a) Canada, New Brunswick or the Recipient may request a sign recognizing their funding
contribution to the Project.
b) Where a physical sign is to be installed, unless otherwise agreed upon by Canada, it will be
the Recipient that will produce and install a joint physical sign that recognizes funding of
each Party at each Project site in accordance with current federal signage guidelines.
c) The joint sign design, content and installation guidelines will be provided by Canada.
d) The recognition of funding contributions of each Party and the Recipient will be of equal
prominence and visibility.
e) Digital signage may also be used in addition or in place of a physical sign in cases where a
physical sign would not be appropriate due to project type, scope, location or duration.
f) Where the Recipient decides to install a permanent plaque or other suitable marker with
respect to a Project, it must recognize the federal and provincial contributions and be
approved by Canada and New Brunswick.
g) The Recipient agrees to inform New Brunswick of sign installations through the Project
progress reports referenced in Section 11(Reporting) of this Agreement.
h) Where a physical sign is being installed, signage should be installed at each Project site one
(1) month prior to the start of construction, be visible for the duration of that Project, and
remain in place until one (1) month after construction is completed and the infrastructure is
fully operational or opened for public use.
i) Signage should be installed in a prominent and visible location that takes into consideration
pedestrian and traffic safety and visibility.
Page 23 of 33
104
9. Advertising Campaigns
a) Recognizing that advertising can be an effective means of communicating with the public,
Canada and New Brunswick may, at their own cost, organize an advertising or public
information campaign related to the Agreement or eligible Project. However, such a
campaign will respect the provisions of this Agreement. In the event of such a campaign,
the sponsoring Party or Recipient will inform the other Parties or of its intention no less than
twenty-one (21) working days prior to the campaign launch.
Page 24 of 33
105
SCHEDULE D - DETAILED CLAIM FORM
Page 25 of 33
106
_ Regional Development Corporation
Brunswick -A'A'NouveauP.O. Box 6000, Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 5H1
IBA — Green Infrastructure
Claim No:
Final Claim:
List all eligible project costs with invoices and cheque numbers on this form. Include a copy of each invoice and proof of
payment. Failure to record and support each cost will cause a delay in processing.
Project Number: 11971
Project Name: City of Saint John -Infrastructure
Description of costs
Name of Supptier
+EhecNo. .
Cheque Amount
Invoice
Total
HST
Total
Eligible & supported costs (total -HST refund)
% of HST refunded by Canada Revenue Aaencv
71.43% - municipality 0 22.33% - university 50% - non-profit organization 100% - other 0% - none
The undersigned hereby certifies that:
a. the invoices above represent eligible project costs that have been paid in full and the work completed; and
b. no other public financial assistance has been received or is to be received for the part of the project against which this
reimbursement is claimed.
Signature Print Name Date
Title Company Telephone
Eligible & supported costs II
Less: previous advance
Add: current advance
CITYSJ
Vendor
I� —
122320.14.14
I� —
122320.14.14
Payment request
For office use only
Claim Reviewer
Project Officer
Payment Authority
9192
account
Page 26 of 33
Date
Date
Claim Auditor
107
SCHEDULE E — PROGRESS REPORT
To be completed by the Ultimate Recipient
The Ultimate Recipient submits a Progress Report to the Regional Development Corporation every year on May 15
and November 15 for the duration of the project. This form should be signed by an authorized official designated in
the Integrated Bilateral Agreement Contribution Agreement, with the contact information identified at the bottom of
this form.
Project Details
Name of Ultimate Recipient: Click or tap here to enter text.
Project Number:Click or tap Project Title: Click or tap here to enter text.
here to enter text.
Reporting Period: Click or tap to enter a date.
Project Schedule
Has the project been substantially completed? Yes ❑ No ❑
% of Project Complete: Choose an item.
Actual Construction Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Actual Construction End Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
If Project has not started please select the forecasted construction dates:
Start date: Click or tap to enter a date.
End date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Project Finances
Total Eligible Costs: Click or tap here to enter text.
Updated Estimated Total Eligible Costs: Click or tap here to enter text.
Please provide an estimate of when the total program contribution will be claimed by federal fiscal year (April 1st to
March 31 st
Fiscal`Year
Amount
2020-2021
Click or tap here to enter text.
2021-2022
Click or tap
here to enter text.
2022-2023
Click or tap
here to enter text.
2023-2024
Click or tap
here to enter text.
2024-2025
Click or tap
here to enter text.
2025-2026
Click or tap
here to enter text.
2026-2027
Click or tap
here to enter text.
2027-2028
Click or tap
here to enter text.
Total
Click or tap
here to enter text.
Page 27 of 33
Communications
Has project signage been installed? Yes ❑ No ❑
Summary of communication activities undertaken during the reporting period. Click or tap here to enter text.
Outcomes and Indicators
Select Investment Stream: Choose an item.
Choose Sub Stream Green Infrastructure projects only): Choose an item.
Are the expected results outlined in the Contribution Agreement still accurate? Choose an item.
If "No", please provide detailed explanation. Click or tap here to enter text.
Climate Lens
Have you completed a GHG Mitigation assessment for your project? Yes ❑ No ❑
Have you completed a Climate Change Resilience assessment for your project? Yes ❑ No ❑
Risk and Mitigation Strategies
Update the factors that have a reasonable likelihood of affecting the project.
Project Complexity: Choose an item.
Please explain if there is a risk identified: Click or tap here to enter text.
Project Readiness: Choose an item.
Please explain if there is a risk identified: Click or tap here to enter text.
Public Sensitivity: Choose an item.
Please explain if there is a risk identified: Click or tap here to enter text.
Ultimate Recipient Risk: Choose an item.
Please explain if there is a risk identified:
Contact Information
Prepared by: Click or tap here to enter text.
Title: Click or tap here to enter text.
Telephone: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: Click or tap here to enter text.
Date:Click or tap to enter a date.
Page 28 of 33
109
SCHEDULE (F.1)
DECLARATION OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION
Pursuant to the Agreement entered into between the Province, represented by the Minister responsible for
the Regional Development Corporation, and City of Saint John, I , a licensed
professional or an acceptable equivalent approved by the Province including the President or legal head of
the Ultimate Recipient, do solemnly declare as follows:
1. That I am the
knowledge of the matters set forth in this affidavit;
(title, organization), and as such have
2. That the work identified as Project #11971 as described in Schedule A in the above- mentioned
Agreement has been substantially completed on the day of 20.
3. That the work:
a. Was carried out by
of (start date) and
b. Was supervised and inspected by qualified staff;
(the prime contractor). Between the dates
(completion date);
c. Conforms with the plans, specifications and other documentation for the work; and
d. Conforms with applicable environmental legislation, and appropriate mitigation measures
have been implemented.
Declared at
(date).
Signature
. (City), in the Province of New Brunswick this day of
Page 29 of 33
110
SCHEDULE (F.2) . PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT
To be completed by the Ultimate Recipient
Ultimate Recipients are required to submit a PCR directly to The Regional Development Corporation no later than 90
days after the date of substantial completion of their project. This form must be signed by an Authorized Official of the
Ultimate Recipient with the contact information identified at the end of this form.
Please send completed form via email to IBA-EBI@gnb.ca
Ultimate Recipient Identification
Name of Ultimate Recipient: Community:
Project Number: Project Title:
Section A: Final information on the project status, expenditures, funding status and communication activities
A.1 Project Status
Scheduled project start date (YYYY/MM/DD)
Actual project start date (YYYY/MM/DD)
Scheduled date of substantial completion (YYYY/MM/DD) Date of actual substantial completion (YYYY/MM/DD)
Summary of completed project:
Attach along with this form, a maximum of three high resolution digital photographs to substantiate the project work completed
Page 30 of 33
111
A.2 Expenditure and Funding Status
Total amount of expenditures incurred by the Ultimate Recipient from actual project start date to substantial completion
Provide total spending on the project from project start date to the substantial completion date. Some projects may achieve
substantial completion before the program end. Include a breakdown of expenditures for eligible and ineligible costs
according to the following cost categories.
Capital Costs
Amount ($)
Engineering & Environmental Planning & Reviews
Subtotal Eligible Costs
Ineligible Costs (Specify):
Total Costs (Eligible and Ineligible)
A.3 Communications
Summary of final communication activities undertaken or upcoming
Provide details, include dates and links, of any related public announcements and press releases (complete or upcoming).
Ensure the Ultimate Recipient informs the Regional Development Corporation about all communication activities.
Page 31 of 33
112
Section B: Information on the Project Outcomes
Project Outcomes
Select all the project outcomes that apply to the project. The selections below should match the information in the application
form.
Green Infrastructure Outcomes
Increased capacity to manage more renewable energy
Increased access to clean energy transportation
Increased energy efficiency of buildings
Increased generation of clean energy
Increased structural capacity and/or increased natural capacity to adapt to climate change impacts, natural
disasters and/or extreme weather events.
Increased capacity to treat and/or manage wastewater and storm water
Increased access to potable water
Increased capacity to reduce and/or remediate soil and/or air pollutants.
Community, Culture and Recreation Outcomes
Improved access to and/or increased quality of cultural, recreational and/or community infrastructure for
Canadians, including Indigenous peoples and vulnerable populations.
Rural & Northern Outcomes
Improved food security
Improved and/or more reliable road, air and /or marine infrastructure
Improved broadband connectivity
More efficient and/or reliable energy
Improved education and/or health facilities
(specific to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Calls to Action
Public Transit Outcomes
Improved capacity of public transit infrastructure
Improved quality and/or safety of existing or future transit systems
Improved access to a public transit system
Page 32 of 33
113
Section B2 Project Outeomes
Confirm that the project outcomes described in the original application were achieved and how they were achieved. Based on
the information in the application describe any changes to the identified project outcomes. Indicate and explain if specific
outcomes were not achieved or if additional outcomes not originally identified.
Section C: Other
Substantial Completion
Attach a copy of the Solemn Declaration of Substantial Completion signed by an authorized representative of the Ultimate
Has the Solemn Declaration of Substantial Completion been completed?
Overview of Issues Identified during project
Provide an overview of the projects progress from start to substantial completion and identify any issues faced by the project.
Provide details, as appropriate, regarding measures taken to minimize the impact of delays in completion date, changes in
project scope and any other impacts on project implementation.
Seetien D: Attestation/Signature
I, the undersigned, hereby understand and agree with the following:
1. All the documentation submitted through this application process is subject to the provisions of the Access to
Information Act. Any financial, commercial, scientific or technical information provided in this documentation will be
treated in accordance with the Access to Information Act. Information provided may be disclosed for the purpose of
program review, statistical purposes and program or performance reporting.
2. The information provided in this close-out report is to the recipient's best knowledge and belief, accurate and
complete.
Prepared by (Name of Authorized I Title:
Official)
Telephone:
Email:
Page 33 of 33
Name of Ultimate Recipient:
Signature
Date:
YYYY/MM/DD
114
115
1 r
E.
oV
9a
o
r.
o �
o
0 N
w b
a�
•d
°
y
00" a0i Cc*c
y .Vr
N
E�
a.t°
q 0
`o �
CA
E-+
A
V
.O
o .-to
H
o
O�.?
•�
�o
O
0
o •�
a
p4•
y
P� +-� s
^" O
a
V 0
e�
ae
U •�
o
y
do
C .�
.� � �
..
•�
CD
>�",
j.,
P O
41
t1! 0
U p
}
bA
N
^
O
O
P1 r+
w
N
w V.
.
Fp74G �
�.•
AZ O
y
Ci
U
W
�
s�
CL
r
�o
av
U�
>, U
U
o O
V
ai O y
U
' O
N
v
G 9, �
N y
° 0�•3
0
U y N .�� •R3 y
N
�z�o�
C8
4z I.. Cd
�. ;
0.0 �) 0 c�
O --cso
�;
a
C �? .
zma °'¢w
CD
A
116
n
A
ay y w
O O 0
a rA w
z a
n
°
'oy
N
°A 0'
oc CD o chi
rp CD O
¢, C O
a, r G
cD
fD OIt
rA
r°e CDlz
� o � a
CD. `"'�
n Cp A
O w 0 W CD
CD CD
_ .0
o
o co
0
�
O
0 '
CD
O G. o CD
C
y
CD
`o
0
CD CD °
-le
SD
CD
61
CD CD
N
5
A
�'
CD
O
N O N 0.
y C
t o
d
CD
d
CD
H
CD
H
N
C/1
CD
CL
w 0
R.
O 0
0 0
fD
c
o
9
m
C
C.
CD
A
m
.Y
C
LD
e
O
�
r-
CD
CD
r'.
CD
A.
CCD
.ti
CD
CA
CD
O•
Ar"
O
N'a.0
A: N
,
5 i.
CD
ID
i t
CD
0 P'
O CD
e r CD
O
y
CD
CD, S' G
CD O
CD,
�.
Vi 5 z
CA CD
p >
o _ P. ,..
.,
.Q
O CD
Gn
rid QQ rrAr.
CD
/yV`.!�
ca
CD �D`
CA
�.. w, o
a
CD `
CD y O vOi
CD
�••�
�.+ e•�
0 ►�..
0
y
vOi N
�
C
CD, 0 O
►t
0
CA .a
CA
CD
CD
Z CAD O
CD
CD
iG C4
C. CD CD
0
ca O
0
O �
CD C �,/�z
xCD
CD
N
r•e
�? a
CD
CD
0. ON
o• E A
ON
ON
eo �: C
CON°
C.
N C
o O p A
CA p
� p.
W �
00CA
� z z
C
C rA
0 c m
01 a
C sr
0
Ne
CD � o`
W
0 o. T
CD 0 rn
D�
117
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-100
Report Date
March 31, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Contract 2020-01: Waterloo Street (Haymarket Square to Castle
Street) — Water, Sanitary and Storm Sewer Renewal and Street
Reconstruction
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Kevin O'Brien
J. Brent McGovern /
Michael Baker
John Collin
I;7��r•1uIu7�►�►�7- rrr•�►�i
It is recommended that Contract 2020-01: Waterloo Street (Haymarket Square to
Castle Street) — Water, Sanitary and Storm Sewer Renewal and Street
Reconstruction be awarded to the low tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at
the tendered price of $1,818,114.35 (including HST) as calculated based upon
estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the necessary contract documents.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council award Contract 2020-01:
Waterloo Street (Haymarket Square to Castle Street) — Water, Sanitary and Storm
Sewer Renewal and Street Reconstruction to the low Tenderer.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
February 22, 2021: M&C 2021-051—Utility and General Fund — Revised 2021
Capital Programs approved.
118
-2-
REPORT
BACKGROUND
The approved 2021 General Fund and Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital
Programs include funding for the reconstruction of Waterloo Street from
Haymarket Square to Castle Street. The work involves the replacement of the
existing watermain and sanitary sewer, installation of a new storm sewer for
separation and full street reconstruction including new concrete curb and
sidewalk, grass medians, roadway granulars, asphalt, trees, and signage. The work
also includes the reconfiguration of the Waterloo Street/Haymarket Square
intersection.
TENDER RESULTS
Tenders closed on March 30, 2021 with the following results, including HST:
1. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $1,818,114.35
2. TerraEx Inc., Saint John, NB $1,990,471.75
3. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $2,231,727.38
4. Dexter Construction Company Limited, $2,577,217.85
Saint John, NB
The Engineer's estimate for the work was $2,466,401.55, including HST.
ANALYSIS
The tenders were reviewed by staff and all were found to be formal in all respects
except for the tender from TerraEx Inc. The tender from TerraEx Inc. contained
errors in mathematics that were corrected in accordance with Division 2.11 u) (i)
as well as a conflict between a written and numerical bid price that was corrected
in accordance Division 2.11 u) (ii). The corrected tender price is reported above.
Staff is of the opinion that the low tenderer has the necessary resources and
expertise to perform the work and recommend acceptance of their tender.
IaIUeINoF-A 1•I1 Ia100,VIto]&I
The Contract includes work that is charged against the 2021 General Fund and
Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Programs. This project is partially funded
by the Integrated Bilateral Funding program. Assuming award of the Contract to
the low tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated
amount of work that will be performed by the Contractor and Others.
119
am
The analysis is as follows:
Budget $ 2,480,000
Project net cost $ 1,973,100
Variance (surplus) $ 506,900
POLICY —TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of
Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General
Specifications, and the specific project specifications.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
This report aligns with Council's Priority for Valued Service Delivery, specifically
as it relates to investing in sustainable City services and municipal infrastructure.
During the Design Phase of the work for this project a review of the Central
Peninsula Secondary Plan (aka Neighbourhood Plan) was completed. The Plan
contains the following Policies and Proposals relating to Waterloo Street:
Policy:
WV-2 Reinforce Waterloo Street as the 'main street' of Waterloo Village
Proposals:
4. Complete the missing built form along Waterloo Street.
5. Enhance the public realm along Waterloo Street through streetscape
improvements and a small-scale neighbourhood greenspace.
The Plan also describes Waterloo Street as the main street of the Waterloo Village
area. Although the Plan targets the western end of Waterloo Street (Union Street
to Golding Street) for improvements, despite this staff incorporated the desired
elements into the design for this section of Waterloo Street as well to continue
the improvements to this section of the corridor.
The reconstruction of Waterloo Street supports the above through the
replacement of asphalt curbs and sidewalks with new concrete curbs and
sidewalks, the removal of asphalt medians and the replacement with new grass
medians where possible and the planting of street trees. In addition, access ramps
will be installed in the sidewalks at pedestrian crossings that will be flush to the
asphalt roadway surface to remove any barriers to access by all users of the
pedestrian transportation infrastructure. The installation of tactile walking
surface indicators will also be included for use.
120
-4-
During the design process various stakeholders were engaged. One item
evaluated was the inclusion of curb extensions at various locations. The Waterloo
Street cross section provides for two travel lanes as well as one parking lane. The
on -street parking on Waterloo Street is alternate side which results in the parking
being on one side of the street for the first fifteen days of the month and then
switches to the opposite side of the street on the sixteenth day until the end of
the month. As a result, the travel lanes also switch from one side to the other. In
addition, Waterloo Street is identified as a bus route. Typically, curb extensions
are provided in the parking lane area to reduce the width of the street without
restricting the travel portion of the roadway. Where the parking on Waterloo
Street alternates sides during the month, there would not be sufficient room to
provide curb extensions on both sides of the street without impacting the travel
portion of the roadway. At the extension locations it would be necessary for
vehicles to encroach into the oncoming lane, especially the aforementioned buses
because of this. For adherence with engineering standards, it is not possible to
include curb extensions within this section of Waterloo Street given its current use
and planned future use.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
The municipal infrastructure on this street is in poor condition and requires
replacement. The renewal of the infrastructure will reduce the likelihood of future
service disruptions to the local residents due to infrastructure failures. The storm
water and sanitary sewer flows will also be separated on this section of Waterloo
Street. In addition, this project allows for the reconfiguration of the Waterloo
Street/Haymarket Square intersection which will permit vehicles traveling down
Waterloo Street to make a right-hand turn at the intersection and head towards
Crown Street something that is currently not possible. This will reduce traffic on
the perpendicular residential streets.
II►�Il►jrd:Z�1uL���:►�:���:79C��1:7�F�1►�I���rC1�:C�1��7�:��
This report was reviewed with Public Works and Transportation Services.
ATTACHMENTS
N/A
121
e
+ f
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-099
Report Date
March 31, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Contract No. 2021-10: Sanitary Sewer Structural Lining — Phase IV
(Various Locations)
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Holly Young
J. Brent McGovern /
Michael Baker
John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Contract No. 2021-10: Sanitary Sewer Structural Lining -
Phase IV (Various Locations) be awarded to the low Tenderer, Eastern Trenchless
Ltd., at their tendered price of $117,555.30 (including HST) as calculated based
upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the necessary contract documents.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council award Contract 2021-10:
Sanitary Sewer Structural Lining — Phase IV (Various Locations) to the low
tenderer.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS
M&C 2021-068 - Termination of Contract 2020-04: Sanitary Sewer Structural
Lining Phase IV — Various Locations between The City of Saint
John and Clean Water Works Inc.
M&C 2020 -27 - Update — 2020 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund and General
Fund (Storm & Transportation Categories) — Capital Programs.
M&C 2019-204 - 2020 and 2021 Utility Fund Capital Budget
122
-2-
REPORT
BACKGROUND
The approved 2020 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program includes
funding for the Cured -in -Place structural lining of sanitary sewers in various
locations. The locations of the lining work recommended for award in Contract
2021-10 includes: Germain Street (Queen Street to St. James Street),
Manawagonish Road (O'Brien Street to Civic #805) and Leinster Street
(Carmarthen Street to Civic #55).
TENDER RESULTS
Tenders closed on March 30, 2021 with the following results, including HST:
1. Eastern Trenchless Ltd. $117,555.30
2. Trenchless Solutions Inc. $152,501.50
The Engineer's estimate for the work was $156,768.00, including HST.
ANALYSIS
The tenders are both local thus limiting the challenges that could arise as it relates
to COVID-19. The tenders were reviewed by staff and were found to be formal in
all respects. Staff is of the opinion that the low tenderer has the necessary
resources and expertise to perform the work and recommend acceptance of their
tender.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The Contract includes work that is charged against the 2020 Water & Sewerage
Fund Utility Capital Program. Assuming award of the Contract to the low tenderer,
an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated amount of work that
will be performed by the Contractor and Others.
The analysis is as follows:
Budget $225,000.00
Project Net cost 137,387.10
Variance $87,612.90
123
-3-
POLICY - TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of
Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General
Specifications, and the specific project specifications.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
This report aligns with Council's Priority for Valued Service Delivery, specifically as
it relates to investing in sustainable City services and municipal infrastructure.
F��:��1[�1��►P1�7dI►�I_�►P[�1/_�►��I�j���1u1�7
The sanitary sewers on these sections of Germain Street, Manawagonish Road and
Leinster Street are in poor condition and require rehabilitation. The rehabilitation
of this infrastructure will reduce the likelihood of future service disruptions to the
local residents and businesses due to infrastructure failure.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
N/A
124
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS: emergencies can occur at any time requiring police, fire or
emergency medical services; and
WHEREAS: when an emergency occurs, the prompt response of police
officers, firefighters and paramedics is critical to the
protection of life and preservation of property; and
WHEREAS: the safety of our police officers, firefighters and paramedics
is dependent upon the quality and accuracy of information
obtained from citizens contacting the Public Safety
Communications Centre; and
WHEREAS: the Public Safety Communications Centre is the first link to
citizens seeking emergency services; and
WHEREAS: every year during the second week of April, the
telecommunications personnel in the public safety
community are honored nationally; and
WHEREAS: April 11 - 17, 2021, is recognized as National Public Safety
Telecommunicators Week; and
WHEREAS: National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week is a time to
celebrate and thank the Public Safety Communications
Centre Operators for their compassion, understanding and
professionalism in their performance of duty serving the
public.
NOW THEREFORE: I, Mayor Don Darling, of Saint
John do hereby proclaim the week of April 11 to April 17, 2021, as "National
Public Safety Telecommunicators Week", in honour of those whose diligence
and professionalism keep our city and citizens safe.
In witness whereof I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Mayor
of the City of Saint John.
125
PROCLAMATION — National Dental Hygienists Week
WHEREAS: April 4th-10th highlights the importance of maintaining oral
health practices, while helping Canadians understand the vital
role that dental hygienists play
WHEREAS: the 4th through the 10th of April is National Dental Hygienists
Week (NDNW); and
WHEREAS: our theme marked by the colour purple and "Oral Health for
Total Health" reminds us that taking care of our mouth, teeth
and gums positively impacts other aspects of our lives;
WHEREAS: the colour purple is associated with dental hygiene and has
been the official colour of dental professionals since 1897 to
signify compassion, purpose & inspiration;
WHEREAS: we are writing to request that a municipal building be lit in
purple for the week of April 4th-loth
NOW THEREFORE: I, Don Darling, Mayor of Saint John do hereby proclaim the
week of April 4-10th, 2021 as National Dental Hygienists Week
as part of the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association's National
"Put your Purple On!" campaign.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF: I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Mayor of the
City of Saint John.
126
COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-098
Report Date
March 30, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Growth and Community
Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Withdrawal of Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application
— Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION
This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council.
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Mark Reade
Jacqueline Hamilton
John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council accept the request, from the applicant and proponent, to
withdraw the rezoning application and cancel the associated Public Hearing
scheduled for Tuesday, April 6, 2021.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proponent and applicant have requested that the application be withdrawn.
Staff recommend that Common Council approve the withdrawal and cancel the
scheduled Public Hearing for the application.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
On February 22, 2021 Common Council referred the Municipal Plan Amendment
and Rezoning application from Hughes Surveys and Consultants on behalf of
Galbraith Construction Ltd. to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and
recommendation. Common Council also set a Public Hearing for the application
for Tuesday, April 6, 2021 at 6:30pm.
REPORT
The application on behalf of the proponent sought approval for the construction
of a new access road into an existing quarry located at 2400 Ocean Westway.
The proposed access road would be located on lands owned by the proponent
adjacent to the existing quarry site.
127
-2-
The application was considered by the Planning Advisory Committee at their
meeting on March 16, 2021. Upon consideration of the matter the Committee
resolved to recommend that Common Council deny the application.
On March 29, 2021 staff received a request from the proponent (Galbraith
Construction Ltd.), and the applicant (Hughes Surveys and Consultants) to
withdraw the application. Staff recommend Common Council approve the
request to withdraw the application and cancel the scheduled Public Hearing.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Not applicable.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
Not applicable.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
E-Mail from David Galbraith dated 2021 March 29
E-Mail from Hughes Surveys and Consultants dated 2021 March 29
128
Reade, Mark
From: David Galbraith <DGalbraith@bellaliant.com>
Sent: March 29, 2021 11:36 AM
To: Reade, Mark
Subject: Oceans Westway
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Good morning Mark,
After careful thought, Gary and I have decided to cancel our plans to proceed with the Ocean Westway by pass road to
our quarry, at this time . We would like to thank you for all of the hard work and guidance that you have provided to
this endeavour. Your support through out this process has been above and beyond what we have come to expect from
most Government agencies . Please notify the proper channels that we request it be removed from the upcoming
Common Council agenda.
Thank you,
David Galbraith
Galbraith Construction Ltd.
Galbraith Equipment Co. Ltd.
Tel: (506) 635-8855
Fax: (506) 635-1944
t
129
Reade, Mark
From: Rick Turner <Rick.Turner@hug hessurveys.com>
Sent: March 29, 2021 5:23 PM
To: Reade, Mark
Cc: Taylor, Jonathan; David Galbraith
Subject: RE: 1 more letter
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Hi Mark,
I understand David Galbraith contacted you with respect to the Ocean Westway Bypass rezoning proposal and that they
have decided to withdraw the proposal.
Since we are the applicant and are working on their behalf we thought we should confirm the withdrawal of the
application to keep things in order.
Rick Turner
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc.
575 Crown Street,
Saint John, NB E21- 5E9
Office: (506) 634-1717
Cellular: (506) 333-8700
rick.turner@hughessurveys.com
From: Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca>
Sent: March 23, 2021 3:54 PM
To: Rick Turner <Rick.Turner@hughessurveys.com>; David Galbraith <DGalbraith@bellaliant.com>
Subject: FW: 1 more letter
CAUTION: External sender
I may have forwarded this one earlier today.
Mark Reade, P.Eng., MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner / Urbaniste Principal
Growth and Community Planning Services
Service de la croissance et de I'urbanisme communautaire
City of Saint John / Ville de Saint John
506 721 0736
1
130
From: Burgess, Aimee <aimee.burgess@saintjohn.ca>
Sent: March 23, 2021 3:25 PM
To: Alex Weaver Crawford (alex@weavercrawford.com) <aIex@weavercrawford.com>; Anne McShane
<feelgoodsj@gmail.com>; brad.mitchelI@cansupply.com; Sullivan, Gary <gary.sullivan@saintjohn.ca>;
gerrylowel@icloud.com; Lourdes Clancy <nbmlc@hotmail.com>; Neil Clements <neilclementslaw@gmail.com>;
ppappas@nb.aibn.com; Susan Baxter (smbaxter@nb.sympatico.ca) <smbaxter@nb.sympatico.ca>
Cc: Kirchner, Jennifer <Jennifer.kirchner@saintjohn.ca>; Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: 1 more letter
Hi PAC - Please see the attached letter.
See you tonight.
Aimee
Aimee Burgess, BBA
Administrative Assistant
T. 506.658.2911
Growth & Community Services
TIR�syc+rlwe lo-hr
One Stop Development Shop
www.saintiohn.ca
2
131
W!w
r --
010
r
it !' . -I A 4I= .
!f r'3�S' r rrgw
LOW
Lands adjacent to 2400
Ocean Westway
Growth & Community Services
Common Council Presentation
132
2020 April 6
nY?4_1.,
SAINT JOHN
�M.
•�aa•.aa•.aaa� � � _
�- �.w-a..
rR � � w rww wf '
I � y
' •.-TxU rf■tip — - —
'1 -
y
yI.R 1". bm• f
LJR
{i1.lW �1
. • r _ 555
f J �•
r
r I �
ra •aa••aaa• ��
ram- - - - - -/� •� ��
Site & Neighbourhood
r. � 99-
}
- I I I •� Y F
•a.
•J.
IJ
• � T � ' 1 x y ;rt- �•
F � T
T {,
Site & Neighbourhood
Site & Neighbourhood
View along ocean Westway
Site & Neighbourhood
View along proposed rout; from existing access road
Redesignate 0.4-hectare area from Park and Natural
Area to Rural Resource
Two areas adjacent to Spruce Lake Stream
Utilize existing watercourse crossing
Wetland and Watercourse Alteration Permit will be
required
t
IL
40.
I
1d
,ell",
I . 4-1
2370
28
375
236.0
2345
2332
74.:
232$ 86 fT
-C
Rezone
(PQ)
1.34-hectare area from Rural (RU) to Pit and Quarry
Proposed Section 59 conditions include
• Detailed design of water transmission main crossing
• 5 m horizontal separation between road and transmission
main
• Limit use of area to access to pit and quarry
• Confirmation of Provincial WAWA permits to be provided
• King William Road / Ocean Westway intersection
improvements to be responsibility of proponent
142
Reduce setback between access road and property line
from 30 metres to 19 metres
Approve subject to condition requiring paving of a
section of access road in western portion of site
Subject to approval of Municipal Plan Amendment and
Rezoning
143
Katie Drive — undeveloped Public Street
City — Developer Subdivision Agreement
• Improvements to Katie Drive
• Pavement Structure
• Maintenance
• As -built Drawings
Subject to approval of Municipal Plan Amendment and
Rezoning
144
Engagement
Notice of Public Presentation and 30-day
Comment period late 2020-early 2021
Letters sent to all property owners within 100
metres of the subjecf roperty on March 11,
20Y1.
0 emails received from public.
Engagement
Public Open House held by Developer
late-2020
Comment cards provided as
appendix to report.
Staff Recommendation
That Common Council
• Approve the Municipal Plan Amendment and
Rezoning
• Impose Recommended Section 59 conditions
• Authorize a City -Developer Subdivision
Agreement
PAC approval of variance to reduce setback of
access road from prope qyne
PAC Recommendation
PAC recommended denial of the
application.
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
March 24, 2021
The City of Saint John
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning
Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
On February 22, 2021, Common Council referred the above matter to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee
considered the attached report at its March 23, 2021 meeting.
Mr. Richard Turner, of Hughes Surveys and Consultants, representing the
proponent, appeared before the Committee, and expressed agreement with the
Staff recommendation. Mr. Turner also suggested an amendment to condition 4
(c) i) of the Staff recommendation to change the requirement that the water
transmission main / roadway crossing be at an angle as close as possible to 90
degrees as opposed to the 90-degree requirement provided in the Staff
recommendation. Mr. Turner noted the quarry operates in accordance with the
standards established in the Pit and Quarry Zone and has operated since the
1960's. He introduced the proponent David Galbraith, of Galbraith Construction.
Responding to questions from the Committee Members, Mr. Galbraith noted
truck traffic is a main concern with pit and quarry operations and higher truck
volumes have occurred with recent projects undertaken by Galbraith
Construction. The proposed access road would reduce truck traffic along this
section of Ocean Westway, which in their opinion is a benefit to the
neighbourhood. He noted the application does not seek an expansion of the area
to be excavated, and if the project is not approved, trucks will continue to use
Ocean Westway to access the quarry.
Responding to a question from the Committee related to possible measures to
mitigate impacts on the two dwellings adjacent to Katie Drive, Mr. Turner noted a
hedge, fence, and tree retention were all means of mitigating impact from the
Page 1 of 3
149
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 24, 2021
proposed road. Mr. Turner also noted the proposed roadway improvements at
the Ocean Westway/King William Road intersection would improve sight distance
at this location.
Jeff Tulk and Leanne Chase of 2340 Ocean Westway appeared before the
Committee in opposition to the application and referred to their letter submitted in
opposition to the application. They noted a fence or berm between the proposed
access road and their property would not benefit them. Mr. Tulk estimated
approximately 240 trucks access the site daily. Ms. Chase noted that Mr.
Galbraith offered to purchase their property and that they were reviewing
possible legal issues surrounding the purchase of the former Lands for Public
Purposes parcel by Galbraith from the City.
Mr. Steve Kuzik of 2350 Ocean Westway appeared before the Committee and
expressed he did not have any complaint regarding the existing truck traffic on
Ocean Westway. He noted has two children who ride their bicycles on this
section of roadway.
Reappearing before the Committee, Mr. Turner noted truck volumes are currently
higher given that aggregate is being supplied to the West Side Port
Modernization project and noted the former parcel of Lands for Public Purposes
was directly adjacent to lands owned by Galbraith Construction.
Some committee members noted the property at 2340 Ocean Westway would be
impacted by the new access road through an increased intensity of truck traffic,
while others noted the broader neighbourhood benefit to the proposed access
road. It was noted by the Committee that the applicant and adjacent landowners
could still discuss issues related to the access road prior to the Public Hearing at
Common Council.
Responding to a question from the Committee, Mark Reade, Senior Planner,
noted the two lots adjacent to Katie Drive were approximately 90 metres in depth.
Mr. Reade also noted the Katie Drive right-of-way having a width of
approximately 20 metres. This would leave a 5-metre area on either side of the
proposed access road to incorporate a fence, berm, or other means of buffering.
In response to an earlier comment from Mr. Turner, Mr. Reade noted that it is a
specific requirement of Saint John Water that the proposed roadway crosses the
pipeline at a 90-degree angle. Mr. Reade noted, based on a review of the
drawings prepared by the applicant there is some flexibility to redesign the
roadway alignment to meet this requirement. In response to comments from the
Committee related to the impact on the value of the properties adjacent to Katie
Drive, Mr. Reade noted the Committee could impose conditions to mitigate the
impacts such as a berm or fence.
Page 2 of 3
150
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 24, 2021
No other persons appeared before the Committee and four letters were received
regarding the application. Following consideration of the Staff report,
presentations, and letters, the Committee adopted a motion to deny the
application via a 5-3 vote.
Ultimately, the majority of the committee found that the proposed by-pass road
would be beneficial to the surrounding residents, but that it would severely alter
the quality of life for the two residents flanking the entrance of the new road
(2340 and 2346 and Ocean Westway). Further, when the committee asked the
applicant what their reasoning was behind this $300,000+ project, the applicant
didn't have a compelling reason other than `It's the right thing to do'. The
committee believes that this is a good proposal, but that the applicant and the
land owners of 2340 and 2346 should have further discussions regarding next
steps and potential compensation prior to the council meeting on April 6tn
RECOMMENDATION:
That the application be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
Alex Weaver Crawford
Chair
Attachments
Page 3 of 3
151
The City of Saint John
Date: March 19, 2021
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting: March 23, 2021
SUBJECT
Applicant: Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. on behalf of Galbraith
Construction Ltd.
Landowner: Galbraith Construction Ltd. and City of Saint John
Location: adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
PID: 55095855 (portion) and 00369496 (portion)
Plan Designation: Park and Natural Areas and Rural Resource (Existing)
Plan Designation: Rural Resource (Proposed)
Existing Zoning: Rural (RU)
Proposed Zoning: Pit and Quarry (PQ)
Application Type: Municipal Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Variance
Jurisdiction: 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 Tuesday, April 6, 2021.
Page 1 of 10
ID2
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory
Committee to grant reasonable variances from the requirements
of the Zoning By-law. The Committee can impose conditions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proponent is proposing to construct a new access road to the existing quarry at 2400
Ocean Westway. The new access road would run from the northern terminus of Katie Drive, an
undeveloped Public Street, along an existing waterline easement to the quarry site.
Development of the access road requires a Municipal Plan Amendment from the Parks and
Natural Areas designation to the Rural Resource designation and a rezoning from Rural (RU) to
Pit and Quarry (PQ). A variance is also required to reduce the setback from the property lines of
the site for a portion of the access road.
Staff are recommending approval of the application with several conditions related to the
mitigation of potential impacts of the new access on the surrounding community and the design
of the access road. The Staff recommendation requires confirmation that the proponent has
obtained the necessary Provincial approvals and agreements related to upgrades to Katie Drive
and the design an operation of the access road.
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council re -designate, on Schedule A of the Municipal Development Plan,
parcels of land with an area of approximately 0.4 hectares located adjacent to 2400
Ocean Westway, also identified as a portion of PID No. 55095855, from Park and
Natural Area to Rural Resource Area.
2. That Common Council re -designate, on Schedule B of the Municipal Development Plan,
parcels of land with an area of approximately 0.4 hectares located adjacent to 2400
Ocean Westway, also identified as a portion of PID No. 55095855, from Park and
Natural Area to Rural Resource.
3. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1.34
hectares, located adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway, also identified as a portion of PID
Numbers 55095855 and 00369496, from Rural (RU) to Pit and Quarry (PQ).
4. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the Community
Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an area of
approximately 1.34 hectares, located adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway, also identified
as a portion of PID Numbers 55095855 and 00369496:
Page 2 of 10
im
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
(a) No portion of the proposed access road, or upgrades to Katie Drive shall be
developed proposal prior to the proponent receiving all necessary Provincial
approvals including a Wetland and Watercourse Alteration Permit(s). Proof of
these approvals must be submitted to the City.
(b) The use of the rezoned portion of land is limited to an access to the pit and
quarry operation located on the adjacent parcels.
(c) That the design and construction of the access road and proposed water
transmission main crossing be in accordance with a detailed engineering design,
approved by the City of Saint John (Saint John Water). This design is to be
prepared by an engineering consultant, selected by the proponent and
acceptable to the City, with experience in the design of water transmission main
crossings. The design must incorporate the following parameters:
i. The access road crossing the water transmission main be at a 90-
degree angle and a crossing design that does not impact the
structural integrity of the water transmission main.
ii. A minimum 5 metre horizontal separation between the water
transmission main and proposed access road.
iii. Hydro excavation of the water transmission main, at the
proponent's cost, prior to design and construction in order that the
location of the water main can be determined.
iv. No ditching of the roadway be located overtop of the water
transmission main.
V. That the water transmission main crossing be subject to a written
agreement, between the City and Developer outlining design
details and operational conditions to ensure protection of the City's
infrastructure and outlining the required insurance to be provided
by the developer.
(d) The design and construction of the proposed reconfiguration of the curb radius at
the Ocean Westway/King William Road intersection be the developer's cost and
be subject to a design prepared by the developer and approved by the Chief City
Engineer or designate.
5. That, subject to Third Reading being given to the Municipal Plan Amendment and
rezoning by Common Council, Common Council authorize the preparation of a City -
Developer Subdivision Agreement for the design and construction of the required
upgrades to and future maintenance of Katie Drive.
6. That, subject to Third Reading being given to the Municipal Plan Amendment and
rezoning by Common Council, the Planning Advisory Committee approve a variance to
reduce the separation between the property line and an access to a pit and quarry from
30 metres to between 19 metres and 30 metres. This variance is issued subject to the
Page 3 of 10
15i4
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
condition that the access road be paved between Stations 0+080 and 0+320 on the
plans submitted with the application.
DECISION HISTORY
The proponent entered into an agreement of purchase and sale with the City of Saint John for a
parcel of land (PID 00369496) that was originally acquired by the City as Land for Public
Purposes. On January 13, 2020 Common Council resolved to refer the proposed land sale to
the Planning Advisory Committee for its concurrence, authorize the proponent (Galbraith
Construction) to initiate any required planning applications for the property, and sell the land
should the Planning Advisory Committee grant concurrence. The Committee concurred with the
sale of the parcel on May 20, 2020. The sale of the property is slated to close the week of
March 15, 2021.
The long-standing quarry and existing access road, at 2400 Ocean Westway to the northwest of
the proposed new access road, was rezoned to the Pit and Quarry (PQ) zone in 2001 in
conjunction with the original adoption of the PQ Zone.
In the late 1980's the City undertook enforcement action related to the access to the existing
quarry operation located on the adjacent parcel (PID 00286500). This enforcement action was
commenced as a portion of the existing long-standing access was zoned RS-1 One and Two
Family Suburban Residential. The Court of Queen's Bench found the operator not guilty, owing
to the long-standing use of the access which was a non -conforming use.
ANALYSIS
Proposal
The applicant is proposing to construct a new access road to the existing quarry at 2400 Ocean
Westway. The proposed access road would terminate at the northern end of Katie Drive, an
existing undeveloped Public Street and be located north of existing dwellings located along the
north side of Ocean Westway. It will also be located to the north of the existing 1500 mm
diameter water transmission main that is located on the site.
As portions of the proposed roadway will be located within 30 metres of the Spruce Lake
Stream, within areas designated as Park and Natural Areas in the Municipal Plan, a Municipal
Plan Amendment to re -designate these lands to Rural Resource is required. The proposed
access road will also require a rezoning to the Pit and Quarry (PQ) zone.
Site and Neighbourhood
The site is in the western portion of the City, northwest of the Ocean Westway/King William
Road/NB Route 1 interchange and north of Ocean Westway. The site includes portions of two
parcels of land:
Page 4 of 10
1-155
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
• PID 00369496, a 0.44-hectare parcel of land located at the northern terminus of Katie
Drive. This parcel of land is being acquired by the proponent from the City.
PID 55095855, a 17.8-hectare parcel of land located east of the parcel containing the
existing quarry. This parcel is located to the north of the existing dwellings along the
north side of Ocean Westway.
Both parcels are mostly wooded. A 1500 mm diameter water transmission main is located within
a cleared easement in the southern portion of these properties near the proposed access road.
Two dwellings are located on either side of Katie Drive at the intersection of Ocean Westway
and Katie Drive.
Lands to the south of the site along Ocean Westway are zoned Two Unit Dwelling (R2) and
contain single family dwellings. Lands to the north and west of the site are zoned Pit and Quarry
(PQ).
Municipal Plan and Rezoning
Municipal Plan
The proposal requires a Municipal Plan Amendment to re -designate an approximately 0.4-
hectare portion of the site from Park and Natural Area to Rural Resource, which will be reflected
in the City's Structure and Generalized Future Land Use maps. These are areas of the project
that are located within the 30-metre watercourse setback of Spruce Lake Stream.
Policy LU-100 provides a framework to evaluate these requests through considering two
important criteria: environmental impacts, and community impacts. These areas are
summarized below. In addition, a detailed review of the proposal with respect to the relevant
Municipal Plan policies is provided in Appendix A.
Environmental Impacts
Policy LU-100 requires that areas proposed to be re -designated from Park and Natural Area to
Rural Resource do not contain environmentally significant features and that any environmental
impacts can be mitigated to a level deemed acceptable by Council.
In this case, the proposal is subject to a Provincial Wetland and Watercourse Alteration Permit,
should the planning application be approved given its proximity at two locations to Spruce Lake
Stream and the proximity of the Kate Drive right-of-way to a Provincially regulated wetland.
Through the initial design process, the applicant and proponent have engaged with the
Provincial Department of Environment regarding the project. Staff also note the planning
application was circulated to the Provincial Department of Environment for comment and no
issues were noted during this initial review by the Province aside from the requirement for the
Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Permit
The proposed access road alignment, while located within 30 metres of a watercourse, will
utilize a long-standing watercourse crossing (culvert) located on the existing access from Ocean
Page 5 of 10
1n6
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
Westway. This minimizes disruption and impacts to Spruce Lake Stream as the proposed
routing for the new access road does not require the construction of an additional watercourse
crossing.
Community Impacts
The proposed haul road will divert trucks from Ocean Westway to a route that includes Katie
Drive, a shorter undeveloped Public Street, and a new access to be constructed north of Ocean
Westway. The current routing has trucks passing in front of twenty-four houses along the north
and south sides of Ocean Westway. The proposed route would have the trucks pass adjacent to
two dwellings on either side of Katie Drive, and to the rear of seven dwellings along the north
side of Ocean Westway.
Policy LU-96 of the Municipal Plan outlines criteria for assessing rezoning applications involving
a rezoning to the Pit and Quarry zone. This criterion is implemented through the Zoning By-law
via the standards of the Pit and Quarry (PQ) Zone. The main issue related to the new access
road is the proximity of the proposed road to the properties along the north side of Ocean
Westway. While a variance is required to reduce the distance from the property line of the site
from 30 metres to between 19 metres and 30 metres, the proposed road conforms to standards
related to the proximity to dwellings provided sections of the access road are paved. These
standards seek to mitigate impacts associated with noise and dust related to truck traffic
accessing aggregate operations.
Rezoning
The construction of the proposed access road will require a 1.34-hectare area to be rezoned
from Rural (RU) to Pit and Quarry (PQ). The proposal was reviewed with respect to the
standards of the Pit and Quarry (PQ) zone to determine compliance with provisions of the
Zoning By-law governing access to excavation operations. Compliance with these standards,
contained in Section 12.4(4) of the by-law, are summarized in the following table.
Standard — Section 12.4(4)
Proposed Compliance
Every private access shall be located a
This is largely met; however, a variance is
minimum of 30 metres from the lot lines of
required to reduce the separation distance to
the pit or quarry.
between 19 metres and 30 metres along the
western portion of the access road adjacent
to PIDs 00287516 and 00437459.
Every private access shall be paved for the
Paving will be required for the 30 metres of
first 30 metres from its intersection with a
the access road closest to its intersection
public street.
with Katie Drive. Cross -sections of the
access road indicate provision for a paved
surface.
Where one or more residential dwellings are
The access road will be located within 150
present within 150 metres of the private
metres of five residential dwellings:
Page 6 of 10
'LET
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
access, that portion of the private access
shall be paved unless:
(i) The dwelling or dwellings are owned by
the owner of the pit or quarry served by the
said private access; or
(ii) There exists either a natural treed screen
having a minimum depth of 30 metres and a
minimum height of 4 metres or a natural
topographic feature having a minimum of 4
metres in height or a man-made landscaped
berm having a minimum height of 4 metres
located between the said private access and
the said residential dwelling or dwellings
extending 25 metres further on either side.
Every private access created after the
coming into force of this subsection and
which has a length greater than 50 metres
shall be constructed in a curved fashion to
prevent direct visibility of the excavation site
and operation from the public street at its
intersection with the private access.
Every private access to a pit or quarry shall
have a gate at the entrance within 20 metres
of the public street. The gate shall be locked
when the pit or quarry is not actively in
operation.
• Civic 2370 Ocean Westway (PID
00287516)
• Civic 2380 Ocean Westway (PID
00285940)
• Civic 2384 Ocean Westway (PID
55122832)
• Civic 2388 Ocean Westway (PID
00437459) and
• Civic 2396 Ocean Westway (PID
00437459)
Provision of a 30-metre-deep buffer on the
proponent's land is not achievable to provide
a separation for all five dwellings. The
presence of the 1500 mm diameter
watermain to the south of the road, limits the
ability to construct a berm. Given this, this
section of the access road will require a
paved surface.
This standard can be met as the access road
will generally run perpendicular to Katie
Drive.
A gate will be required to restrict access from
Katie Drive.
Variance
The intent of the 30-metre separation, between the access road and property line of the site, is
to mitigate dust and noise impacts onto adjacent lands. The requirement to pave sections of the
access road within 150 metres of adjacent dwellings, which will be required for the section of the
access road between Stations 0+080 and 0+320 on the plans submitted with the application,
also seeks to reduce dust from hauling operations. With respect to noise mitigation, Staff note
vehicle speeds along this section of the access road will also be lower because of the narrow
width of the access road in proximity to Spruce Lake Stream and the horizontal curve where the
proposed access road intersects with the existing access road. It is recommended the variance
be granted subject to a condition that the access road be paved between Stations 0+080 and
0+320 as indicated on the plans submitted with the application.
Page 7 of 10
1S8
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
Proposed Section 59 Conditions
Staff recommends a series of conditions be placed on the rezoning related to the design,
construction and use of the access road. These conditions are discussed below:
Given the proximity of the proposed access road to the water transmission main, Staff
are proposing a Section 59 condition requiring the detailed design and construction of
the proposed access road be in accordance with engineering drawings, prepared by an
experienced engineering consultant and subject to the approval of the Saint John Water
and the Development Officer. These drawings must include the design of the roadway
and proposed watermain crossing and the design must incorporate the following
parameters:
o The access road crossing the water transmission main at a 90-degree angle and
a crossing design that does not impact the structural integrity of the water
transmission main.
o A minimum 5 metre horizontal separation between the water transmission main
and proposed access road.
o Hydro excavation of the water transmission main, at the proponent's cost, prior to
design and construction in order that the location of the water transmission main
can be determined.
o No ditching of the roadway be located overtop of the water transmission main.
The City also requires that water transmission main crossing be subject to a written
agreement, between the City and proponent, outlining design details and operational
conditions to ensure protection of the City' s infrastructure and outlining the required
insurance to be provided by the proponent.
The proponent engaged an engineering firm to complete a sight distance assessment at
the Ocean Westway/King William Road intersection. The assessment identified that the
available sight distance from the proposed access, looking east along Ocean Westway
was 67 metres. The required sight distances are 130 metres and 195 metres for a
passenger vehicle and tractor trailer (WB-20 design vehicle) respectively. To mitigate the
sight distance restrictions to the east, the engineering review proposes to reconfigure the
curb radius at Ocean Westway/King William Road to reduce the speeds of westbound
vehicles making a right turn onto Ocean Westway. Staff recommend that these
roadway improvements be the responsibility and cost of the developer and be subject to
a design prepared by the developer and approved by the Chief City Engineer or
designate. Infrastructure Development Staff note the following with respect to the
proposed design:
Page 8 of 10
159
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
o A portion of Provincial Highway is included within the proposed
improvement area. These improvements will need NBDTI support.
o The applicant will need to advise on whether object markers are needed
along new curb line to help delineate the proposed extension.
o The applicant will need to advise on whether an advisory speed tab sign
for that east to west approach is required.
o The applicant should consider a surface other than grass, for the area
behind the curb, to eliminate the need for mowing.
• A condition is also recommended requiring the applicant to provide the City with proof
the required Provincial Wetland and Watercourse Alteration approvals have been
granted prior to the City granting final approval prior to construction.
• It is also recommended that the use of the rezoned area be limited to an access for the
pit and quarry operation located on the adjacent parcels.
Katie Drive Upgrades
Although no land is being subdivided, the proposal will require upgrades to an undeveloped
Public Street, Katie Drive. Such work is normally authorized through a City -Developer
subdivision agreement. Staff recommend that Common Council authorize such an agreement
which would include the following:
• The required design standard for this section of the proposed access road in
accordance with the City's General Specifications. This will include a sufficient
pavement structure to accommodate the proposed truck traffic.
• Submission of the detailed design, completed by the applicant's consultant, to the
City for review and approval.
• The City -Developer Agreement will also detail the party responsible for maintenance
of this section of the access road. The City's initial position is that this section of the
access road be maintained by the developer as it is a component of the larger
privately -owned project.
• Stamped As -Built drawings are required at construction completion of Katie Drive.
Conclusion
The applicant is proposing the construction of a new access road to divert traffic from Ocean
Westway. Staff have reviewed the proposal against applicable policies and are recommending
Page 9 of 10
15W
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway March 19, 2021
on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd.
approval of the Municipal Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Variances subject to recommended
conditions to address and mitigate community impacts.
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No alternatives were considered.
ENGAGEMENT
Proponent
The proponent held a community open house at the Lorneville Community Centre in late 2020.
Comment cards from the Open House are provided in the report appendices.
Public
In accordance with the Committee's Rules of Procedure, notification of the proposal was sent to
landowners within 100 metres of the subject property on March 11, 2021. Notice of the
Municipal Plan Amendment was posted on the City of Saint John website on December 31,
2020. The rezoning was posted on the City of Saint John website on March 16, 2021.
No letters were received from the Public during the 30-day comment period for the proposed
Municipal Plan Amendment.
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Author
Manager/Senior Planner
Commissioner
Mark Reade, P.Eng., MCIP,
RPP
Jennifer Kirchner, MCIP, RPP
Jacqueline Hamilton, MCIP,
RPP
Contact:
Mark Reade
Telephone:
(506) 721-0736
Email:
Mark.Reade@saintjohn.ca
Application:
20-3006
APPENDIX
Map 1: Aerial Photography
Map 2: Future Land Use
Map 3: Zoning
Attachment 1: Site Photography
Attachment 2: Municipal Plan Policy Review
Submission 1: Access Road Plan and Cross -Sections
Submission 2: Proposed Reconfiguration - Ocean Westway / King William Road
Intersection
Submission 3: Comment Cards from Open House
Page 10 of 10
10
Air Photo Lands Adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
_
IL 1 'I
-IF 17-
0 0 !'
' ro
o0
2021-03-17
Civic Addresses 0 Subject Property
Conditional Zoning Property Parcels
1:9,028
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi
0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km
Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Saint John, Province of New
N
A
2400 Ocean Westway - Future Land Use
1 4'.
Ap
f
+ �I
2021-03-15
0 Property Parcels Future Land Use u Park and Natural Area
L72 Primary Development Area Heavy Industrial 0 Stable Residential
Rural Resource E7Urban ReAgge
1:9,028
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi
0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km
GeoEye, Maxar
Zoning - Lands Adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
2021-03-17 1:9,028
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi
Civic Addresses �� Property Parcels RL IM FD
0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km
Conditional Zoning Zoning
R2 PQ RU
Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Saint John, Province of New
0 Subject Property RM CG EP 104
View of Katie Drive right-of-way from Ocean Westway
view iooKing east along proposea aiignment rrom existing
access road.
View looking along Ocean Westway.
View along waterline easement looking east.
Site Photography - Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway City of Saint John
Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. on behalf of Galbraith Construction Ltd. 2021 March 19
1ffib
Municipal Plan Policy Analysis -Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
Policv/Policies and Subiect Area I Staff Comment
Policy LU-2
Ensure the Future Land Use map (Schedule
B):
a. Provides sufficient land to accommodate
the projected demands for residential,
commercial, industrial and other land uses
over the planning period;
Policy LU-4
Not consider changing the designation of
lands on the Future Land Use map (Schedule
B) through a Municipal Plan amendment,
unless the proposal:
a. Is consistent with the general intent of
the Municipal Plan and further
advances the City Structure;
b. Is necessary by virtue of a lack of
supply of quality land already
designated in the Municipal Plan to
accommodate the development;
c. Enhances the community and the
quality of life offered to residents of
the City;
d. Efficiently uses available
infrastructure;
e. Does not negatively impact the use
and enjoyment of adjacent lands and
neighbourhoods;
Is an appropriate use within the land
use designation being sought for the
property, and the proposal is
consistent with the specific policies
regulating development in the
designation; and
g. Adequately addresses and mitigates
any significant environmental impact;
Rural Resource Area Policies
Policy LU-95
Create the Rural Resource Area designation
on the Future Land Use map (Schedule B).
Council intends that land within the Rural
Resource Area designation shall generally
remain in their natural state, or, subject to
Policy LU-2
Sufficient lands are provided for the quarry
operation. The proposed Municipal Plan
Amendment would allow for an alternate
access which would reduce truck traffic on
Ocean Westway and the impact to the
residential dwellings located on this street.
Policy LU-4
The change in designation from Parks and
Natural Areas to Rural Resource for the
proposed access road is consistent with the
general intent of the plan as it is
located in a rural area of the City largely
designated as Rural Resource.
Staff note the intent of the application is not
to seek approval for a new extraction site but
to develop a new access route to attempt to
mitigate the community impact of an existing
extraction activity.
The proposal will reduce demands on
existing City infrastructure as truck traffic will
be removed from an existing City Street.
Paving of sections of the proposed access
road will be required to mitigate dust, in
conjunction with the requirements of the Pit
and Quarry (PQ) zone.
As sections of the access road are within 30
metres of a watercourse and wetland area, a
Wetland and Watercourse Alteration permit
will be required from the Provincial
Department of the Environment.
Rural Resource Area Policies
Policy LU-95
The proposed rezoning to the Pits and
Quarries (PQ) Zone conforms to Policy LU-
95, as it is an appropriate resource use
demonstrated through compliance with the
criteria outlined in Policy LU-96.
m
Municipal Plan Policy Analysis -Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
regulation and required approvals, be used
for appropriate resource uses including
forestry operations, agriculture uses including
livestock operations and the fishery, and
extraction activities, including pits and
quarries.
Pits and Quarry Policies
Policy LU-96
Provide that pits and quarries may be located
in the Rural Resource Area designation
provided the land is rezoned to the Pits and
Quarries Zone. The Pits and Quarries Zone
defines the specific performance standards
for their operation, and the rehabilitation of
operative and inoperative pits and quarries.
In considering applications to rezone a
property to the Pits and Quarries Zone,
Council shall ensure the proposed use can
demonstrate compliance with all of the zone
provisions, including:
a. Compatibility with and/or minimal
impact on existing adjacent land uses;
b. An appropriate location and
acceptable hours of operation;
c. A stormwater management plan;
Pits and Quarry Policies
Policy LU-96
Compatibility with adjacent land uses and the
appropriateness of the access road is
demonstrated through the road location
generally meeting the requirements of the PQ
zone.
Hours of operation and stormwater
management related to the existing quarry
operation would be governed by the
PQ zone. Major changes to existing drainage
patterns are not anticipated as the existing
drainage patterns drain to Spruce Lake
Stream.
As sections of the proposed roadway are
within 125 metres of dwellings, these
sections will have to be paved. In addition,
the roadway construction will be subject to
Provincial approval through the issuance of a
Wetland and Watercourse Alteration permit.
d. Incorporation of site development
measures which will assist in the To conform with the standards of the PQ
control of smoke, dust, odour, toxic zone, a gate will be required at the Katie
materials, vibration and noise; Drive end of the access road.
e. Compliance with required setback,
yard, and separation distances from
existing roads or uses;
f. The provision of visual screening;
g. Acceptable location for buildings and
equipment;
h. Inclusion of necessary safety and
protective measures;
Acceptable location of entrances
and exits, and the designation of
acceptable hauling routes;
Demonstrated compliance with
.T
Municipal Plan Policy Analysis -Lands adjacent to 2400 Ocean Westway
signage and landscaping provisions;
and
k. Measures to ensure future
rehabilitation of the site.
Re -designation of Park and Natural Areas
Policy LU-100
Consider requests to re -designate lands from
Park and Natural Area to Rural Resource
Area provided that the land does not contain
environmentally significant features, a
demonstrated potential exists for a resource
related use of the land, and any
environmental and/or community quality of
life impacts from the proposal can be
mitigated to a level deemed acceptable by
Council.
Natural Environment
Policy NE-11
Protect environmentally sensitive areas,
including watercourses and wetlands, riparian
areas, and floodplains and appropriately
restrict development near these features.
Re -designation of Park and Natural Areas
Policy LU-100
The change in designation from Parks and
Natural Areas to Rural Resource for the
proposed access road is consistent with the
general intent of the plan as it is in a rural
area of the City largely designated as Rural
Resource.
While there is an existing access road into
the site, the proposed new route will reduce
truck traffic on Ocean Westway. The
proposed access road makes use of an
existing watercourse crossing, limiting
impacts on Spruce Lake Stream.
Portions of the roadway are within 30 metres
of Spruce Lake Stream and a Provincially
Designated wetland and will require a
Wetland and Watercourse Alteration Permit
from the Province. Staff have circulated the
application to the Provincial Department of
Environment for comment and no issues
were noted from this initial review by the
Province.
Natural Environment
The roadway construction will be subject to
Provincial approval through the issuance of a
Wetland and Watercourse Alteration permit.
00286690 /
GALBRAITH
1 1 1 CONSTRUCTION
/4�1
♦ 1111 5 C0369694 /
♦♦♦ 11 �♦ / GALBRAITH\
..♦♦ /1♦ CONSTRUCTION
■ .01 FROM
� \ / / � •/ � 2:1 TO 1.5:1 SLOPE � \
0036973,TOE OF 1.5:1 SLOPE \
• / / / / 6 \ �
3 • GALBRAITH\ G
N o \ \
z CONSTRUCTION P�
co • / TOE OF 2:1 OO Q \
O" : SLOPE
b 1 �G \
Z a \
00286500 �� \ G
1(1
GALBRAITH O� • r / 1 � � � �\X �
CONSTRUCTION ♦ TRANSITION FROM \
1 P� ova Oa: ♦ / //♦ / 1.5:1 TO 2:1 SLOPE
l
J S�Q� �♦ / ♦ \ /
J \
TOE OF 2.1 SLOPE \
STREAM WIDTH IS APPROXIMATELY 3m BUT VARIES. Q<$ Q���a ♦ 1
LOCATION TAKEN FROM SNB WATERCOURSE AND `' O� ,VOO
WETLAND MAPPING. g
v `Q ♦ ♦ / \ /
55095855 NEW DITCHGALBRAITH O /
CONSTRUCTION : ♦ ♦ / TOP OF 2:1 SLOPE m` \
TRANSITION FROM : ♦ / / \ 1
1.5:1 TO 2:1 SLOPE /
EXISTING CROSSING
/ TOE OF 2:1
SLOPE / 5�
// / /
/
> /
Profile Ocean Westway Bypass
60 60
59 59
58 58
57 57
561 56
55
54 ,w 54
53 1;00 —ORIGINAL GRAD: (LIDAK 53
52 52
51 F 51
50 '23 XISTING WATER TIANSMISS ON LINE
50
49 49
48 48
47 47
O
O
O
N
n
N
O
n
O
0)u7
a0
�
ORIGINAL GROUND
0)
0
0+000
O
Lq
0+100
0+200
0+300
0+400
0+500
0+600
0+700
0
O
0)
�°
FINAL GRADES
t
�
L0
ISSUED FOR WAWA PERMIT 24-MAR
0 APPLICATION 2020 JLP
No. Revisions Date By
HUGHES
SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS
L�LHughes Surveys & Consultants Inc.
(WEBSITE: www.hughessurveys.com)
575 Crown Street Tel : (506)634-1717
Saint John , NB Fax : (506)634-0759
E21- 5E9 eMail : info®hughessurveys.com
Stamp
Project Title
OCEAN WESTWAY BYPASS
GALBRAITH CONSTRUCTION
Drawing Title
WAWA PERMIT APPLICATION
PLAN Et PROFILE
GRAPHIC SCALE
(IN METRES) CADD By
10 0 10 20 30 40 50 JLP
Project No.
1 500 Y19042-
Chk'd by Scale
RET HORZ. 1:1500
Phase Revision Sheet
0 W1
O
N
O
N
0
to
t
U
L
0
T
O
C
C
O
N
O
W
}
M
U
N
O
rn
/
0
0
rn
0
N
No
RIP RAP TO NBDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION ITEM
608, TYPE R-A, MIN 300mm THICKNESS OVER
TERRAFIX 40OR GEOTEXTILE EROSION PROTECTION
5000 C 5000
PROPOSED FINISH GRADE
ORIGINAL GROUND
3 0
2 �1
r`
100mm CRUSHED GRAVEL OR 115mm ASPHALT SURFACE
150mm GRAVEL BASE
450mm PIT -RUN GRAVEL SUB -BASE
TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS SECTION - CUT
Sta. 0+240± to Sta. 0+336±
N.T.S.
5000 ¢ 5000
PROPOSED FINISH GRADE
ORIGINAL GROUND
ME
-�v 2
0 0 0 0 1
?
FLOW DIRECTION
- 100mm CRUSHED GRAVEL OR 115mm ASPHALT SURFACE
/ 150mm GRAVEL BASE
300mm
450mm PIT -RUN GRAVEL SUB -BASE
ROADWAY CROSS SECTION - WITH CULVERT
RIP RAP TO NBDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION ITEM
608, TYPE R-A, MIN 300mm THICKNESS OVER
TERRAFIX 40OR GEOTEXTILE EROSION PROTECTION
Sta. 0+240±
N.T.S.
1000 ¢ 5000
PROPOSED FINISH GRADE
.-- 3% /
2% °
°
ORIGINAL GROUND
2:1 0 ISSUED FOR WAWA PERMIT
APPLICATION
i
No. Revisions
'--100mm CRUSHED GRAVEL OR 115mm ASPHALT SURFACE
150mm GRAVEL BASE
450mm PIT -RUN GRAVEL SUB -BASE
TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS SECTION - SINGLE LANE
Sta. 0+160± to Sta. 0+240±
N.T.S.
5000
C 5000
PROPOSED FINISH GRADE
3%
VARIES -SEE INDIVIDUAL
SECTIONS FOR SIDE SLOPE
ORIGINAL GROUND
2
1 _
Wiz✓ �v���� � � -- __ �—
/
100mm CRUSHED GRAVEL OR 115mm ASPHALT SURFACE
150mm GRAVEL BASE
450mm PIT -RUN GRAVEL SUB -BASE
TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS SECTION - FILL
Sta. 0+000 to Sta. 0+160± and Sta. 0+540± to Sta. 0+720±
24-MAR JLP
2020
Date By
HUGHES
SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc.
(WEBSITE: www.hughessurveys.com)
575 Crown Street Tel : (506)634-1717
Saint John , NB Fax : (506)634-0759
E2L 5E9 eMail : info®hughessurveys.com
Stamp
Project Title
OCEAN WESTWAY BYPASS
GALBRAITH CONSTRUCTION
Drawing Title
WAWA PERMIT APPLICATION
TYPICAL SECTIONS
CADD By I Chk'd by I Scale
JLP I RET I AS SHOWN
N.T.S.
Project No. Phase Revision Sheet
Y19042- 0 W2
0+200
o�
55
5!
w
Cr
a
w
%
50 ORIG
LIDA
«�
w
51
y o
`g
WATER
1
—_
— —
er� TRANSMISSION
LINE
C7
45
4!
An
=20 0
-10
U
0+180
10
i
65
o�
60 61
o a
55 5!
WATER
50 51
45 4!
) 5!
i 51
) 5!
i 51
4
2�0 4020 —10 0 10 2Q 0 4520
65 0+300 65
0�
J
w
U
�a
Qw
50
�Y
3%
_
5
—
_
1.5:1
WA
TER
TRANSMISSION
LINE
45
4
An
=20
clue
0+160
10
5
)
5
60 6
ORIGINA GROUND
55 % 5
50 5
WATER
T SMISSION LINE
45 4
) 65
5 (
)
5 P
—10
,u
10
:fi7
55
50
5
&1
) 65
5 (
)
5 P
—10
,u
10
:fi7
55
50
5
&1
0
61
30m WETLAND
fER
ORIG/h
AL GROUND
(LIDAR
3%
3
5
5!
0
51
i
200 4- 0 —10 0 10 200 —20 —10 0 10 205
so 0+240 so 65 0+550 65
55
00
Z)
ry
��
a�
50
¢
�g
� ORI
w
INAL GROUND
U
51
— —
—
1.5:1
WA
ER
—�
TR
SMISSION LINE
45
4!
A
=20
QlC]
0+100
10
r
55 5!
LIDA
3%�— 3% — —
---------
t I
50 51
/ WA ER
TRANSMISSION LINE
45 4!
i E
i
i E
i
30m WETLAND
61
0
BUFFER
ORIGINAL
GROU
3%
0
3%
5
2,1
WET
ND 5!
0
51
20 0 —20 —10 0 10 2Q 0 4520
60 0+220 60
55
�o
ORIGINAL GROUND
50
2:1
1
51
TRANSMISSION
LINE
45
�sJ =NJ
11K
i
55 5!
(LIDAR)
w
U
a 3% —
50
� a 5l
a
Y /WATLH
J
U
45 4!
2t0 4020
=NJ
Lei
10
i
i
240
nut
0
0+ 991
10
0 ISSUED FOR WAWA PERMIT 24-MAR JLP
APPLICATION 2020
No. Revisions Date By
i HUGHES
SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc.
) (WEBSITE: www.hughessurveys.com)
575 Crown Street Tel : (506)634-1717
Saint John , NB Fax : (506)634-0759
E2L 5E9 eMail : info®hughessurveys.com
Stamp
20 5
Project Title
OCEAN WESTWAY BYPASS
GALBRAITH CONSTRUCTION
Drawing Title
WAWA PERMIT APPLICATION
SECTIONS
GRAPHIC SCALE
(IN METRES) CADD By Chk'd by Scale HORZ. 1 :200
4 0 4 8 12 16 20 JLP RET VERT. 1:200
Project No. Phase Revision Sheet
1 200 Y19042- 0 W3
2t0 4020
=NJ
Lei
10
i
i
240
nut
0
0+ 991
10
0 ISSUED FOR WAWA PERMIT 24-MAR JLP
APPLICATION 2020
No. Revisions Date By
i HUGHES
SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS
Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc.
) (WEBSITE: www.hughessurveys.com)
575 Crown Street Tel : (506)634-1717
Saint John , NB Fax : (506)634-0759
E2L 5E9 eMail : info®hughessurveys.com
Stamp
20 5
Project Title
OCEAN WESTWAY BYPASS
GALBRAITH CONSTRUCTION
Drawing Title
WAWA PERMIT APPLICATION
SECTIONS
GRAPHIC SCALE
(IN METRES) CADD By Chk'd by Scale HORZ. 1 :200
4 0 4 8 12 16 20 JLP RET VERT. 1:200
Project No. Phase Revision Sheet
1 200 Y19042- 0 W3
FIGURE 1 - ACCESS LOCATION AND EXISTING SIGHT DISTANCE
y w
Im
��s
w � OO�
0 / /
Nsw allon N�
� a
r n
vreovoseo access
_ _--
�O�AN WESSW� I v iomi/ /
10
\ O
t
_ 3 j
`sort"..
f,
}
aECXrnE
REVIEW OF PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT ACCESS ON
OCEAN WESTWAY
DR11YINin¢
PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION
IG.
�o Xa C01
0
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "outlaw68@bellaliant.net" <outlaw68@bellaliant.net>
To: dgalbraith@bellalaint.com
Date: November 26, 2020 at 4:49 PM
Subject: Fwd: information meeting
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "outlaw68@bellaliant.net" <outlaw68@bellaliant.net>
To: dgalbraith@bellalaint.com
Date: November 21, 2020 at 7:57 PM
Subject: information meeting
your information meeting was very informative the new road looks great ann marie and i never ever had
any problems with the pit or truck your works are always friendly and waving and respectfully of the
speed on the street glad to have yous here and seen over the years that if someone needed anything on
the street yous do what ever yous can to help thnak you for being a great neighbor and please tell your
guys thank you for being so respect full towards the people who live hereon the street paul and ann
marie morehouse
Comment Card
GALBRAITH Galbraith Construction Ltd.
CONSTRUCTION
Ll r) Ocean Westway Bypass Road Proposal
SC� Gvl� Y�n�A '�i�+.�i 6�s 1� ve �i,�ecTlr/ Gcr• �os5 -�!'o
grcuTll/ c�dAco% a
HUGHEB
Hughes Surveys &
Consultants Inc.
575 Crown Street
Saint John, NB E2L 5E4
TeL (506) 6 4-1717
',Ay, 4o Yc1c�c�dl t
- � �n 2. ir` v✓ ��� i 2 Ar i v'p-- cln'y`iavl c f Nei V i` ✓ q 4A--P b l ci d,7H.h
(Z)yY' a;r��.
�„�hr'��.
L✓� have-
<foncej 11 e `A/ ,-- 1 klo rjk
cc 10�tyiQ
C';i,
j"/5�
a-Ao5 o C-ea+n we S 3-- u'Dc�
Thank you for your co ments and suggestions
GALBRAITH Comment Card
CONSTRUCTION Galbraith Construction Ltd.
LTD Ocean Westway Bypass Road Proposal
s
LA)
ThanWyou for y co
e5 -�- 03cc m
ann suggestions
V-cs �
n
Hi GHES
Hughes Surveys &
Consultants Inc.
575 crown Street
Saint John, NB E2L 5E9
Tel: (506) 634-1717
From: Coastal Enterorises
To: OneStoo
Subject: Municipal Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Variance Application Lands
Date: March 17, 2021 1:30:39 PM
Attachments: Scan.odf
[ External Email Alert] "Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
Attached is my letter expressing my view on the above
subject.
Thank you,
Richard Thompson
177
March 17, 2021
Planning Advisory Committee
Re: Galbraith Construction
To Whom It May Concern:.
I am writing this letter of support for Galbraith
Construction's proposed new Access Road and Rezoning
from Rural to Pit and Quarry.
Galbraith Construction has demonstrated to us the highest
regard for safety and community concerns while engaged
in operations.
I am the Owner of Long Beach Enterprises Ltd., which is
an adjacent property to Galbriath Construction.
Yours truly,
i
Richard H. Thompson
Long Beach Enterprises Ltd.
Owner
/all
178
Burgess, Aimee
From: Chelsea Hill <chelseanicolehill13@gmail.com>
Sent: March 22, 2021 10:19 AM
To: OneStop
Subject: Ocean west way resident
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Hello
I am a resident of 2405 ocean west way and am emailing to voice my view of the proposal on behalf of Galbraith
construction.
After going to a meeting and speaking with David Galbraith he assured me (also via email) that this new road would not
turn into a loop for the trucks to access the quarry. He reassured me this is to stop the large trucks from using Ocean
west way to access the quarry. I am in favour of this proposal as I despise the constant trucks loudly driving up and
down our what is quiet street without them. I believe it will help With the noise level. They also go fast and there is
always gravel on the road and rocks on my lawn. I have a small child and this new access road will also help to make our
current road safer for the children on this residential street. We also don't have great side walks and the single one we
do have isn't cleared during the winter which makes going for walks with our stroller dangerous as the trucks are always
going back and fourth and not all of them slow down. The streets current walking trail will not be affected by this new
road as it is behind the houses on the other side of the street. I am really looking forward to this change.
Thank you for requesting and respecting our opinion.
Chelsea & Daniel Hill
1
179
From: OneStOD
To: Burgess, Aimee; Reade, Mark
Subject: FW: Against 2400 Ocean Westway Municiple Plan Amendment
Date: March 22, 2021 8:35:27 AM
Paula Hawkins
One Stop Development Shop
Customer Service Centre
Ground Floor — City Hall
(506) 658-2911
pauIa. hawkinsfsaintjohn.ca
From: jeff tulk <tulkstr@yahoo.ca>
Sent: March 21, 2021 7:08 PM
To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca>; Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Against 2400 Ocean Westway Municiple Plan Amendment
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to spamsam lleen.saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
To the members of the P.A.0 committee
Saint John N.B ;
I would like to start by thanking all members present for their service to the community.
My name is Leanne Chase and I am the partner of Jeff Tulk and will be writing on both his and my own
behalf.
Jeff purchased 2340 Ocean Westway in October of 2016. The home had several listings on the
internet,and some that still can be seen when the address is googled.
He used a former friend of mine from school as a realtor from Exit reality.
We requested to look at homes with the following specifications ; Privacy,extra land to protect our privacy,
a view,access to green space and walking trails,turn key ready.We looked at homes in Lorneville but
2340 Ocean Westway had everything we were looking for while being able to remain in city limits.
The home is advertised with these features and many more.
On the internet as well ,you can see it was sold, to Jeff Tulk.
Darling Real Estate Inc
9 subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
The summer of 2018 Jeff began sanding the cedar siding on the house...
March of 2019,as seen on file in documents; a letter was sent to the house addressed to Jeff Tulk.
Which I will make reference to in my end statements.
The letter requested he contact Mr.David Galbraith.
Jeff contacted him by phone and we set up an appointment with him shortly after at 2:30 in the
afternoon(I do have the date written down and minutes I took and kept from memory of that day)
Our first question was to ask if in fact we were the only ones to receive a letter?? as we noticed the word
"effected" with in it.
He explained we were in fact the only ones to receive it.
He showed us his plans and spoke of his plans,showed us maps etc...
I made a comment about how those kind of plans would not have been drawn up over night, maybe even
years of planning???
He asked us if we were willing to "move" our house on to one of his vacant lots down the street with the
open quarry view.
To be honest I was insulted that he showed no concern for our home or the structural damage it may
cause, so I answered 'what about structural damage?'
He gave no response.
He then asked if we were willing to pick out one of his lots near the gravel pit and he would build us a new
home.
We said "No thank you,we have a nice view"
He then asked if we were willing to sell.
Jeff answered "The home is not for sale ... but anything I'm sure can be for the right price"
Mr.Galbraith then said 'I noticed you have staging up on the side of your house?"
Jeff answered "Yes I am getting ready to paint"
Mr.Galbraith responded : "Well if your considering selling to me ,don't put much into it"
Jeff asked " Are you interested now?"
Mr.Galbraith answered " No that wont be for awhile down the road"
He also asked 'how' we bought it?? ... as he had had his eye on it.
We told him it was everything we wanted and planned to retire there.That we too 'had our eye on it and
timing must be everything'
We said no more, and left the office on Ready Street.
We had plans for this home and one of them was a small salon for myself.This was a lot to think about
and consider.
Shortly after I was contacted by Mr. Galbraith on the phone and he asked me if he could send one of 'his'
appraisers to my home. Jeff was not home at the time as I explained to Mr. Galbraith but would speak
with him about it.l also said we would not be basing our price on what 'his' appraiser thought rather then
our own and the advice of our own people.He mentioned the value of homes in our area and again I told
him directly we would use our own if we did consider any offer.
He then said "That's fine because I know nothing about real estate"
I answered back knowing this man runs a very large business(contracting); he must know something
about real estate and zoning??
I said ;Without disrespect to you Mr.Galbraith I do understand real estate,zoning and most Iaws.What I do
know is working with me would be easy, but changing the zoning, not so easy,this has a direct effect on
me and my life and we will decided if we want to sell and for how much if we do. I will give Jeff the
message and he can get back to you if or when he decides.
We were still unsure as to sell the house or not?We knew for sure if we did,we wanted the ability to
purchase something with similar features; a view, landscaping, gardens etc ... of our choice.
Shortly after Jeff contacted a old friend from high school who works in real estate(Exit) to ask about a
replacement estimate.Upon his arrival we were informed he had done business with Mr.Galbraith directly
through Exit reality on a apartment complex.
I knew this was a conflict of interest and any further information could be seen here as here say in this
matter.
This caused us a distrust in real estate choice.As well I knew we now had a conflict if interest in our
choice with Exit.
181
I think it was the summer of 2019 when I was getting ready for work and I heard a strange voice yelling in
my front yard.) looked out the window and seen a man yelling something along the lines of "I'll be back
after work to deal with you Bub" and waving his fist in the air towards Jeff ... I heard Jeff yell "I asked you
once nicely move your truck" as other men came towards the driveway I could see how the
trucks(Galbraiths) had our driveway blocked and were double parked up and down the street and this
man was now threatening Jeff,As I seen other men from the trucks approaching Jeff I called 911.
These events are on record through my request of the Saint John Police.
In 2019, We hoped if we bought the lot behind us we could avoid further development and save some
green space which has duck ponds.) fell it would be a great addition to GEO or one of many walking
biking trails that Saint John has to offer ... not to over look that this has been the DUCKS
home/environment for many many years.As well it is and has been zoned for those reasons.
Jeff contacted Curtis Langill about the possibility of us purchasing lot 00369496 pid pan 1500590.
He told Jeff ; "The land was not for sale to anyone, not us, not Galbraith."
A few months later Jeff called again and was told by Mr.Langill that Mr.Galbraith could purchase the
land as he was "closer to the lot???"That he was entitled to purchase, not Jeff( I am not aware of any
such laws or bi laws but I am looking into it with Legal advise on weather "the person closest to a lot has
first right to purchase???"),I thought that any land the city tries to get rid of is advertised and put up for
public auction,) didn't see that land advertised in the paper??
Due to Covid or other reasons I was unable to find the S.J bi laws online although all other cities are
available.
Jeff then contacted Mark Reid and asked what was going on with Katie Drive??
Mark Reid said that Mr. Galbraith was now putting in a request to purchase the lot we had inquired about
previously.He informed Jeff that it would go before P.A.0 and he would inform him of when the meeting
would be.
Prior to the first P.A.0 meeting Jeff contacted Mr.Galbraith and asked him 'What are you willing to offerT
Mr.Galbraith told Jeff he was tied up with a land purchase and would contact someone to asses and get
back to him.Which he never did.
We will not use Mr. Galbraith's appraisals due to conflict as well as trust at this point.
Would it be fair to question weather Mr. Galbraith is waiting for the results of P.A.0 vote 'before' making
us an offer?
And if he is granted permission will he no longer have concern for the residents of Ocean Westway??
mainly US??
Forcing us again into a corner yet this time financially???
Where we will have to chose between what "he thinks our home is worth to him" vs I will build the road
anyway and give you no choice but to sell to me or ruin your home/ investments???
We can not just "replace" what we have and what we have invested here,or we would not have
invested??We will not sell and be forced to have less???It appears thus far Mr.Galbraith has his own
agenda which has nothing to do with community or the residential tax payers of Ocean Westway.
Including no concern for environmental and safety effects.
I work in an attempt to assist Jeff with the financial responsibility of being a home owner and tax payer.
I have been to mental health over this matter. In their opinion I am 1. An advocate for mental health 2.
definitely in a situational crisis and suffering from stress related factors.
I have had to miss time from work,call police,write letters,among many other feelings and emotions
brought on by this situation] ask counsel to seriously consider all factors I have listed in our attempts to
deal with Mr. Galbraith on any professional level.
Pertaining to the first letter from Mr. Galbraith he admits at that time he has had(past tense) "discussions'
182
with 'city officials'.
Whom were the city officials?
When and where did these discussions take place??
Are there minutes for said discussions??
Can "discussions" be defined??
Are these discussions some where I can find on city records?
As well as how much he may have invested at that point and up until this point on a 'possibility,'??
Are there others with an interest in his investment possibility's??
Was it, the plan 'before' we were made aware of 'the plan'??
Other residents say yes.
Was Exit reality aware of theses plans prior to our purchase?
Did they sell us our home under false pretence??
His words 'As you may be aware'...no we were NOT aware of any discussions you may or may not of had
with city officials until you wrote it to us??
'to discuss before we move forward'...
Who are 'we'??
..his company?
other company's??
Exit??
city officials??... is "move forward" part of the plan? ... Would it be fair to say Mr. Galbraith has been
moving forward with his plan all along???
Mr.Galbraith admits in letter on the direct effect it would have on our home and our lives having an
"access" road 40 to 50 feet from our house ! Let me remind you his already existing access road is quite
a distance from homes(as you can see marked X on the map) and away from a busy intersection with a
flashing light!! Why a second one?
Mr. Galbraith admitted in the last PAC meeting(the meeting to buy lot 00369496) that his main agenda is
an "access" road for his "trucks and heavy equipment".It was only after being 'questioned' that his
speaker mentions a 'possible' apartment building in the "future" and No ,they had no plans for it in the
near future at present, nor did they consider a date to be given?.Proof residential would not be the use or
the request of the change in zoning. The request by Mr. Galbraith I remind counsel is for an "access
road" to his INDUSTRIAL PIT.NOT a street.Not for an apartment building.
The city folded plans and left 50 year old foundations out there in the 70's and ruled it rural.Why??
In letter as well as meeting he admit -tingly states"It is easier to inconvenience one person then it is to
inconvenience 20 residents".
I ask counsel to consider this type of statement. It is a lie.
If in fact he is keeping track of the amount of "numbers" of "residents" his trucks are inconveniencing
...make it 21 HOMES?? We are in -convinced as well and more so, then the other 20.
Please do not make us the TARGET....
"easier?"
; Is it really easier to inconvenience 'one person??'...if so how is it you chose that 'one??'...if not for your
own agenda gain or purpose?Rather than, as he claims, to benefit 20 residents?
To benefit 20??... or benefit one?
Inconvenience. How much of a 'inconvenience' has this been for us only 2 years after the purchase of a
new to us home???
Galbraith Construction has in fact inconvenienced many, mean while causing the depreciation of our
homes at no cost to him or the city,yet at HIS profit.
We feel we have not been able to fully enjoy our home or move forward since having the very first
meeting with Mr.Galbraith.
This has brought us stress, questions,time and effort just to try to save a home, that, I remind counsel; we
183
are already paying for and maintaining???
Before Mr. Galbraith, Jeff had no intentions of selling and wanted to keep the home as a retirement
investment.
I/We have not been paid for our time, research or efforts on any of these matters.
Our reasons for opposing this project are as follows;
1.The admittance that 2340 Ocean west -way will be directly effected due to construction(structural
,environmental etc...) damage, within 50 feet of the dwelling.As can be seen on the map,the darkened
area with the small 'X' is our driveway.At the other end of the street(dead end ,no traffic)I have marked a
'X' where the existing road is,away from any dwellings,no where near a BUSY intersection.
I ask counsel to consider the fact we are the one person he chooses to "inconvenience" above and
beyond the other 20 that he already admittedly inconveniences. How would you feel if YOU were that
"one"??The Target.There are more then 20 residents which are effected by the congestion at the
intersection caused by industrial truck traffic and blind spots.No surveys were conducted.
2.HEALTH & SAFETY
I asked counsel to consider the amount of exhaust fumes ,truck traffic,dust and noise pollution the
residents of 2340 Ocean Westway will have to put up with everyday 5 or more days a week from sun up
til sun down if this access road is put through.Trucks are on idle and ready to go before 7am. This in a
community full of walkers joggers and bicyclist. I have video and can prove we get at least one truck and
sometimes two, every minute, of everyday.
Viewing the map one can imagine how a transport truck has to make a 90 degree/or more of a turn from
King William onto Ocean Westway and then another wicked turn from Ocean Westway onto Katie Drive
all within roughly 135 feet.) believe the trucks would have to enter the oncoming lane of traffic on Ocean
Westway to make that turn... Dangerous, Illegal and most likely causing congestion at the intersection and
BLOCKING in my driveway just to turn onto this street.
Basically trapping us in our drive way or cornering us in literally making it UNSAFE for us.This should be
a concern for all residents but will "effect" us directly.
As you can see on the map Katie Drive is parallel to our land AND runs on a angle,which will be 40-50
feet from our HOUSE and running THROUGH our back yard,which I assume would have to be "built up".
If approved those trucks will be continually sitting on idle(at a stop sign) parallel to our property with the
tail end towards our back yard and fumes being trapped by what is left of the green space we are trying to
save.
Everyday of our lives.breathing that in.What "buffer" could ever stop that??
Soil contamination due to this and or leaking trucks??
Possibility of a Truck striking our children, us or our Pet,our home or the people we love.
The corner of Ocean Westway and King William is VERY dangerous.This is a RESIDENTIAL
neighborhood as you can clearly see on the map which is across from Birchwood sub division.
We have MANY bikers,walkers etc ... I have witnessed MANY near accidents from my living room and it
will be just a matter of time before someone is hurt bad or even killed on that corner.
I now wonder why we have posted no truck signs which can be seen approx 200 feet or more before the
corner of King William and Ocean Westway, while Industrial trucks run through and past the sign??? ... the
bi laws and laws and zoning regulations ; why do we have them in the first place??
Our drive way is in a blind spot, on coming traffic from Ocean west way heading towards Spruce lake, as
you might be able to see on the map the bend in the road before our home(our property,on the corner) on
the map ... which will make Katie drive even more of a blind spot for oncoming traffic.
3. Goggle "What increases property value VS decreases??
Increase- walking trails,green space and 'public transit'
decrease -highways, industrial business,TRUCKS
This does not only have a "effect" on our home itself rather then our investment in the home !
4. Environmental effects on green space, ponds, nature and wild life destroying what is now used as a
walking trail, but no longer will be due to the recent sale.) could provide many articles on long term effects
WE
of industry and pollution on land if requested.All road ways must be 30 meters from wetland is in our N.B
environmental bi- laws. Wetlands help prevent drought and fire, moss takes 7000 years to grow,this is a
source for wildlife and protection for us on planet earth.
5. In the 70's the city of Saint John ruled the land remain rural.) ask counsel members to ask themselves
why their forefathers and mothers made that choice, why they canceled buildings if not to protect us? I
have try'd to find the minutes from the 70's as well as the bi laws for the city of Saint john to no prevail.I
wish for the committee to look into it for the reasons it was denied by the same committee so long ago.
Photos 007 and 005 are pics of my back yard after it rains.The amount of flood water seen depends on
how much rain fall we receive.) have had more in the backyard.How long before I see oil contamination in
that water???If this goes through?;My property line is that Spruce tree(pic 3) and the three green chairs
are on Katie Drive.As mentioned earlier Katie Drive is about 40-50 FEET FROM MY HOUSE; ON A
BLIND CORNER and VERY CLOSE to an intersection ... NOT A Very SAFE AND PRACTICAL place for
tractor trailers/heavy equipment making roughly 150-200 trips daily to be using!!!
Thank you
Leanne Chase
Jeff Tulk
185
1-4
f0
3
m
rn'
�
�
z
v
t
N
o
0
U
o
c
N
0
� Y
o
L }+
4-
O O
c
QE
o m
a v
O
+�
Y 4�
v M
.G O
m
M o
t
� o
3 �
o
J �
o �
L p-
VV) Y
U OL
M
H
M M
aj
`J a,
m O
3 .='
M s
O U
� 3
c�
IS
cn O C
o , o
.E
Q O
Q
a >
L � �
ANao v U
(U
s M t m 5
,_ a,
a 3 m N '7Cm L
of G1 O C U
>
C
M"
v_Uf
N
O
O
4J
D
A
w
3
.�
a
-a
tLn
00
(C
L
a
�
v'
o
L
a
5
O
o0
�
LA
o,
>
o
0
o
f°
L
GJ
.0
N
"
y
O
7
a
m
O
N
U
E
.i
3
a
A
fl.
o
0
O
a)O
M
f0
•L
aJ
3
L
,
o
in
c
can
N
U
f0
f0
.-
O
M
o
W
=
-
s
41
O
O
v
V)
5
to
C
L
-a
o
E
>
a
o
o
—
a
o
E
v
v
a
N
>
o
U
0
a -p
.0
1
ci
J
_0
r
MD
ILL
r
U
F-
Q
Mr
W
V
E
a 76
E
v —
ooa
3
o m o s ai
c 0
m o on
N a
a
E E 3 '0
v
3°
O
c o o>
a
v_, w
C O
H
y a
d .�
�
a`,
O
•� c p
L
+�•' L; fro N
@ y c c
✓ GJ y
E m a"
a.+
Cl L H c
E m 'c
m m
N 'Q
N
C O
C >' 'O > in
�_ L O N
C c
p
p T O.
3 c
O a� 3 0
N c c�6 OA
L v O
T -E41 L
T G
3 v 3 m m 0
3 N p C
E v°' o mc
y L mm
y
3 o N m 0
0 CL
O S m N tlA
3
N C
O T
3 3
v v
L
v v
c Ov c c 0
O
7 m c N
O 0 C
C a
c
U a y c u
v 3 M. •> a
v o
N o c �; a
r-
O o F OV .Q m
c c 'C m
- a
o @J
O m r- v ,.,
v m fa p c
N m
0 3p
a c
C O N o +L•+
a N 2' o
ry C L c
y
E v y, a
o m
o C 3
m
0 N 7 t' L
i m L Y
O. Z' aT+
L L L
y y j c 0 j
c
O v D. .n
m a c
.L+ p u
a v
p o O '6
O E
O 7 m
L O v O L
E 3
C
Fa 0— vNi p
3
u
C w
N m m
o
a�
> CLO
o w m
-E 1 L 0 .M
m
N m C
= c
.--i p w E
v GJ
L C >.
L t«LO G1 3
LO Y `O t v
c0 N
o@
c __ p L
3 ON
a> m
a_
v 3° o
4
u
v
y °'
v v v 0
v 3 °
v o a
v v
u c
L v
c > a-0
w m m c N Y
a� f0
m E 2-C N
N m 0
`-°
w O 41
N c
L E N m O
- o °
J OD L Y
�> N= 0
c CO
3 m
N N
E E v 0 0
'p O L a
N C
c R O
N yam.
w m N
a
m N
N y u V '
v°
o c u ar u 3
c
o$ u t�
'i Y
v= ° Ln
N
c c
7 N c
c y a
O�
Y m
0.0 00
a 0 co
O N N a p
Ou t'' N Q
N y C
N J rn w U1 to
O �'
'D c >O
O .p m v y
N C y Q
p
Y v
m> vNi o0 h0 t'
N G1 m N
•u m y c
p -O
u -0 0
O m L Q +L-'
3
O Z N
-C
N 3 U
y p
N N O °
l7 n •y •Q Q
c= m v
H r c
O m c m
-
+• w Z s
N m
L Ui m- Q
Y'Ily
jp,
jj)�ly�l1j'��i/1��Mhills
1ti
r`.
From:
Reade, Mark
To:
Buraess, Aimee
Subject:
FW: Municipal Plan Amendment -Ocean Westway
Date:
March 23, 2021 8:33:09 AM
Aimee, please forward to PAC.
Thanks
Mark Reade, P.Eng., MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner / Urbaniste Principal
Growth and Community Planning Services
Service de la croissance et de I'urbanisme communautaire
City of Saint John / Ville de Saint John
506 721 0736
From: Sophia Guitard <sophiaguitard@gmail.com>
Sent: March 22, 2021 11:02 PM
To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca>; Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Municipal Plan Amendment -Ocean Westway
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an
external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please
forward the email to sspamsamplena�john.ca or contact IT Service Desk
at 649-6047. * *
Thank you for providing us, one of the homeowners, a chance to provide input. Some of the
neighbors told us there was a meeting back in the fall; however we never had notice of the meeting.
As well, we had limited time to prepare our response or speak with our neighbours as we just
received your letter on March 18th with only 4 days to respond.
There is a lot to consider with this Municipal Plan Amendment, consideration of the people who
make their living operating and servicing the pit, the customers who need the rock at a reasonable
price and the home owners who live adjacent the pit and share the road. Compounding this is that
based on previous experience, the pit is not an 8 hr day 5 day week operation. It is normal for pit
operations to go beyond 8hrs and this year has been the most extended duration of operations at
the pit. This results in more trucks through the community, drilling, dynamiting, etc. Previously in
an attempt to minimize the negative effects of the noise and dust we kept our windows closed
through the week day hours of operation of the pit. In addition, with the help of experts, we
installed air handling units complete with filters which need to be maintained. I think it would be
realistic to conclude that for any neighborhood in which a pit of growing demand operates it would
eventually end up challenging the home owners wellbeing while adversely affecting the value of
their homes.
190
We were provided a topographical picture of the route and elevations (maybe the reason we were
provided that is that the noise will be lower and to help us understand that the watercourse effects
would be considered as there is a lake that spills over to a stream). Unfortunately we don't have the
knowledge or expertise to interpret or assess the potential outcomes of this change. There are
resources available with experts who could explain and quantify the effect of the change to the
community. This could include experts within either the municipal, provincial (and perhaps federal)
government (I added them because I think the fill is going to the port which is under federal control).
Again we are not experts however one part of the road on the proposed roadway, given the size and
number of the trucks and their trailers exiting or entering the road, looks like it would detract rather
than improve safety. We also have concern for the two neighbors whose properties is next to the
road. We have a tight -knit little community and care for our neighbors. While a movement of the
road does have some appeal as it would put more distance between our home and the truck traffic,
we don't want to make things better for some while making it almost unbearable for others.
Although experience would have us believe that the Galbraith organization would be considerate of
those directly impacted by the new roadway and take compensatory measures.
So we have established we are not experts however with the help of experts we could probably
better understand what the company is trying to do and the impact to our community. We
apologize for not having the knowledge nor expertize and the only thing we can offer is the use of
our house should the City's Planning Advisory Committee want to experience first-hand a typical
work day. Sometimes first-hand experience of the effects to the people helps create a shared
understanding which results in an even better solution.
We respectfully request that this proposal be turned down in its present form.
Yours truly,
Tom Keleher
Sophia Guitard
191
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
March 24, 2021
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment
545 Sandy Point Rd (PID 00051508)
On February 22, 2021, Common Council referred the above matter to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee
considered the attached report at its March 23, 2021 meeting.
The landowner was present at the meeting but chose not to speak. The
Committee asked no questions of staff and no members of the public spoke to
the file. The Committee moved staff recommendation unanimously.
No letters were received regarding the application.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 7,261 square metres, located at 545 Sandy Point Road,
also identified as PID Number 00051508, from Neighbourhood
Community Facility (CFN) to Low -Rise Residential (RL).
The City of Saint John
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of
land having an area of approximately 7,261 square meters, located at 545
Sandy Point Road, also identified as PID number 00051508:
(a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with
detailed building elevation and site plans, prepared by the proponent
and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the
design and location of buildings and structures, garbage enclosures,
outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle and bicycle parking,
Page 1 of 2
192
Xiaodu Ge 545 Sandy Point Road March 24, 2021
loading areas, landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting,
and other such site features; and
(b) The above elevation and site plans be attached to the permit
application for the development of the parcel of land.
Respectfully submitted,
Alex Weaver Crawford
Chair
Attachments
Page 2 of 2
193
The City of Saint John
Date: March 19, 2021
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting: March 23, 2021
SUBJECT
Applicant: Xiaodu Ge
Landowner: Moose and Panda Recreation Ltd.
Location: 545 Sandy Point Road
PID: 00051508
Plan Designation:
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Application Type:
Jurisdiction:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Low to Medium Density Residential / Stable Residential
Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN)
Low -Rise Residential (RL)
Rezoning
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 Tuesday April 6, 2021.
This application seeks to rezone a parcel of land from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN)
to Low -Rise Residential (RL) in order to facilitate the adaptive reuse of a former Place of
Page 1 of 4
194
Xiaodu Ge 545 Sandy Point Rd March 19, 2021
Worship. The applicant proposes the creation of a single dwelling unit and has not indicated any
further redevelopment plans for the site at this time.
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 7,261
square metres, located at 545 Sandy Point Road, also identified as PID Number
00051508, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to Low -Rise Residential
(RL).
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the Community
Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an area of
approximately 7,261 square metres, located at 545 Sandy Point Road, also identified as
PID Number 00051508:
(a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed
building elevation and site plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the
approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the design and location of
buildings and structures, garbage enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway
accesses, vehicle and bicycle parking, loading areas, landscaping, amenity
spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and
(b) The above elevation and site plans be attached to the permit application for the
development of the parcel of land.
DECISION HISTORY
The property was zoned Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) at the time of the Zoning By-
Law's adoption in 2014. Land Titles indicates that no decisions of Common Council currently
restrict the development of the property.
ANALYSIS
Proposal
This proposal concerns the establishment of a single dwelling unit in a former place of worship
situate within the Primary Development Area, as identified in Schedule B of the Municipal Plan.
The applicant, citing challenges relating to the COVID-19 Pandemic, has abandoned a former
proposal to establish an Entertainment Center -type use at the above address in favour of the
proposed residential use.
The proponent is not proposing to undertake significant interior or exterior renovations as a part
of the conversion. Further, as the proposed use is less intensive than the former use as a place
of worship and other uses allowed under the current zoning, the Zoning By -Law does not
require site upgrades per section 4.2(1) (a) of the by-law. While the Low -Rise Residential (RL)
Page 2 of 4
195
Xiaodu Ge 545 Sandy Point Rd March 19, 2021
zone does present the opportunity for more intensive residential use, the present application
does not arise from any such redevelopment proposal.
Service Areas Review
The application was circulated to a variety of City and external stakeholders on February 26,
2021. A review by the office of the Building Inspector reiterated the requirement for a Change of
Use Permit to verify key life -safety considerations, including the dimensions of bedroom
windows. Further to this, Saint John Water will require minor modifications to the water service
while Fire Prevention raised no issues with the proposal.
Site and Neighbourhood
The property is situated along a transitionary stretch of Sandy Point Road. The subject property
faces Hazen White -St. Francis School. To the north, residential use quickly attenuates as Sandy
Point Road approaches Samuel Davis Drive. To the south, Sandy Point Road contains an
abundance and a variety of residential uses, including medium -density residential uses near
Jack Street and MacLaren Boulevard. These medium -density residential uses are located to the
southwest of the subject property and are adjacent to the Somerset Street commercial corridor.
Adjacent lands are zoned for a variety of residential densities. The proposed Low -Rise
Residential (RL) zone suits the transition along Sandy Point Road in either direction; bridging
more intensive land uses near MacLaren Boulevard with single or two -unit residential uses
along Sandy Point Road in either direction. The existing development matches the typical use
profile of residential areas in the environs of Rockwood Park, with majority single family homes
clustered near intersections, commercial nodes, or institutional uses.
Municipal Plan and Rezoning
The land is partly designated as Stable Residential and partly designated as Low to Medium
Density Residential in Schedule B of the Municipal Plan. As is demonstrated in the attached
policy analysis, the current land -use designation supports more intensive residential
development. The proposed Low -Rise Residential (RL) zone allows for substantial
redevelopment without further review by Council and by the Committee. While no further
redevelopment is being considered at this time, the site is well positioned to facilitate the
transition of new and more intensive residential uses into the neighbourhood over time.
The Low Rise Residential (RL) zone corresponds to the intensity of the site's former use as a
Place of Worship and reflects the status quo. A variety of uses including Multiple Dwelling,
Group Dwelling, and Semi -Detached Dwelling permitted in the Low Rise Residential (RL) zone
maintain the intent of both Stable Residential and Low to Medium Density Residential future
land use designations defined in the Municipal Plan. This is briefly elaborated in the attached
Municipal Plan Policy Review.
Conclusion
The proposed rezoning achieves the adaptive reuse of a former place of worship. The
development proposal, though intended in part as a response to the ongoing COVID-19
Page 3 of 4
196
Xiaodu Ge 545 Sandy Point Rd March 19, 2021
pandemic, does present the opportunity for the Committee to consider the long-term growth
potential of this area. As demographic shift continues to change demands for community
facilities, the reuse of their former buildings for residential use is desirable from both
environmental and from community standpoints. Where the proposal makes little change to the
built landscape and represents a less -intensive use of land, the proposal does not disrupt the
neighbourhood context.
Further, the proposed rezoning enables the future redevelopment of the site in a manner which
suits the Municipal Plan. While not presently under consideration, the proposed rezoning would
remove a key barrier to such incremental development and would encourage growth when
market trends allowed.
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No alterative recommendation was considered.
ENGAGEMENT
Proponent
The landowner has not undertaken any additional public engagement, to date.
Public
In accordance with the Committee's Rules of Procedure, notification of the proposal was sent to
landowners within 100 metres of the subject property on March 11, 2021. The rezoning was
posted on the City of Saint John website on March 16, 2021.
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Author
Manager/Senior Planner
Commissioner
Benjamin Peterson, MA, BA
Jennifer Kirchner, MCIP, RPP
Jacqueline Hamilton, MCIP,
RPP
Contact: Benjamin Peterson
Telephone: (506) 650-0292
APPENDIX
Map 1: Aerial Photography
Map 2: Zoning
Map 3: Future Land Use
Attachment 1: Municipal Plan Policy Review
Attachment 2: Site Photography
Page 4 of 4
197
Attachment: Municipal Plan Policy Review
Policy Staff Comment
1-2:
In considering amendments to the Zoning Bylaw or the
imposition of terms and conditions, in addition to all other
criteria set out in the various policies of the Municipal Plan,
have regard for the following:
a. The proposal is inconformity with the goals, a. The proposal makes use of an existing
policies and intent of the Municipal Plan and the building and thus maintains the intent of the
requirements of all City bylaws; Zoning By -Law through section 8.5.
b. The proposal is not premature or inappropriate
by reason of:
i. Financial inability of the City to absorb costs
related to development and ensure efficient
delivery of services, as determined through
Policy 1-7 and 1-8;
ii. The adequacy of central wastewater or water
services and storm drainage measures;
iii. Adequacy or proximity of school, recreation or
other community facilities;
iv. Adequacy of road networks leading to or
adjacent to the development; and
v. Potential for negative impacts to designated
heritage buildings or areas.
c. Appropriate controls are placed on any proposed
development where necessary to reduce any
conflict with adjacent land uses by reason of:
i. Type of use;
ii. Height, bulk or appearance and lot coverage of
any proposed building;
iii. Traffic generation, vehicular, pedestrian,
bicycle or transit access to and from the site;
iv. Parking;
v. Open storage;
vi. Signs; and
vii. Any other relevant matter of urban planning.
d. The proposed site is suitable in terms of steepness
of grade, soil and geological conditions, locations of
watercourses, wetlands and susceptibility of flooding
as well as any other relevant environmental
consideration;
b. The proposal is not premature or
inappropriate by any of the reasons listed
below.
c. Future developments remain subject to
the requirements of the Zoning and
Subdivision By -Laws. Common Council have
the power to impose further restrictions
through Section 59 of the Community
Planning Act (SNB 2017, c.19).
d. While portions of the site may pose
topographical challenges in future, the
current proposal does not pose a significant
challenge in environmental considerations.
e. No such phasing is proposed.
f. Based on feedback from relevant City
service areas, the proposed development
attains these health and public safety
standards.
E
Attachment: Municipal Plan Policy Review
e. The proposal satisfies the terms and conditions of
Policy 1-5 related to timeframes and phasing of
development; and
f. The proposal meets all necessary public health and
safety considerations.
LU-87
Intend that the areas designated Stable Residential will
Where the proposed development makes us
evolve over time from a land use and built -form
of existing community context and the
perspective but that new and redeveloped land uses are to
proposed zone may facilitate an incremental
reinforce the predominant community character and make
increase in residential density over time,
a positive contribution to the neighbourhood.
subject to the land use control of that day,
the intent of this policy is met.
199
View of existing building from South.
View of Sandy Point Road looking South.
Site Photography
545 Sandy Point Road
View of Sandy Point Road looking North.
View of principal facade.
City of Saint John
March 19, 2021
200
545 Sandy Point Road - Aerial Photography
2021-03-19 1:2,500
0 0.01 0.03 0.06 mi
0 Subject Property Conditional Zoning o 0.. 0.04 0.09 km
Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Saint John, Province of New
Civic Addresses Property Parcels Brunswick, Province of Nova Scotia, Esri Canada, Esri, HERE, Garmin,
INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, US Census Bureau, NRCan, Parks
201 Canada, The City of Saint John
545 Sandy Point Road - Zoning
I
2021-03-10
Civic Addresses Property Parcels CG FD
Conditional Zoning Zoning CFN RU
R2 P 202
1:2,500
0 0.01 0.03 0.06 mi
0 0.02 0.04 0.09 km
Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Saint John, Province of New
Brunswick, Province of Nova Scotia, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P,
METI/NASA, USGS, US Census Bureau, NRCan, Parks Canada, The City of
Saint John
545 Sandy Point Road - Future Land Use
low
f Mtn if,
of
10 op
P. rL OP pi4
AW
tip ii - - Pr
OIL
/POP Ip - P 4W 4f ftP dg P Op
ep
r
2021-03-15 1:2,500
0 0.01 0.03 0.06 mi
0 Property Parcels Rural Resource
Park and Natural Area 0 0.02 0.04 0.09 km
J Primary Development Area GeoEye, Maxar
Future Land Use Stable Residential
203
Low to Medium Density Residential
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 1114
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 fifteenth day of
December, A.D. 2014, is amended by:
rezoning a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 7,261 square metres, located
at 545 Sandy Point Road, also identified as
PID Number 00051508, from
Neighbourhood Community Facility
(CFN) to Low -Rise Residential (RL).
- 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 X day of X, A.D. 2021 and
signed by:
Mayor/Maire
ARRETE NO C.P. 1114
ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE DE
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 quinze (15)
decembre 2014, est modifie par:
Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une
superficie d'environ 7261 metres carres,
situee au 545, route Sandy Point, egalement
identifie comme NID 00051508, de zone
d'installations communautaires de
quartier (CFN) a zone residentielle —
immeubles d'habitation bas (RL
- toutes les modifications sont
indiquees 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 arrete le X 2021, avec les
signatures suivantes :
Common Clerk/Greffier communal
First Reading - X Premiere lecture - X
Second Reading - X Deuxieme lecture - X
Third Reading - X Troisieme lecture - X
204
545 Sandy Point Road
Public Hearing Presentation
April 6, 2021
Growth & Community Services 205
SAINT JOHN
To rezone a parcel of land from Neighbourhood
Community Facility (CFN) to Low Rise Residential (RL)
to permit the adaptive reuse of a former Place of
Worship.
206
S i) SG���i polNe K
FO y lY1Q�l h v �
,i
Was yoorK �
gel g-, &A , Ix
207
M
J
leaf f �""
2021-03-19
EM Subject Property
Civic Mdresses
bob bandy Hcint Kcad - Aerial Hhctogra
Conditional Zoning
Property Parcels
-ff- View r,-..f Site
d
s'!
1:2.50C
0 0.01 0.03 O.X rni
j0 ., ., , , i, , ,
0 6,22 O.D4 9.091-
E- xEK
Site & Neighbourhood
rl
View from Sa:dy Point Road
Site & Neighbourhood
Site & Neighbourhood
Sandy Poin
1:2
2021-03-15 5
G Gill 4.G3 4.Q6 rryi
0 Prupaby Parcels
i� R;rrory oeveloperFNAna
RALFe Land Use
Law to- Medurn density FamzkTtal
545 Sandy Point Road - Zoning
2021-0&10
Civic Addresses Property Parcels CG
Conditional Zoning Zoning
1:2.500
0 0.01 0.w 0.06 mi
FD
0 Q.92 O.M 0.Aw
LLrm.if/ Nd Lw+*Lrk— �! d n .. Jdn. A.,ft d Ilw
• • k-�..rk P.rF F4— u—&. Er, HERE, irnh. rK�NT P.
rEluxaBa, u9cx ux c— 9—, NNE-, Pwu r—N.L ih-C cr
x.M lrir
Engagement
Letters were sent to all property owners within 100
metres of the subject property on March 12, 2021.
The public notice was posted on the City's website
on March 16, 2021.
No replies have been received from the public.
PAC Recommendation
At its 23 March, 2021 Meeting, the Planning Advisory recommended
the adoption of Staff recommendation:
1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 7,261 square metres, located at 545 Sandy Point Road,
also identified as PID Number 00051508, from Neighbourhood
Community Facility (CFN) to Low -Rise Residential (RL).
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of
land having an area of approximately 7,261 square meters, located at 545
Sandy Point Road, also identified as PID number 00051508:
(a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed building
elevation and site plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the
Development Officer, illustrating the design and location of buildings and structures, garbage
enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle and bicycle parking, loading areas,
landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and
(b) The above elevation and site plans be attached to the permit application for the
development of the parcel of land.
Staff Recommendation
1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of
approximately 7,261 square metres, located at 545 Sandy Point
Road, also identified as PID Number 00051508, from
Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to Low -Rise
Residential (RL).
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the
parcel of land having an area of approximately 7,261 square meters,
located at 545 Sandy Point Road, also identified as PID number
00051508:
(a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed
building elevation and site plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the
approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the design and location of buildings
and structures, garbage enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle
and bicycle parking, loading areas, landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior
lighting, and other such site features; and
(b) The above elevation and site plans be attached to the permit application for the
development of the parcel of land.
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-096
Report Date
March 29, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Public Works and
Transportation Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Prince William Street Loading Zone Relocation
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Barb Crawford
Tim O'Reilly
Michael Hugenholtz
John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
Your City Manager recommends Common Council authorize 1st and 2nd Readings
of the Amendment to the Traffic By-law in the form attached to M&C 2021-096.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Art Warehouse (120 Prince William Street) wishes to install a Sidewalk Cafe in
front of their business. Currently there is a loading zone along the East side of
Prince William Street directly in front of the Art Warehouse, which limits the use
of the street for the proposed Sidewalk Cafe. This proposed Traffic By -Law
amendment is considered a priority because it assists in the community economic
recovery from COVID-19.
Through discussions with City staff and letters received from businesses in the
area (including Woodchucks Axe Throwing, TUCK Studio and Spicer Merrifield
Gallery) there was consensus in moving the loading zone to the West side of the
street, adjacent to the existing accessible parking space. The attached Traffic By -
Law Amendment, if approved, would permit this change to occur.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
N/A
REPORT
217
-2-
The City's Traffic By -Law establishes standards to regulate the circulation, standing
or parking of vehicles in the City of Saint John. One such mechanism in this bylaw
is the designation of commercial loading zones within the City.
The Standards and Specifications for the Establishment of Sidewalk Cafes upon
Street Rights of Way permit installation upon a public sidewalk or public right of
way. Sidewalk Cafes are not permitted to be installed in Loading Zones, accessible
parking spaces or within nine meters (9m) of an intersection. The specifications
also state that Cafes are to be installed adjacent to an establishment.
The Art Warehouse has approached the City about the possibility of placing a Tier
3 Sidewalk Cafe adjacent to their business at 120 Prince William Street. At present,
there is a loading zone prescribed by the Traffic By -Law. The current location of
the loading zone would not permit the proposed Sidewalk Cafe.
In conversation with the business owner, it was noted that moving the loading
zone would be beneficial and supported by the neighboring businesses. The
loading zone relocation will help assist in the community economic recovery from
COVID-19. Letters of support have been received from the business owners at
Woodchucks Axe Throwing, TUCK Studio and Spicer Merrifield Gallery.
The revenue realized through the relocation of the loading zone to permit a
Sidewalk Cafe and collect associated parking and permit fees supports Council's
Priority to be Fiscally Responsible by contributing to the overall Sustainability
effort.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
Implementing this change will have a manageable service and financial impact.
There will be no loss of on street parking and, therefore, no lost revenue as it
relates to parking spaces.
Movement of the loading zone will permit a Tier 3 Sidewalk Cafe. There is an
associated application fee for the Cafe as well as fees for use of any on street
parking.
Public Works and Transportation Services will need to remove the existing loading
zone paint from the East side of the street and paint the relocated loading zone
218
am
on the west side. There are existing loading zone signs that will need to be
relocated.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
The Parking Commission and Growth & Community Services provided input.
The Art Warehouse and adjacent business owners provided input per the
attached documentation.
The General Counsel's Office drafted the attached Amendment to the Traffic By-
law.
ATTACHMENTS
Amendment to the Traffic By-law for Council's consideration
Letters in support (received via e-mail) from Woodchucks Axe Throwing, TUCK
Studio and Spicer Merrifield Gallery.
219
A BY-LAW TO AMEND A BY-LAW
RESPECTING THE TRAFFIC ON STREETS
IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, BY-LAW
NUMBER MV-10.1, AND AMENDMENTS
THERETO
ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE
RELATIF A LA CIRCULATION DANS LES
RUES DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN,
ARRETE NUMERO MV-10.1, ET
MODIFICATIONS AFFERENTES
Be it enacted by the Common Council of Lors d'une reunion du conseil municipal,
The City of Saint John as follows: The City of Saint John a d&cr&t& ce qui suit:
A By-law of The City of Saint John
entitled "A By-law respecting the Traffic On
Streets in The City of Saint John, By-law Number
MV-10.1" and amendments thereto, enacted on
the 7th day of October, A.D. 2019, is hereby
amended as follows:
1. Schedule "M" — Loading Zones is
amended by deleting the following words under
the following headings:
Street
Side
Limits
Prince William
East
Commencing at a
Street
point 9.5 metres
south of Princess
Street and
extending 9.2
metres Southerly
2. Schedule "M" — Loading Zones is
amended by adding the following words under the
following headings:
Street
Side
Limits
Prince William
West
Commencing at a
Street
point 18.3 metres
south of Princess
Street and
extending 9.2
metres Southerly
Par les pr&sentes, 1'arret6 de The City of
Saint John intitul& « Arret& relatif a la circulation
dans les rues de The City of Saint John, Arret&
num&ro MV-10.1 » et modifications aff&rentes,
decrete le 7e jour d'octobre 2019, est modifi&
comme suit:
1. L'annexe « M » — Zones de chargement
est modifi&e par la suppression des mots suivants
sous les titres suivants :
Rue
Cote
Limites
rue Prince
est
A partir d'un point
William
situ& a 9,5 metres
au sud de la rue
Princess jusqu'a un
point situ& 9,2
metres plus loin en
direction sud
2. L'annexe «M » — Zones de chargement est
modifi&e par 1'adjonction des mots suivants sous
les titres suivants :
Rue
Cote
Limites
rue Prince
ouest
A partir d'un point
William
situ& a 18,3 metres
au sud de la rue
Princess jusqu'a un
point situ& 9,2
metres plus loin en
direction sud
220
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., 2021 signed by:
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait
apposer son sceau municipal sur le present arrete
le 2021, avec les signatures
suivantes:
Mayor / maire
City Clerk / greffier de la municipalite
First Reading - Premiere lecture -
Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture -
Third Reading - Troisieme lecture -
221
Crawford, Barb
From: Crawford, Barb
Sent: March 26, 2021 9:38 AM
To: Crawford, Barb
Subject: FW: Re: letter attached - loading zone
From: Hazel Cochran <hello@theartwarehousesj.com>
Sent: March 17, 2021 1:57 PM
To: Crawford, Barb <Barb.Crawford@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Fwd: Re: letter attached - loading zone
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spa msample@saintiohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Hi Barb
Please see below email from Andrew Beale from Woodchucks
Thankyou
Hazel
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Andrew Beale<andrew@woodchucksaxethrowing.ca>
Date: Wed., Mar. 17, 2021, 1:56 p.m.
Subject: Fwd: Re: letter attached - loading zone
To: Hello <hello@theartwarehousesj.com>
Cc: judith <iudith@tuckstudio.ca>, Judith <iudith@iudithmackin.ca>
Hi Hazel,
As per our conversation we at Woodchucks are in support of moving the current loading zone in front of
your establishment (120 PW) to our side of the street (125 PW).
As you can see below, the chain of conversations that lead to this. We ultimately would like to replace the
handicap zone in front of the new Tuck Studio.
Good luck!
Andrew
1
222
Crawford, Barb
From: Judith Mackin <judith@judithmackin.ca>
Sent: March 26, 2021 1:22 PM
To: Crawford, Barb
Subject: Loading Zone - Prince William Street
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Dear Barb,
Please let this email serve as my formal support for moving the existing loading zone from the opposite side of the
street to our side / West side of the street. Thank you, and all your team for your hard work on this matter.
Best,
Judith
Judith Mackin
Please note: I now try to limit email checking to the early morning and end of the afternoon. If you need
immediate help please contact a Tuck Team Member by calling 506.642.9692
TUCK STUDIO (the shop + interiors)
t.506-642-9692
e.judith@judithmackin.ca
w.www.tuckstudio.ca
a.115 Prince William Saint John NB E21- 2134
*.Save paper, think before you print!
Do you get our Tuck updates? Sign up at tuckstudio.ca
1
223
Crawford, Barb
From: Hazel Cochran <hello@theartwarehousesj.com>
Sent: March 18, 2021 1:52 PM
To: Crawford, Barb
Subject: Fwd: Loading Zone
[ External Email Alert] **Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it
appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to
spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047.**
Hi Barb,
Please see below email from Shannon Merrifield in support of moving the loading zone
Please let me know if there is anything else I should do, I'm very nervous about timeline.
Talk soon
Hazel
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Shannon Merrifield <shannon @spicermerrifield.com>
Date: Thu., Mar. 18, 2021, 12:28 p.m.
Subject: Re: Loading Zone
To: Hazel Cochran <hello@theartwarehousesl.com>
Hi Hazel
We are in favour of moving the loading zone to the Woodchuck s / Tuck Studio side.
Any questions can be forwarded to me at this email, or tel 7219787
Best
Shannon Merrifield
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:39 PM Hazel Cochran <hello@theartwarehousesl.com> wrote:
Hi Shannon,
Thank you for returning my call earlier! I'm writing to confirm you are supportive of moving the loading zone from our
side of the street to the other side in front of Woodchucks/Tuck Studio.
Thank you,
Hazel
Shannon Merrifield, Co -Founder
1
224
Spicer Merrifield Gallery
116 Prince William Street
shannon@spicermerrifield
(506) 721-9787
n
SPICE R
MERRIFIELD
225
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 106-25
A LAW TO AMEND THE
MUNICIPAL PLAN BY-LAW
Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in
Common Council convened, as follows:
The Municipal Plan By-law of The City of Saint
John enacted on the 30th day of January, A.D. 2012
is amended by:
1 Amending Schedule A — City
Structure, by redesignating a parcel of land
having an area of 8.57 hectares, located adjacent
to 2100 Sandy Point Road, also identified as
PID No. 55238471, from Park and Natural Area
and Rural Resource Area to Stable Area
classification;
2 Amending Schedule B — Future
Land Use, by redesignating a parcel of
land having an area of 8.57 hectares, located
adjacent to 2100 Sandy Point Road, also
identified as PID No. 55238471, from Rural
Resource and Park and Natural Area to Major
Community Facility and extending the
boundary of the Primary Development Area
(PDA);
- all as shown on the plans 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.
2021 and signed by:
Mayor/Maire
ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE
RELATIF AU PLAN MUNICIPAL
ARRETE No C.P. 106-25
Lors d'une reunion du conseil communal, The
City of Saint John a edicte ce qui suit:
L'arrete concernant le plan municipal de The
City of Saint John decrete le 30 janvier 2012
est modifie par:
1 La modification de 1'annexe A —
Structure de la municipalite, afin de faire passer
la designation d'une parcelle de terrain d'une
superficie d'environ 8.57 hectares, situee
adjacent a 2100, rue Sandy Point, egalement
identifie de NID 55238471, afin de la faire
passer de zone de ressources rurales pares et
aires naturelles a zone stable;
2 La modification de 1'annexe B —
Utilisation future des sols, afin de faire passer
la designation d'une parcelle de terrain d'une
superficie d'environ 8.57 hectares, situee
adjacent a 2100, rue Sandy Point, egalement
identifie de NID 55238471, afin de la faire
passer de zone de ressources rurales et de
pares et aires naturelles a grandes
installations communautaires et repoussera
les limites de la zone d'amenagement primaire;
- toutes les modifications sont indiquees
sur les plans ci joints et font partie du present
arrete.
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait
apposer son sceau communal sur le present
arrete le 2021, avec les signatures suivantes :
City Clerk/Greffier communal
First Reading — March 29, 2021
Second Reading — March 29, 2021
Third Reading —
Premiere lecture — le 29 mars 2021
Deuxieme lecture — le 29 mars 2021
Troisieme lecture —
226
GROWTH & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
SERVICE DE LA CROISSANCE ET DU DEVELOPPEMENT COMMUNAUTAIRE
MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN / PLAN D'AMENAGEMENT MUNICIPAL
Amending the Primary Development Area
Modifiant la zone primaire de developpement
FROM / DE
Outside PDA
A 1'exterieur de ZPD
Applicant:
Location
PID(s)/NIP(s):
Ethos Ridge
2100 Sandy Point Road
55238471
TO/A
Inside PDA
A 1'interieur de ZPD
Considered by P.A.C./Considers par le C.C.U.: March 16 mars, 2021
Enacted by Council/Approuve par le Conseil:
Filed in Registry Office/Enregistre le:
By -Law #/Arrete #:
Drawn by/Crese par: Andrew Pollock Date drawn/Carte crese: March 30 mars, 2021
227
GROWTH & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
SERVICE DE LA CROISSANCE ET DU DEVELOPPEMENT COMMUNAUTAIRE
MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN / PLAN D'AMENAGEMENT MUNICIPAL
Amending Schedule "A"
Modifiant Annexe «A»
FROM / DE TO / A
Rural Resource Stable Area
Secteur de 1E] ressources rurale Secteur stable
Park and Natural Area
Parc et airs Stable Area
naturelle Secteur stable
Applicant: Ethos Ridge
Location: 2100 Sandy Point Road
PID(s)/NIP(s): 55238471
Considered by P.A.C./Considers par le C.C.U.: March 16 mars, 2021
Enacted by Council/Approuve par le Conseil:
Filed in Registry Office/Enregistre le:
By -Law #/Arrete #:
Drawn by/Crese par: Andrew Pollock Date drawn/Carte crese: March 30 mars, 2021
228
GROWTH & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
SERVICE DE LA CROISSANCE ET DU DEVELOPPEMENT COMMUNAUTAIRE
MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN / PLAN D'AMENAGEMENT MUNICIPAL
Amending Schedule "B"
Modifiant Annexe «B»
FROM / DE TO / A
Major Community
Rural Resource Facility
Ressources rurales 1E]Etablissement
communautaire majeur
Park and Natural Area Major Community
Parc et aire Facility
naturelle Etablissement
communautaire majeur
Applicant:
Location
PID(s)/NIP(s):
Ethos Ridge
2100 Sandy Point Road
55238471
Considered by P.A.C./Considers par le C.C.U.: March 16 mars, 2021
Enacted by Council/Approuve par le Conseil:
Filed in Registry Office/Enregistre le:
By -Law #/Arrete #:
Drawn by/Crese par: Andrew Pollock Date drawn/Carte crese: March 30 mars, 2021
229
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-109
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 fifteenth day of
December, A.D. 2014, is amended by:
Rezoning land having an area of approximately
8.57 hectares, located adjacent to 2100 Sandy
Point Road, also identified as PID No.
55238471, from Rural (RU) to Major
Community Facility (CFM) pursuant to a
resolution adopted by Common Council under
Section 59 of the Community Planning Act.
all as shown on the plan attached
hereto and forming part of this by-law.
ARRETE NO C.P. 111-109 ARRETE
MODIFIANT L'ARRETE DE 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 quinze (15)
decembre 2014, est modifie par:
Changement de zonage d'un terrain d'une
superficie d'environ 8,57 hectares, situe a
cote du 2100 Sandy Point Road, egalement
identifie comme NID 55238471, de rural
(RU) a grande installation
Communautaire (CFM) conformement a
une resolution adoptee par le conseil
municipal en vertu de I'article 59 de la Loi
sur I'urbanisme.
toutes les modifications sont
indiquees sur le plan ci-joint et font partie
du present arrete.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John
Saint John has caused the Corporate a fait apposer son sceau communal sur
Common Seal of the said City to be affixed le present arrete le X 2021, avec les
to this by-law the X day of X, A.D. 2021 and signatures suivantes
signed by:
Mayor/Maire
City Clerk/Greffier communal
First Reading — March 29, 2021 Premiere lecture — le 29 mars 2021
Second Reading — March 29, 2021 Deuxieme lecture — le 29 mars 2021
Third Reading — Troisieme lecture —
230
GROWTH & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
SERVICE DE LA CROISSANCE ET DU DEVELOPPEMENT COMMUNAUTAIRE
REZONING / REZONAGE
Amending Schedule "A" of the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John
Modifiant Annexe «A» de I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John
FROM / DE TO / A
Major Community
Rural Facility
Zone rurale RU F�i CFM Zone de grandes
installations
communautaires
Pursuant to a Resolution under Section 59 of the Community Planning Act
Conformement a une resolution adoptee par le conseil municipal en vertu
de I'article 59 de la Loi sur I'urbanisme
Applicant: Ethos Ridge
Location: 2100 Sandy Point Road
PID(s)/NIP(s): 55238471
Considered by P.A.C./Considers par le C.C.U.: March 16 mars, 2021
Enacted by Council/Approuve par le Conseil:
Filed in Registry Office/Enregistre le:
By -Law #/Arrete #:
Drawn by/Crese par: Andrew Pollock Date drawn/Carte crese: March 30 mars, 2021
231
2100 Sandy Point Road — Section 59 Conditions
That Common Council impose the following conditions on land having an area of 8.57 hectares, located
adjacent to 2100 Sandy Point Road, also identified as PID No. 55238471 pursuant to section 59(1)(a)(ii)
of the New Brunswick Community Planning Act:
(a) There shall be no vehicular access to the development off Pelton Road. The entrance to Pelton
Road is to be gated and utilized only by service vehicles required for limited inspection and
maintenance of the lift station and pad mount transformer. All other vehicles are to enter
the site from Sandy Point Road.
(b) The Sandy Point Road access driveway shall be owned and maintained by the property owner.
It shall not be owned, maintained or serviced by the City of Saint John;
(c) The development, in accordance with paragraph 4 (d) and (e), shall be completed within 5
years of the date the rezoning came into effect. If it is not completed within that time, Council
may take steps to cancel the resolution and agreement and repeal the rezoning pursuant to
Section 59(5) and 59(6) of the New Brunswick Community Planning Act; and,
(d) The development shall be restricted to the "Supportive Facility" use as identified in the Major
Community Facility (CFM) Zone of the City of Saint John Zoning By-law.
(e) The development and use of the parcel of land shall be in accordance with a detailed site plan,
landscaping plan and elevation plans, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval
of the Development Officer. These plans shall be attached to the permit application for the
development of the parcel of land and shall substantially conform to the landscape and site
plans contained in this report, with particular regard to the minimum 30 metre wooded buffer
between any building and the northern property line at Pelton Road and the minimum 30
metre setback and buffer from the Kennebecasis River.
232
j
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-094
Report Date
March 30, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Public Works and
Transportation Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT. Accessibility of Saint John Facilities
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Tim O'Reilly
Michael Hugenholtz
I John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
Your City Manager recommends Common Council receive and file this report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Accessibility, when it comes to supporting each person's ability to receive City
services, is a truly universal consideration. To manage scope, however, this report
focuses on a select number of areas in relation to accessibility. These focus areas
include on -street parking, the pedestrian network, and recreational facilities.
Within each of these focus areas in this report, achievements are celebrated, a
path to continuous improvement is outlined, and some planned short-term
outcomes are described. All organizations that assist the City in improving its
accessibility are valued and special consideration in this report is made of
Common Council's identified advisory committee for accessibility, the Saint John
Ability Advisory Committee.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
At its March 22, 2021 meeting, Common Council received a presentation by
Ability NB and this presentation was received and filed. Your City Manager also
committed that additional information was to be forthcoming to Council at the
next meeting, which will address accessibility issues including a discussion on
accessible parking in the uptown. This report responds to this commitment.
REPORT
Context
Saint John, like many municipalities, was built in times where value sets were
different than today. For example, areas of the Uptown were built when horse
233
-2-
and buggy were the primary mode of transportation. In other areas of the City,
the single occupant vehicle was prioritized as our transportation system grew.
Today, accessibility for the wide range of abilities each of us have is a priority. Its
prominence is clear throughout the City's various strategic plans and within
Common Council's priorities.
It is important to recognize that allowing our built environment to catch up with
our value of accessibility will take time. Some changes are going to be expensive
to implement and must be planned within available resources.
The City is privileged to have partners in various fields that keep us focused on
what is important and provide the expertise required to assist in problem solving
and prioritization. In the case of accessibility, organizations such as Ability NB,
the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB), and the Saint John Ability
Advisory Committee (SJAAC) are a few of these organizations that encourage and
assist us in turning our values into reality.
Although accessibility is a truly universal characteristic, this report focuses on a
select number of areas. These focus areas include on -street parking, the
pedestrian network, and recreational facilities. Within each of these focus areas,
achievements are celebrated, a path to continuous improvement is outlined, and
some planned short-term outcomes are described. Although all organizations
that assist the City in improving its accessibility are valued, special consideration
is made of Common Council's identified advisory committee for accessibility, the
Saint John Ability Advisory Committee.
On -Street Parking
In a recent presentation to Common Council, Ability NB provided advice on the
need to review barrier -free on -street parking spaces, particularly in the Uptown.
Celebrating Achievements
There is a total of 37 designated on -
street barrier -free parking spaces
and 14 off-street barrier -free
parking spaces managed by the
Parking Commission within the
Uptown. The figure to the right
shows a select number of these
spaces, with the blue areas showing
locations of on -street spaces and
the orange spaces showing off-
street spaces. Privately owned
barrier -free spaces are not shown.
d
®
uu
e
6
9
ob
4� x
234
-3-
Responding to citizen requests for on -street barrier -free spaces outside the
Uptown can and are completed seamlessly given the infrastructure requirements
are lower and the demand for other forms of parking or loading areas is lower
than in the Uptown. City staff completes a high-level review of the area where
the request is made, such as impact on neighbours or avoidance of hydrants or
other areas where parking is not permitted. City staff then simply confirm the
citizen has a barrier -free parking placard and request the citizen advise the City if
they are going to move, then City staff installs appropriate signage. Recent
examples of such installations include Rockland Road and Manawagonish Road.
Path to Continuous Improvement
City staff reached out to Ability NB following their presentation to Common
Council to better understand opportunities for improved access to barrier -free
spaces in the Uptown. Ability NB referenced two standards that should be
pursued:
• Canadian Standards Association (Accessible Design for the Built
Environment), and
• New Brunswick's Barrier -Free Design Building Code
Fully achieving these standards while considering both on -street and off-street
options is not expected to be possible. The associated standards include, for
example, distance and access between a space and the destination, as well as
the grade and dimensions of the space itself. The high demand for a variety of
street uses in the Uptown including parking, loading, vehicle traffic, snow
storage in winter, cyclists, and pedestrians is a challenge. Many Uptown streets
are steep where grade standards are not achieved. The City's Zoning By -Law
exempts any off-street parking requirements from being included with new
developments in portions of the Uptown; this adds to on -street parking demand
including barrier -free spaces. Although more opportunities for barrier -free
spaces at an acceptable grade may be available in Parking Commission lots, the
standard relating to distance between the space and the destination may not be
achieved.
Saint John is not the only jurisdiction facing a challenge of providing adequate
barrier -free parking availability in a busy uptown (or downtown) setting. The
City of Ottawa, for example, has provided some flexibility in where persons
requiring barrier -free spaces can park on -street that is not permitted for general
parking or loading purposes. This type of solution can get us closer to achieving
standards but must be weighed against other considerations such as general
traffic safety (i.e. impact on access to fire hydrants or sight lines at crosswalks)
before such solutions would be recommended to Common Council.
Implementation of MoveSJ is expected to have a positive influence on
decreasing demand for on -street parking generally Uptown, thereby freeing
235
-4-
more spaces for those in our community who truly need it such as those who
rely on barrier -free spaces within proximity of their destination. A heightened
prioritization on active and public transportation modes in MoveSJ (in contrast
to the City's previous Transportation Plan), particularly in the Uptown, will help
support a reduced reliance on the single occupant vehicle and the demand on
infrastructure by vehicles including parking spaces.
Plans for Short Term Outcomes
A five -phased short-term plan is being considered to align Uptown parking
availability more closely with the referenced standards:
1. Understanding more clearly the gap between existing barrier -free parking
availability and these Canadian and Provincial standards,
2. Considering innovative solutions in other jurisdictions, such as in Ottawa,
3. Identifying and implementing high -impact yet cost-effective ways in
which this gap can be closed,
4. Incorporating barrier -free standards for on -street spaces as part of future
Uptown Capital projects, and
5. Considering additions to the supply of barrier -free on -street or public lot
parking spaces when Uptown developments are approved that otherwise
would have been required to provide these barrier -free spaces.
Ability NB has offered to assist City staff in understanding this gap through
discussions after their presentation to Common Council. Another stakeholder, a
Mr. Dave Stonehouse, has offered to assist in exploring solutions used in the City
of Ottawa. The Saint John Parking Commission has identified potential new on -
street barrier -free spaces that will be considered as part of the assessment. City
staff will likely procure external resources to complete a more complete gap
analysis (phases 1 and 3 of the short-term plan) to complement the input from
Ability NB, Parking Commission, and Mr. Stonehouse to allow cost effective
solutions to be identified and implemented in a timely manner.
Pedestrian Network
The City's pedestrian network includes some 400 km of sidewalks, crosswalks
crossing 1300 lanes, as well as 55 km of trails in Rockwood Park alone. With such
a large inventory, and some of which being constructed prior to heightened
attention on accessibility, the system will continue to have barriers to
pedestrians with various abilities for some time.
Celebrating Achievements
The City has made significant progress in improving pedestrian accessibility,
mainly over the last 15 years or so. Communications, advancements in
Accessible Pedestrian Systems, consistent use of specifications and best
236
-5-
practices, integration of improvements into Capital road projects, and various
trials and innovations are all categories of various achievements.
City staff maintain dialogue with the Saint John Ability Advisory Committee and
the CNIB generally on pedestrian system accessibility and when problem solving.
For instance, City staff participate in the annual Disability Awareness Week Town
Hall where dialogue on how the City's transportation system can be improved
for various ability levels. Very recently, City staff worked with the CNIB on
innovative solutions that allowed the City's audible messaging at Accessible
Pedestrian Systems (APS) to continue to serve their clients with low or no vision
while allowing the messaging to begin serving citizens in both of our province's
official languages.
Thirty-five (35) and counting APS are installed at signalized crosswalks around
the City. Thirty-four percent (34%) of the City's total inventory of 72 signalized
intersections have APS crosswalks and 54% of the City's total inventory of 11
mid -block "half signal" crosswalks include APS. APS systems follow a certain set
of guidelines established by the Transportation Association of Canada that
include the types and locations of various audible messages and that help guide
low vision pedestrians across the street. Guidelines also extend to details such
as pedestrian push button height and proximity. To promote independence of
low vision pedestrians, consistency in design is very important, and City staff are
very detailed to ensure guidelines are followed consistently wherever possible.
A 700 m stretch of trail in Rockwood Park is considered accessible and the 1 km
length of trail around Lily Lake contains accessible elements such. Although
Rockwood Park trails are designed for various skill sets, at least 3% of the 55 km
of trails in Rockwood Park include options for pedestrians with varied abilities.
The City's General Specifications used for all roadway improvements have been
enhanced to better serve pedestrians with various abilities. Saw cuts have
replaced trowel joints along sidewalks in providing a smoother surface for
pedestrians in wheelchairs. Installed access ramps at crosswalks are required to
have consistent specifications such as provision of a level transition between the
sidewalk and the street as well as a requirement for directional slope in the path
of travel to assist in orienting pedestrians with low vision or those in wheelchairs
when the space is available. These specifications were enhanced around 2011
and therefore most, if not all, sidewalks rebuilt over the past 10 years have been
upgraded with these accessibility improvements.
Virtually every Capital road project where sidewalks and/or crosswalks are
present include pedestrian accessibility enhancements. The above -mentioned
specifications are incorporated into each Capital project. Catch basins are
purposefully designed with gaps to accept storm water but can also dangerously
snag assisted walking devices; these are typically moved from crosswalks during
a street's design stage. Several Capital projects in recent years that include
237
signalized intersection rehabilitation have incorporated APS such as at
Main/Chesley, Union/St. Patrick, King Square North/Sydney, and
Westmorland/Consumers. Underground wiring to support APS and other
improvements at the McAllister/Major's Brook intersection were incorporated
into a recent Asphalt Resurfacing project; these improvements supported
improved access to the recently opened Irving Oil Fieldhouse, a project in itself
providing focus on accessibility.
As part of the annual street resurfacing program, old asphalt curb and sidewalk
that was heavily deteriorated was replaced with new concrete curb and
sidewalk. This has totaled over 17 km just in the past five years.
The City is continuing to undertake trials and incorporate innovations to advance
further the accessibility of the pedestrian system. Tactile Warning Systems
compliment other messaging at access ramps between sidewalks and
crosswalks; their alignment, textured surface, and contrasting yellow colour
advise a low vision pedestrian they are about cross a street and assist in
orienting them where to cross the street. The City has undertaken a trial of a
stainless -steel product at the Brunswick/Paul Harris intersection and a trial of a
composite material product at the King Square North/Sydney intersection. The
latter location was a selection site because of the use of an APS on a diagonal
crosswalk. The City has not made a final decision on material type as there are
trade-offs including durability over time with snow clearing impacts. Criteria also
needs to be set on where they are to be installed.
Another recent innovation is the incorporation of APS technology into
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) crosswalks. RRFB crosswalks have
only started to be installed in the City over the past approximately five years and
have only been recognized in national best practices in the past approximately
three years. However, their effectiveness with bright flashing lights and cost
effectiveness, with solar power and wireless elements, have caused them to
become very popular in our community. Recently, City staff have found a
version of these RRFBs that include APS audible messaging. The first installation
was on Millidge Avenue.
As indicated previously, access ramps at intersections can, among other benefits,
orient a pedestrian in a wheelchair or with low vision in the correct direction
across a street within a crosswalk with distinct ramps. Creating this clear
orientation is more easily accomplished, and supported in the City's General
Specifications, at a wider sidewalk area where wide medians between the street
and sidewalk exist. Given the orientation benefits, the City has trialed these
distinct ramps at less -than -ideal locations such as at Union/Sydney. Although
the distinct ramps were achieved, an abrupt and narrow "peak" is created
between the two distinct ramps. There are times where you need to take some
risk and see how results turn out with a real -world trial given the associated
benefit potential.
No
Path to Continuous Improvement
Accessibility of the City's transportation system is a paramount priority of
MoveSJ, the City's new Transportation Plan. The Plan's vision is to "Allow each
citizen the ability to use the mode of transportation of choice and to do so
safely". Achieving this vision requires the unique abilities possessed by each are
considered in this guiding strategic plan.
As just one straight forward, practical example, MoveSJ recommends longer
times be provided at signalized crosswalks for all pedestrians. In the case of
signalized crosswalks frequented by many pedestrians with disabilities, MoveSJ
recommends even longer times be provided to cross the street.
Plans for Short Term Outcomes
Several plans are underway in 2021 and over the next couple of years to improve
the accessibility of the City's pedestrian network. Following are some examples:
• The existing RRFB signalized crosswalk in front of the YMCA on Churchill
Boulevard is planned to be upgraded with APS technology in 2021,
• One crosswalk at the Bayside/Causeway intersection is planned to be
upgraded with APS in 2021,
• Each Capital project into the future that involve concrete sidewalks,
including the planned reconstruction of over 70 City blocks in the Uptown
area, will incorporate the improved specifications for access ramps and
smooth sidewalk joints,
• City staff have been working with the Saint John Ability Advisory
Committee and potentially other community partners toward a 2021
application to the Healthy Communities Initiative for funding for APS
RRFB crosswalks at Somerset/Lime Kiln Road, Millidge/Sussex, and
Grandview at NBCC, all being at Transit stops,
• The longer walking times at signalized intersections as recommended in
MoveSJ will begin to be implemented in 2021,
• Improvements to the APS at the King/Charlotte signalized intersection,
identified previously as a high priority, are to be considered as part of a
Capital road project in the next few years.
Playgrounds and Parks
Celebrating Achievements
The following City playgrounds currently include accessible elements:
• Rockwood Park,
• Market Place West,
Canadian Tire Jumpstart playground at Rainbow Park,
• Forest Hills,
239
-8-
• Little River Reservoir
In very recent years, the City partnered with Canadian Tire Jumpstart in
constructing the new playground at Rainbow Park and the City invested in
replacing the safety and accessible surface at the Market Place West playground.
Five (5) of the 6 (83%) of the currently constructed Regional or District
Playgrounds identified in PIaySJ include accessible elements.
The City of Saint John also invests from time to time in supporting accessibility
improvements to playgrounds operated by partner organizations via the Land for
Public Purpose fund or Community Grants. Playground projects at Seaside Park
and Island View schools in recent years are examples.
Path to Continuous Improvement
The City's Parks & Recreation Strategic Plan, PIaySJ, provides direction to
continuously improve the accessibility and general overall quality of certain
recreational facilities, particularly those at District and Regional parks. Many of
the recent and contemplated future City investments have been targeted toward
improvements at these parks.
To manage expectations, it is important to point out that PIaySJ also identifies
the over -abundance of neighbourhood -level playgrounds in Saint John. Many of
these playgrounds are not accessible and the intent in PIaySJ is to either divest of
or decommission most of them over time. Instead of trying to invest public
funds too thinly that won't achieve quality outcomes, for accessibility or
otherwise, these funds instead are meant to be focused for higher quality
outcomes at the fewer district and regional playgrounds.
Plans for Short Term Outcomes
Several accessibility improvements are planned or envisioned at various District
or Regional recreational facilities over the next few years. Following are a few
examples:
• Approved Capital funds will be used to replace a wooden accessible play
structure at Market Place West.
• The Dominion Park Master Plan that is in development includes
accessibility features including within a playground proposed for that
facility.
• As part of the design work for the public space improvements at Fundy
Quay and Loyalist Plaza, consultations will be had with the Saint John
Ability Advisory Committee for specific feedback on how to ensure
mobility needs are considered, and
• City staff are working with Ability NB to complete an accessibility audit of
the Shamrock Park district facility with a focus on the tennis courts,
M
parking lot, and washrooms. City staff's intent is to apply through the
Inclusive Community Recreation Infrastructure Fund to assist in paying
for identified deficiencies.
Once the playground at Dominion Park is reconstructed as part of the park's new
Master Plan, 100% of the constructed Regional or District playgrounds will
include accessible features.
Role of Saint John Ability Advisory Committee
Inclusion of input from various organizations such as the CNIB, Ability NB, and
individual members of the community on accessibility will continue to be
important.
City staff does want to highlight as part of this report the relationship between
Common Council and the SJAAC. The SJAAC is a committee of Common Council
which addresses issues and concerns relating to persons with disabilities
pertaining to City programs, policies, and services. The SJAAC works to be the
voice for an inclusive community by removing barriers and create a more
inclusive Saint John. This is achieved through information sharing, awareness,
advice, support, and empowerment. In this way, the mandate of the SJAAC is to
work with Mayor, Council, and city staff to create a barrier free city that is a
more welcoming place to live, work, play, and conduct business.
The SJAAC is made up of an accomplished group of volunteers with expertise in a
variety of fields including education, employment, and housing. For the scope of
this presentation, it should be noted that pedestrian safety, transit system and
the built environment remain standing agenda items.
The members of the committee recognize that moving to a more accessible and
inclusive community is a long-term process. SJAAC remains pleased with their
engagement with Council and city staff. Improvements in the transit system,
pedestrian safety and city owned/managed facilities have been noted. This is an
opportunity to reinforce the important role that both the committee and the
municipality play in accessibility and inclusion.
SJAAC believes Saint John has taken the lead in the province in developing a
clearance tone for the APS. Saint John is currently one of the few municipalities
in New Brunswick that has a sound source during the clearance phase of
pedestrian signals. SJAAC believes a unique clearance tone currently being
piloted at APS in the City as part of the plan to ensure these systems serve both
official languages may be recommended and used by other municipalities within
the province or the country.
SJAAC was a part of the consultation phase for recreation projects such as The
Canadian Tire Jumpstart Playground at Rainbow Park and the Greater Saint John
241
-10-
Fieldhouse. SJAAC also continues to work with Saint john Transit on driver
training and Audio/Visual supports.
In terms of future opportunities, the SJAAC would like to encourage the
prioritization of inclusion and accessibility when implementing budgets and
plans. Further, SJAAC would like to encourage City staff and Agencies, Boards,
and Commissions to consult with SJAAC during all phases of projects.
The SJAAC prioritizes the following projects in relation to facilities discussed in
this report:
• A proper APS at Charlotte/King,
• APS and accessibility of traffic island at McAllister/Westmorland,
• APS added to RRFB at the YMCA crosswalk, and
• Accessible main entrances at recreation facilities, particularly Shamrock
Park tennis courts and City owned arenas,
City staff's communications with the Ability Advisory Committee are strong as
detailed in this report, anchored through the City's liaison with the committee.
However, improvements will be explored, including:
• Transitioning to increased and regular engagement of service -specific
staff such as those related to transportation,
• Reviewing Capital transportation project designs, and
• Scheduling more regular SJAAC presentations and discussions with
Common Council.
Common Council's Safe, Vibrant City priority highlights the importance of
accessible transit and active transportation networks. Common Council's Valued
Service Delivery priority highlights the importance of partnerships with
organizations, such as those detailed in this report.
Various City strategic plans focus on accessibility outcomes, also as detailed in this
report.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
It will be important to include a lens of accessibility into our design process for
major capital projects, including the development of new facilities and major
street reconstructions. This will lead to better service outcomes, and financial
outcomes as it is always far more expensive to retrofit accessibility features after
the fact than during original construction.
Building a more accessible community will make Saint John a more attractive
place to live, which is becoming more and more important with our aging
242
-11-
population. Better accessibility has benefits not only for those with disabilities,
but for the community.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Ability NB
Saint John Ability Advisory Committee
Mr. Dave Stonehouse
Growth & Community Services
Saint John Parking Commission
Public Works & Transportation
ATTACHMENTS
City Staff Presentation
243
Accessibility of
Saint John Facilities
SAINT JOHN
April 6, 2021
244
• Service to persons with all ranges of abilities +
• ..and improving service for all
• Prioritized value of our community
• Council priorities (public and active transportation)
• Saint John Ability Advisory Committee
• PlanSJ, PlaySJ, MoveSJ
(P-
SAINT JOHN
245
• Changing values
• Built environment expensive to upgrade
• Quality, not just quantity, is important
• Valuable partners
• Problem solving
• Prioritization
• Keep us focused
• Words to actions
• On -Street Parking
• Pedestrians
• Parks & Playgrounds
SAINT JOHN
246
• Standards (CSA, Provincial)
• Proximity, availability
• Grades, dimensions, access
• Challenges applying to Uptown on -street spaces
• Hills, access to sidewalk, demand for road space, off-street parking exemptions
• What is our gap and how can we work to close it?
• Plan for Short Term Solutions
• Gap analysis, assistance from Ability NB
• Consider solutions used in other jurisdictions (i.e. Ottawa)
• Deliver on high impact, economical wins
• Incorporating standards into Capital road general specifications
• Situational awareness as the Uptown grows
• Streamlined approach for on -street spaces outside Uptown
• Reducing parking demand with Transportation mode shift via MoveSJ
SAINT JOHN
247
• Enough sidewalks to run over 9 marathons
• 1300 vehicle lanes crossed with marked crosswalks
• Dialogue key to improving accessibility
• Annual Disability Awareness Week Town Hall
• Regular contact with Ability Advisory Committee and CNIB
SAINT JOHN
• Audible messaging and
orientation
• Push button height and
location
• Access ramps with
gentle slope, smooth
transition, and oriented
where feasible
• Consistency and
attention to detail
• 35 APS and counting in
Saint John
Union/St. Patrick intersection
(P-
SAINT JOHN
249
• Access ramps and saw cut joints with every rebuilt concrete
sidewalk
• APS included within Capital or Resurfacing projects
• Union/St. Patrick
• Main/Chesley
• King Square North/Sydney
• Westmorland/Consumers
• McAllister/Major's Brook
( P.- -
SAINT JOHN
250
Innovations and Trials
�e
_ -�� .irsirs�mccw.
woo
qi+t �.
Varning Surfaces
iare
N/Sydney
Improve your skillr
t $ f
" hoar• cowwr ,x
klllr .nd m r.l -
nn ?�
s 11120/2019 01:04+f
Single APS sound source nTM
King/Charlotte
SAINT IOHN
252
• RRFB APS at Churchill/ YMCA
• Federal funding application for 3 more RRFB APS
• All near Transit stops
• Partnering with SJ Ability Advisory Committee
• APS at Bayside/Causeway
• Longer walk times at signalized crosswalks
• MoveSJ recommendation
• Access ramps and saw cuts with Capital and Resurfacing projects
SAINT JOHN
253
• P I aySJ
• Playgrounds with accessible elements
Rockwood Park
Market Place West
Canadian Tire Jumpstart playground at Rainbow Park
• Forest Hills
• Little River Reservoir
• LPP/Community grants to support accessible school playgrounds
Plans for Dominion Park
• Plans for Shamrock Park complex
SAINT JOHN
254
Playgrounds and Parks
J. fir.
-
-�
I
,.ML—_ —dhkkL—
11/20/2019 0016
.
—
4 i
• Advisory Committee to Common Council
• Current Committee's priorities
• Proper APS at Charlotte/King
• APS and accessibility of traffic island at McAllister/Westmorland
APS added to RRFB at the YMCA crosswalk
• Recreation facility main entrances accessibility
• Improvements
Increased engagement of service -specific staff
SJAAC review of Capital designs
• Suggest regular SJAAC presentations to Common Council
SAINT JOHN
256
• Partners help us remain focused and aligned
• Values, strategic plans
• From plans to quality service improvement
• Progress made but work still to do
• Including planned short-term improvements
• Staff recommendation to receive and file report
( P.- -
SAINT JOHN
257
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No.
2021-103
Report Date
April 01, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Strategic Services
His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Cyberattack — Restoration Costs and Projected Recovery Estimate
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author
Commissioner/Dept. Head
City Manager
Stephanie Rackley-Roach
Kevin Fudge
I John Collin
RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends that Common Council receive and file this report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 13, 2020, the City of Saint John experienced a cyberattack. The scope of
the attack was wide -reaching with significant damage caused to the City's IT
infrastructure. The need to shut down the network and preserve the compromised
environment for forensic investigation impacted business continuity with no ability to
reuse the existing information technology equipment. Therefore, consulting and
hardware requirements for event management and recovery were acquired under the
emergency provisions in the City's Procurement Policy and other related legislation.
The main consulting vendors were engaged through External Counsel approved by the
City's Insurer. All major components for the network rebuild were purchased under the
emergency provisions. The total projected cost for consulting services, network
hardware, licenses and support, vendor and hardware for application restorations, and
other costs related to the recovery effort is $2,950,409 plus HST. While the new network
is almost complete, there is considerable work remaining for the restoration of all the
applications used to deliver efficient public service. Some costs are estimated and will be
finalized as more work is completed.
The City has both a property and cyber insurance policy. It is estimated by staff that at
least 85% of the recovery costs will be submitted to the Insurer under these two policies.
The amount recoverable will be determined by the Insurer upon receipt of the City's
claim. The City is still within the timeframe to finalize the claim and will monitor
requirements closely to ensure timelines are met to recover costs. Costs not covered by
insurance will be covered by the operating budget or the appropriate reserve fund.
Renewal and enhancements of information technology requirements are funded out of
the IT reserve, with projects planned and presented within the capital budget annually.
r
-2-
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
Not applicable.
REPORT
On November 13, 2020, the City of Saint John experienced a significant ransomware
cyberattack. While City staff supported by a third -party vendor worked diligently to shut
down the network immediately to mitigate risk, the City's network infrastructure and
information systems sustained significant damage. Significant emergency investments
were required to recover from the cyberattack.
The City has cyber insurance through AIG for these types of malicious attacks. The City
was advised by the Insurer to retain External Counsel. Through External Counsel, Blake,
Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) and later Norton Rose Fulbright (Norton Rose) several
third -party consultants were engaged to support the City in containment, forensic, and
recovery efforts. In the interest of time under the emergency provisions in the
Procurement Act, these engagements were approved through the Insurer and signed -off
by the City Manager. Formal engagements through External Counsel included the
following, with initial cost estimates outlined in Table 1. Agreements with Blakes/Norton
Rose for external counsel and Redbrick Communications for public relations support were
also executed. The statements of work outlined for these engagements did not include a
total estimate. However, as services were required, the estimated costs are outlined in
the financial section of the report.
Table 1: Consultants eneaeed and retained under External Counsel
Consultant
Role
Statement of Work
FireEye Mandiant
Forensic Investigation
$162,000 USD + Report TBD +
(Mandiant)
applicable tax
Bulletproof Solutions
Containment and Recovery
$489,250 CAD + HST
ULC (Bulletproof)
CYPFER
Ransomware Recovery &
$10,250 + applicable tax
Payment Facilitation
The scope of the cyberattack to the City's network, including both the City and Police
domains, was wide reaching. It involved encryption to most Windows -based servers and
many system endpoints (i.e., laptops and computers). Given the damage to the City's
information technology infrastructure, recovery needed to start immediately to ensure
continuity in the delivery of critical public services.
The creation of a temporary network required the City to look at building with new
hardware for several reasons:
• Requirement to preserve the environment for the forensic investigation.
• Requirement to preserve the environment for the criminal investigation.
• Risk in restoring the City's compromised hardware with the potential that
remnants of the malware may continue to reside in the compromised
environment and lead to potential reinfection.
259
-3-
With existing hardware not available for immediate rebuild of the network, the City
worked through Bulletproof to procure the necessary components. This was based on
understanding City and Police infrastructure requirements and designing a system that
would meet these needs in the short term. The replacement of network hardware has
been right -sized and is scalable for future growth if needed.
The Enterprise Agreement approved by Common Council on April 6, 2020 for Microsoft
Office 365 and the estimated percentage of recoverable data from the City's backup
systems allowed for the immediate start of the restoration of the City's network.
Costs associated with Bulletproof consulting fees and hardware purchases for the
network and backup systems are outlined in the financial section of this report. This
includes an estimate of the requirement to procure additional security for the City's
network that will be incorporated into the City's Microsoft Enterprise Agreement in the
second year of renewal April 1, 2021.
As the City works to restore applications used to deliver services to the public, several
additional costs have been projected. While it is critical to get these applications
operational as soon as possible, the acquisition of goods and services required for
restoration are no longer considered an emergency. For the most part, supply and service
agreements have and will be used to ensure timely restoration.
Procurement Policy and Agreements
In order to restore critical public services and facilitate the network rebuild there have
been several purchases made under specific provisions in several procurement policies
and agreements.
The cyberattack, for the purposes of procurement will be considered as one event and all
costs associated with getting a new network in operation will be associated with this
event. Under section 5.12 Special Circumstances (Emergency) Purchases, of the City of
Saint John Procurement Policy, permits the City to follow a non-competitive bid process
to remedy an urgent situation. According to section 5.12(e), the relevant details shall be
included in a report submitted to Council at the earliest possible opportunity following
the special circumstances.
Section 153.1(e) of the General Procurement Act of New Brunswick also allows the direct
purchase of "goods and services that are strictly necessary and, for reasons of urgency
brought about by an event unforeseeable by the following entities, cannot be obtained
in a timely manner through an open competitive bidding process."
Similarly, Article 19.12(d) of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement of
Canada (CETA) and Article 513(d) of the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) allows
for limited tendering "if strictly necessary, and for reasons of urgency brought about by
events unforeseeable by the procuring entity, the goods and services could not be
obtained in time using opening tendering." Limited tendering "means a procurement
method whereby the procuring entity contacts a supplier or suppliers of its choice."
Furthermore, Article 513.1(i) states that limited tendering is also allowed "if goods or
consulting services regarding matters of a confidential or privileged nature are to be
purchased and the disclosure of those matters through an open tendering process could
reasonably be expected to compromise government confidentiality, result in the waiver
of privilege, cause economic disruption, or otherwise be contrary to the public interest."
N
-4-
In this case, releasing any information by way of public tender would not be in the best
interest of the City or the public given the unlawful nature of the event at hand.
Insurance
The City has two separate insurance policies that give rise to coverage for events such as
the cyberattack: property policy and cyber policy.
Cyber Policy
The City's cyber policy is with AIG, one of the world's leading insurance companies for
cyber insurance. There are five (5) sub -limits, two (2) are for third -party liability coverage
(protection from liability from damages to others) and three (3) are first -party sub -limits
(coverage for our own expenses and damages). There is one deductible ($50,000) that
applies to an occurrence regardless of which sub -limits are used, and there is one overall
limit ($2,000,000) that applies as well.
The two (2) third party sub -limits are for Security and Privacy Liability and Regulatory
Action Liability. The three (3) relevant first party sections are:
• Cyber Extortion — Monies paid by an Insured, with the Insurer's consent to end a
security or privacy threat that would otherwise cause harm to an Insured and the
cost to investigate such a threat.
Event Management — Reasonable and necessary expenses incurred within one
year of a security or privacy event to conduct investigations (including forensic),
crisis management, notification and education services, insurer services, and/or
data restoration.
• Network interruption — Cost from the time of interruption until the 120th day
after the interruption that would not have been incurred but for the interruption.
Property Policy
Within the City's property policy with AIG there is coverage for damage to our computer
systems. This includes replacement of hardware and the cost to restore the data with a
limit of $6 Million. The deductible is $1,000. No exclusions apply.
The policies have separate coverages; however, the Cyber policy can "stack" upon the
property policy. In this case, the property coverage would respond first to the property
damage (hardware) and data recovery. The cyber policy would cover any excess over this
property policy, also bringing in those other coverages such as the cost of extortion, event
management, and service interruption.
The determination as to what the Insurer deems as recoverable will not be confirmed or
finalized until the City submits the final claim. The City is still within the timeframe to
submit the Proof of Loss and will monitor requirements to ensure timelines are met to
recover costs.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Providing an update on the financial and service impacts of the cyberattack recovery
efforts supports Common Council's priority of being fiscally responsible. It ensures
accountability and transparency to the taxpayers.
261
-5-
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
Since the cyberattack on November 13, 2020, the City with the support third party
vendors has made tremendous progress. The most significant work was the rebuild of
the network and backup requirements. Bulletproof led the design and build with support
of the City's IT team. With the urgency to implement a secure network, Bulletproof
leveraged supply agreements from several municipalities and governments to procure
the components required. Procurement of these requirements were done under
emergency and necessary clauses outlined in the City's Procurement Policy, General
Procurement Act of New Brunswick, Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement of
Canada (CETA), and the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA).
Actual and projected consulting and material costs related to Bulletproof are outlined in
Tables 2 and 3. Costs are presented without tax.
Table 2: Bulletproof Solutions ULC consulting costs
Bulletproof Solutions
Original
Actual Cost
Estimated
Total
Funding to be
ULC Consulting
SOW
as of Feb 28
Remaining
Projected
submitted
Recovery Activities
$444,250
$629,273
$257,133
$886,406
Insurance
Forensic Investigation
$45,000
$72,000
$0
$72,000
Insurance
Activities
Projected Total
$489,250
$701,273
$257,133
$958,406
Table 3: Bulletoroof Solutions ULC material costs
Bulletproof Solutions ULC
Actual Costs
Projected
Total
Funding to be
Hardware, Licenses, Support
as of Feb 28
Costs
Costs
Submitted
Network Hardware Equipment
$325,516
$0
$325,516
Insurance
Server Storage Hardware
$148,206
$0
$148,206
Insurance
Equipment
Backup Hardware Equipment
$323,282
$0
$323,282
Insurance
Support / License - Network
$87,532
$0
$87,532
Operating
Reserve
Support / License - Server /
$2,938
$0
$2,938
Operating
Storage
Reserve
Support / License - Backup
$228,725
$0
$228,725
Operating
Reserve
Additional Fire Walls / Switches
0
$69,199
$69,199
IT Reserve
Totals
$1,116,199
$69,199
$1,185,398
Mandiant with support from Bulletproof completed a forensic investigation of the City's
compromised network in February 2021. Costs related to Mandiant include both consulting and
technology fees related to remote access to the compromised network. The necessary technology
was implemented by Bulletproof. The investigation involved a review of all the logs from the
Bulletproof security operations center generated from the City's SIEM (Security Information and
Event Management) solution. Actual costs are noted in Table 4.
Table 4: FireFve Mandiant goods and services costs
Original
Actual Costs
Projected
Total
Funding to be
FireEye Mandiant
SOW
as of Feb 28
Cost
projected
Submitted
Costs
Incident response
$100,000
$139,200
$0
$139,200
Insurance
activities
262
-6-
Incident remediation
$40,000
$0
$0
$0
Insurance
planning and support
Reporting
TBD
$24,000
$0
$24,000
Insurance
Endpoint Incident
$9,000
$9,000
$0
$9,000
Insurance
Response Technology
Network Incident
$12,000
$0
$0
$0
N/A
Response Technology
Other
$1,000
$0
$0
$0
N/A
Totals USD
$162,000
$172,200
$0
$172,200
Estimated CAD
$210,600
$223,860
$0
$223,860
Remaining consulting and material costs related to network recovery and event
management are outlined in Table 5.
Table 5: Consultine/Vendor eoods and services costs
Consultant /
Actual Costs
Projected
TotalFunding
to be
Vendor
Service
as of Feb 28
Cost
Projected
Submitted
Costs
Anisoft
Backup Recovery
$16,278
$16,277
Insurance
Ivan's Audio and
Council Chamber
$1,806
$1,806
Insurance
Visual
Support
Blakes / Norton
External Counsel
$24,000
$24,000
Insurance
Rose
Ransomware
CYPFER
Recovery / Cyber
$10,250
$10,250
Insurance
Advisory Services
Total Projected
$28,334
$24,000
$52,334
With the backup in place, the City's IT Team is moving on to application restores. Several
financial and public safety applications have already been restored. Microsoft Office 365
has been implemented providing users with email, administrative applications, and
collaboration tools. Applications have been prioritized for restoration based on service
impact, vendor availability, and the City's IT Team resource capacity. Estimates for the
recovery are being developed as application restoration facilitators work through a seven -
step process that includes defining requirements, designing, and planning steps.
Estimated vendor and hardware costs related to application restores is $458,290 plus
HST. Agreements and equipment purchases will be brought forward to Common Council
for approval as required by the City's Procurement Policy.
Table 6 outlines miscellaneous costs related to support the recovery and ensure business
continuity in the delivery of public services.
Table 6: Incident resaonse actual and oroiected costs
Incident Response Costs
Actual Costs
Projected
Total
Funding to be
Projected
as of Feb 28
Cost
Submitted
Costs
Business Continuity - Service
$6,543
$6,543
Insurance
Interruption
Service Interruption — HVAC
$7,691
$7,691
Insurance
120 days
Communications
$171
$171
Insurance
Forensics
$94
$94
Insurance
263
-7-
Recovery
$3,743
$3,743
Insurance
Response
$10,681
$10,681
Insurance
City Overtime - Recovery
$33,198
$10,000
$43,198
Insurance
Total Costs
$62,121
$10,000
$72,121
Overall actual and total projected costs are presented in Table 7. While a significant
portion of the network rebuild has been completed, significant costs remain for the
application restores. The estimate provided for application restores should consider a
contingency of plus or minus twenty percent (+/- 20%).
Of the total projected costs in the amount of $2.95 Million, the City's response team
estimates that at least 85% ($2.5 Million) of total costs should be recoverable through the
City's two insurance policies. Actual costs incurred and whether they will be covered
under the cyber policy cannot be confirmed until the insurer provides their written
position following the City's submission of Proof of Loss. The remaining costs that could
range between $400,000 and $500,000 will either be absorbed into IT operating budget
or applicable reserves. Renewal and enhancements of information technology
requirements are funded out of the IT reserve, with projects planned and presented
within the capital budget annually.
Table 7: Overall oroiected recovery and event manaeement costs related to the cvberattack
Response Component
Actuals
Projected
Total Projected
Bulletproof Consulting
$701,273
$257,133
$958,406
Bulletproof Hardware/Licenses/Support
$1,116,199
$69,199
$1,185,398
FireEye Mandiant
$223,860
$0
$223,860
Anisoft
$16,277
$0
$16,277
Ivan's Audio and Visual
$1,806
$0
$1,806
Blakes / Norton Rose
$0
$24,000
$24,000
CYPFER
$10,250
$0
$10,250
Vendor Support Application Restores
0
$458,291
$458,291
Incident Response Costs
$62,121
$10,000
$72,121
Projected Totals
$2,131,786
$818,623
$2,950,409
A final cost component of the City's network rebuild is Microsoft licensing for security.
The Enterprise Agreement approved by Common Council did not include security costs
for moving to Office 365 as the initial plan was to implement a hybrid system of a hosted
and on -premise solution over the three-year life of the agreement. Security is currently
being purchased through Bulletproof and will transition to Microsoft with the year one
reconciliation of licensing needs in April of 2021. Security costs are based on a per user
basis. The estimated cost of security is $195,000 plus HST. As with all licenses related to
users, these costs are charged back to the respective service areas as an operating cost.
These funds are not included in the 2021 budget; however, they will be incorporated into
future operating budgets. The installation of Microsoft security features is an industry
best practice and significantly improves the City's cyber security risk profile.
M
-8-
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
This report was prepared in collaboration with the City's Finance Team, Supply Chain
Management Team, Risk Management Team, and the Information Technology Team.
ATTACHMENTS
None
265
FUNDY NORTH
Fishermen's Association
March 19, 2021
Saint John Common Council
City Hall
15 Market Square
Saint John, NB
E21- 1E8
Attention: Mayor Don Darling, Benjamin Peterson & Members of the Common Council,
RE: Fundy Quay Project
We have been informed that the portion of the Fundy Quay Seawall Refurbishment and Storm
Sewer Outfall project, including repairing and raising the existing seawall surrounding the
Fundy Quay site, will begin April 1. The spring Harbour fishery will be starting in April as well.
The Fundy North Fishermen's Association represents the local Harbour fishers and we are
concerned this work could severely impact these fishermen if all precautions are not taken.
In the letter of advice issued by DFO to the City of Saint John, it was requested that the
contractor "Schedule work to avoid any impact on the commercial gaspereau fishery located
adjacent to the Project area, within the Harbour". We respectfully trust that this request will
be adhered to in order to avoid disrupting the spring commercial gaspereau fishery that will
be taking place in the Harbour. The Port of Saint John has agreed to postpone work at Long
Wharf until June 7 so as not to impact this fishing season. Our hope is that the City will give
the Harbour fishers the same consideration.
We look forward to the opportunity to discuss this matter with you at your earliest
convenience.
Darlene Norman -gown
Assistant Director
Fundy North Fishermen sAssociation
Phone: (506) 529-4165
Fax (506) 529-4531
darlene@fundynorth. org
www.f dynorth.org
3 Prince of Wales Street, St. Andrews, NB E5B 3W9
Phone: (506) 529-4165 Fax: (506) 529-4531
Email: darlene@fundynorth.org
www.fuiorth.org
Darlene Norman -Brown March 30, 2021
Assistant Director
Fundy North Fisherman's Association (Fundy North)
3 Prince of Wales Street
St. Andrews, NB
E5B 3W9
Dear Ms. Norman -Brown,
The City of Saint John (`the City') is happy to provide the following response to Fundy North
Fisherman's Association's (Fundy North) letter dated March 19, 2021 regarding the Fundy Quay
Sea Wall Refurbishment and Storm Sewer Outfall Project (`the Project'). The City completed a
Request for Review under the Fisheries Act for the Project during the project planning phase,
which has been reviewed and approved with advice by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans
(DFO). The request for review document and the corresponding letter of advice issued by DFO
contained several mitigation strategies and recommendations, which are being undertaken as part
of the Project. One of these mitigation strategies was to "schedule work to avoid any impact on
the commercial gaspereau fishery located adjacent to the Project area, within the Harbour". The
City and our consultant. Dillon Consulting Limited have incorporated the timing of the
gaspereau fishery season into the scheduling and planning of the Project activities/sequencing, as
described below.
The pile driving work required for the Project, is scheduled to begin in July 2021 to ensure it
takes place outside the gaspereau fishery season. The work that will take place throughout May -
June 2021 consists of the removal of concrete on the face of the existing wall and installation of
a new concrete face (including the use of a floating barge). This work will generally consist of
removal of deteriorated concrete, installation of new rebar, installation of formwork, and placing
of new concrete. The work has been scheduled to start at the east end of Pugsley Slip and
proceed toward the harbour as to not impact the fishery.
Additionally, we offer the following details on the nature of the work, including mitigation
strategies to reduce the impact to fish and fish habitat that is protected under the federal Fisheries
Act:
Concrete removals will take place above the water level. Floating platforms anchored to
the wall will be used to ensure that no removed concrete or other debris will enter the
water.
P.O. Box 1971 C.P. 1971
��— Saint John, NB Saint John, N.-B.
Canada EA 4L1 Canada E2L 4L1
SAINT JOHN wwwsab'injohn.ca
• The work area for the barge to be used in the work will be located within 10 m of the face
of the sea wall. The barge will not extend past this 10 m work area. The purpose of the
barge is to store materials, equipment, and provide a staging area for divers who will
assist with installing rebar and formwork on the face of the wall.
• The in -water work area for Project activities being undertaken from May to June 2021 is
limited to within 10 m of the face of the Sea wall, as described above. Furthermore, the
majority of this work will take place within Pugsley Slip.
Should you have questions about the information provided in this letter, please do not hesitate to
contact the undersigned.
Regards,
Samir Yammme, Project Manager
City of Saint John
Samir.yammine a saintLohn.ca
506-648-4667
C: Mayor and Council
City Manager — J. Collin
Commissioner — B. McGovern
Common Clerk — J. Taylor
N
N ZOA —
�� D�m
ii �F( rODy�
F
mr0
Ul r o
fT1 F x x
Z mmm�
�oomZ
RN
/•, F F �./ a "'\ � ;ar=," ;=x=%
xj
M 6F to
f1Z F \
N g
/F " £ g F \
r r FeFFF / G O \
20
F/
Z>O A4
ro
z
m 8 `\ '�\\■ eF e F F
y
A " 6
x
n
A m m
m
D v h� F F �3aSs a31tlM
A D ya
O �
N
Do D
Aa
�r
O r
`c
m y::a�s asitlM —
S &
a
269
QDS'am2T low
M&C No.
2021-097
Report Date
March 30, 2021
Meeting Date
April 06, 2021
Service Area
Strategic Services
SUBJECT: Parking Commission
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN
SESSION OF COUNCIL
As part of the sustainability initiatives, the City is seeking to improve both the
efficiency and effectiveness of the organization and to review the City's Agencies,
Boards and Commissions. In this context, it is considered appropriate to wind up
the Parking Commission and transfer, as appropriate, the operations, employees,
and assets to the City, with a view to eventual dissolution of the Parking
Commission. The Parking Commission has been consulted and is generally
supportive of the initiative.
This report seeks to obtain direction from Council to commence the wind-up of
the Parking Commission and to begin the work of transferring assets to the City
and assignment of contracts.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
The City of Saint John having created the Saint John Parking Commission (the
"Corporation"), a New Brunswick corporation, by resolution, DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE that (a) the commencement of the wind-up of the Corporation be
hereby approved; and that (b) City staff be authorized to engage in acts ancillary
thereto, including specifically the making of formal requests to the Corporation
to transfer assets to the City, the assignment of contracts and the seeking third
party consent to such assignments.