Loading...
2021-07-26_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jourCity of Saint John Common Council Meeting AGENDA Monday, July 26, 2021 6:00 pm 2nd Floor Common Council Chamber, City Hall 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 1.1. Land Acknowledgement 1.2. National Anthem 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1. Minutes of July 12, 2021 2 - 13 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 5. Consent Agenda 5.1. Engineering Services: Woodlawn Park Lift Station (Recommendation in Report) 14 - 17 5.2. Contract No. 2021-13 Asphalt Resurfacing 2021 — Program Adjustments 18 - 20 (Recommendation in Report) 5.3. Contract 2021-16: Coleson Cove Raw Water Transmission Main Upgrades 21 - 23 (Recommendation in Report) 5.4. Proposed Public Hearing Date — 1720 Manawagonish Road and 867 Millidge 24 - 26 Avenue (Recommendation in Report) 5.5. Letter of Support: Zoomers on the Go (Recommendation in Report) 27 - 33 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 8. Delegations / Presentations 9. Public Hearings - 6:30 p.m. 9.1. Stop Up and Close a portion of Consumers Drive (1st and 2nd Reading) 9.2. Proposed By -Law Amendment - 191 Princess Street — Heritage Conservations Areas By -Law with recommendation to deny the amendment 10. Consideration of By-laws 10.1. Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment - 60 Technology Drive 10.2. Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment with Sec 59 Conditions - 489 Sea Street and 0 Woodville Road (3rd Reading) 10.3. ProposedZoning By -Law Amendment with Sec 59 Conditions and Sec 131 Agreement — 730,858, 864 and 906 Dever Road (3rd Reading) 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1. Federal Government Department for Saint John (Councillor Ogden) 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1. Demolition of Vacant, Dilapidated and Dangerous Building at 110 Victoria Street (PID 00376517) 12.2. Management Job Evaluation 12.3. Dominion Park Master Plan Phase 1 Implementation 13. Committee Reports 13.1. Finance Committee: Terms of Reference 13.2. Finance Committee: Internal Audit Services 13.3. Finance Committee: ABC Reporting Policy 13.4. Finance Committee: Asset Management Policy Updates 13.5. Finance Committee: Utility and General Fund — 2021 Capital Programs Revision III 13.6. Finance Committee: 2022 Gas Tax Funds — Quality of Life Investments 2 34 - 36 37 - 86 97 - 183 184 - 185 186 - 212 213 - 230 231 - 295 296 - 300 301 - 323 324 - 337 338 - 343 344 - 362 363 - 384 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 15.1. Saint John Police Force 2020 Annual Report (Recommendation: Receive for Information) 15.2. J. Bezanson: Request to Remove Heritage Designation - 114-116 Wentworth Street (Recommendation: Refer to City Manager) 15.3. J. Bezanson: Request to Remove Heritage Designation - 66 Sydney Street / 161 Princess Street (Recommendation: Refer to City Manager) 15.4. SJ Ability Advisory Committee: Request to Present (Recommendation: Refer to the Clerk to schedule) 15.5. SJ Local Immigration Partnership: Request to Present (Recommendation: Refer to the Clerk to schedule) 15.6. The Chamber: 35th Annual Golf Tournament - Ticket Purchase Request (Recommendation: Refer to Clerk to purchase tickets for interested Council members) 16. Supplemental Agenda 17. Committee of the Whole 17.1. Contract Management software - HighQ 17.2. Letter of Engagement with PWC 17.3. Appointments to Committees 18. Adjournment 385 - 403 .o. E .E 407 - 407 a[ -* ,1 I ; 409 - 411 412 - 415 416 - 419 420 - 421 3 City of Saint John Common Council Meeting Monday, July 26, 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: 4:00 p.m., 2nd Floor Boardroom, City Hall 1.1 Approval of Minutes 68(1) 1.2 Land Matter 68(1)(d) 1.3 Financial Matter 68(1)(c) 1.4 Potential Litigation 68(1)(g) 1.5 Legal Matter 68(1)(c,f,g) 1.6 Financial Matter 68(1)(c) 1.7 Financial Matter 68(1)(c) 1.8 Nominating Committee 68(1)(b) 1.9 Legal Matter 68(1)(f) 1.10 Personnel Matter 68(1)(j) Present: Also Present: COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 MINUTES — REGULAR MEETING COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN JULY 12th, 2021, AT 6:00 PM 2nd FLOOR COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mayor Donna Noade Reardon Deputy Mayor John MacKenzie Councillor -at -Large Brent Harris Councillor -at -Large Gary Sullivan Councillor Ward 1 Greg Norton Councillor Ward 1 Joanna Killen Councillor Ward 2 Barry Ogden Councillor Ward 3 Gerry Lowe Councillor Ward 3 David Hickey Councillor Ward 4 Greg Stewart Councillor Ward 4 Paula Radwan City Manager J. Collin Associate General Counsel E. Hagan Commissioner Human Resources S. Hossack Fire Chief & Chief Emergency Management Services K. Clifford City Engineer Utilities & Infrastructure Services M. Baker Commissioner Growth & Community Services J. Hamilton Chief of Staff & Chief Financial Officer K. Fudge Commissioner Public Works and Transportation Services M. Hugenholtz Director Legislative Services / City Clerk J. Taylor Deputy City Clerk P. Anglin Administrative Clerk R. Evans 1 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 1. Call to Order To conform to the Government COVID-19 Mandatory Order Council Members and staff participated in person with social distancing and masking. To ensure public access and transparency the meeting is being live streamed on the City's YouTube channel. Rogers TV also live streams and archives the meeting. 1.1 Land Acknowledgement Deputy Mayor J. MacKenzie read the Land Acknowledgement and called for a moment of reflection. 1.2 National Anthem The Saint John Symphony Youth Orchestra performed 0 Canada by video. 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1 Minutes of June 28. 2021 Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Sullivan: RESOLVED that the minutes of June 28, 2021, be adopted. MOTION CARRIED. 3. Approval of Agenda Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie: Resolved that the agenda of July 12, 2021, be approved with the addition of the following items: 17.1 Termination of Lease the Infusion Tea Room 17.2 Appointment to Committee MOTION CARRIED. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest Councillor Lowe declared a conflict of interest with item 9.1 Sea Street. 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021- 200: Proposed By -Law Amendment - Heritage Conservations Areas By -Law Common Council set the public hearing date of July 26, 2021, to consider an amendment to the 2 9 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law concerning the removal of 191 Princess Street from the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area. 5.2 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted Report M&C 2021- 199: 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 substantially similar form to the previous Licence Agreement with the term to end on December 31, 2021, to provide for the operation 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 Licence Agreement and any documents ancillary thereto. 5.3 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021- 197: Contract 2021-02: Princess Street (Water St. to Prince William St. & Canterbury St. to Germain St.) - Sanitary and Storm Sewer, the contract be awarded to the low tenderer, Terraex Inc., at the tendered price of $278,858.90 (including HST) as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. 5.4 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021- 195: Project Contributions from LPP Trust Fund, Common Council: 1. Approve an update to guidelines for the City of Saint John's 'Policies for the Acceptance of Land for Public Purposes and Use of LPP Funds', as outlined in M&C 2021- 195; 2. Authorize $40,000 from the Land for Public Purpose Trust Fund be allocated to assist with a community -led project for the overhaul of the Forest Hills Pickleball Courts; and 3. Authorize $5,000 from the Land for Public Purpose Trust Fund be allocated to assist with a community -led project for the installation of a rain garden in Montgomery Crescent Park. 5.5 That as recommended by the Saint John Transit and Parking Commission in the submitted report entitled Appointment of Austin Proctor, Badge No. 9983 Canadian Corps of Commissionaires as a By -Law Enforcement Officer, Common Council approve the following: That pursuant to Section 14 of the Police Act of the Province of New Brunswick, the Common Council of the City of Saint John does hereby appoint the following member of the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires as By -Law Enforcement Officer with the responsibility and authority to enforce provisions of the Parking Meter By -Law and the 3 0 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 provisions of Section 5, Section 5.1, Section 7, Section 8, Section 15 and Section 16 of the Saint John Traffic By -Law, namely: Austin Proctor, Badge No. 9983; and further that this appointment shall continue until such time as the appointee ceases to be a member of the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires or until the appointment is rescinded by Common Council, whichever comes first. 5.6 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021- 202: Patio Licence for Market Square Boardwalk, 1. The City of Saint John enter into the Licence agreement with The Hardman Group Limited as attached (M&C #2021-202); and further 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the said Licence Agreement. 5.7 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021- 203: CentralSquare Technologies Terms for Script Development, the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the CentralSquare Technologies, LLC Terms for development services and all documents ancillary thereto. Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Sullivan: RESOLVED that the recommendation set out in each consent agenda item respectively be adopted. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 8. Delegations/Presentations 8.1 Health Growth Plan UNB Saint John Petra Hauf Vice -President UNBSJ, and David Emerson Special Advisor to the President UNBSJ entered the meeting. Referring to the submitted presentation entitled Health Growth Plan UNB Dr. Petra Hauf described the Integrated Health Initiative (IHI), an interdisciplinary approach reforming health care. Many years in the planning, the IHI is built on a long-time focus on health at Tucker Park, Saint John Regional Hospital, UNB Saint John campus, Dalhousie Medicine New Brunswick and NBCC Allied Health. The provincial and federal governments, private sector, UNB and partners will contribute to the construction costs of the IHI facility. 4 5 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Norton: RESOLVED that the Health Growth Plan UNB Saint John presentation be received for information. MOTION CARRIED. 9. Public Hearings - 6:30pm Having declared a conflict of interest with item 9.1 Councillor Lowe withdrew from the meeting. 9.1 Proposed Rezoning and Section 59 Amendment with Staff Presentation and Planning Advisory Committee report recommending approval — 489 Sea Street and 0 Woodville Road (1st and 2nd Reading) Commissioner Hamilton advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.38 hectares, located adjacent to 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN); amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.14 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00385781, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to Low Rise Residential (RL); and amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1.79 hectares, located at 0 Woodville Road also identified as PID Number 00394973 and a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Low Rise Residential (RL) to construct an additional building for a special care home and to construct a residential subdivision. Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting a copy of Planning staff's report considered at its May 18, 2021, meeting at which the Committee recommended the rezoning of a parcel of land located at 489 Sea Street and 0 Woodville Road as described above with Section 59 conditions. Senior Planner Mark Reade described the rezoning of the parcel of land located at Sea Street / Woodville Road. The proposal will permit the construction of a special care home and townhouse development. Active Transportation, off -road trails, culturally specific landscaping, and Land for Public Purposes (LPP) were discussed. The Mayor called for members of the public wishing to speak against the rezoning. Two members of the public registered to speak against the proposal. Colleen Gallant recommended policies for using cultural landscaping and advised of the environmental impact letter from the Federal Government to residents in the site area addressing the need for protection of migratory birds. Alan Dittrich provided comments against the 5 X COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 rezoning stating the environmental impact on migratory birds, and deer living in their natural habitat on the site. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favour of the rezoning with Matthew Blain, Hughes Surveys presenting on behalf of the applicant. Responding to questions on the culturally specific landscaping, biodiversity, permaculture engineering, the City Manager advised that staff submit a modified Section 59 recommendation prior to third reading which would impose additional landscaping requirements to ensure the congruency with the existing natural environment. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.38 hectares, located adjacent to 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN); amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.14 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00385781, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to Low Rise Residential (RL); and amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1.79 hectares, located at 0 Woodville Road also identified as PID Number 00394973 and a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Low Rise Residential (RL), be read a first time. MOTION CARRIED. Read a first time by title, the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John." Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Harris: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.38 hectares, located adjacent to 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN); amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.14 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00385781, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to Low Rise Residential (RL); and amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1.79 hectares, located at 0 Woodville Road also identified as PID Number 00394973 and a portion of PID Number 6 7 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (132) to Low Rise Residential (RL), be read a second time. MOTION CARRIED. Read a second time by title, the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John." Councillor Lowe re-entered the meeting. 10. Consideration of By -Laws 10.1 Traffic Bylaw Amendment Schedule M — Canterbury Street (3rd Reading) Commissioner Hugenholtz advised Council Members the bylaw addresses the relocation of a loading zone on Canterbury Street to allow a street patio. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Hickey: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto" amending Schedule "M" Loading Zones, be read. MOTION CARRIED. The by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto", was read in its entirety. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Hickey: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto" amending Schedule "M" Loading Zones, be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto." 10.2 Traffic Bvlaw Amendment Schedules A - 7 and I - Charlotte Street (3rd Readin n. COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 Commissioner Hugenholtz advised the Traffic Bylaw Amendment is related to the temporary closure of a section on Charlotte Street between Union Street and the construction site at 91 King Street. Moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto" amending Schedule "A-1"- Parking for Specified Times — Charlotte Street; amending Schedule "B" — No Parking Anytime — Charlotte Street; and amending Schedule "I" — No Overnight Parking — Charlotte Street, be read. 1to] IIIs] [y_l l all lx03 The by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto" was read in its entirety. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Radwan: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto" amending Schedule "A-1"- Parking for Specified Times — Charlotte Street; amending Schedule "B" — No Parking Anytime — Charlotte Street; and amending Schedule "I" — No Overnight Parking — Charlotte Street, 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, "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law respecting the Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John, By -Law No. MV-10.1 and amendments thereto." 10.3 Parking Bvlaw LG-8 Amendment Schedule A — Charlotte Street (3rd Readin Commissioner Hugenholtz advised the Parking Bylaw Amendment is related to the temporary closure of a section on Charlotte Street between Union Street at the construction site at 91 King Street. Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Radwan: RESOLVED that a "By-law respecting the Regulation of Parking in The City of Saint John, By-law Number LG-8 and amendments thereto", amending Schedule "A" Parking Zones — Charlotte Street, be read. MOTION CARRIED. 8 9 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 The by-law entitled, "A By-law respecting the Regulation of Parking in The City of Saint John, By-law Number LG-8 and amendments thereto", was read in its entirety. Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Ogden: RESOLVED that a "By-law respecting the Regulation of Parking in The City of Saint John, By-law Number LG-8 and amendments thereto", amending Schedule "A" Parking Zones — Charlotte Street, 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, "A By-law respecting the Regulation of Parking in The City of Saint John, By-law Number LG-8 and amendments thereto." 11. Submissions by Council Members 12. Business Matters -Municipal Officers 12.1 2020 Annual Workforce Re The City Manager commented on two overarching themes in the 2020 Annual Workforce Report: 1. The 2020 restructuring / downsizing staff, reduced budgets, COVID-19 and cyberattack impacts on staff; and, 2. Salary / benefits compensation. Responding to question the City Manager acknowledged the following: • employment equity needs to be addressed going forward in 2021-22 • the Police Commission is the authority to release the workforce information on their staff. Moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Councillor Hickey: RESOLVED that the submitted report entitled 2020 Annual Workforce Report, be received for information. MOTION CARRIED. 12.2 Arena Ice Rental Rates and Ice Allocation Policy 2021-2022 Commissioner Hamilton introduced the Arena Ice Rental policies and recommended rental rates. Referring to the submitted report entitled M&C2021-196: Arena Ice Rental Rates and Ice Allocation Policy 2021-2022, Manager Community Services A. McLennan provided the 9 10 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 background information on arena ice rates under the City's sustainability plan and the incremental approach to adjust the rates associated with new policies. Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Sullivan: RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M&C 2021- 196: Arena Ice Rental Rates and Ice Allocation policy 2021-2022, Common Council: 1. Approves the 2021-2022 arena ice rental rates, as presented in Table 2 of M&C Report 2021-196; and 2. Approves the updated Ice Time Allocation and Management Policy, as attached to M&C Report 2021-196 (Attachment'A'). MOTION CARRIED. 13. Committee Reports 14. Consideration of Issues Separate from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 15.1 D. James: Follow-up Red-light Cameras (Recommendation: Receive for Information) Moved by Councillor Hickey, seconded by Councillor Sullivan: RESOLVED that the letter from D. James: Follow-up Red-light Cameras be received for information. MOTION CARRIED. 15.2 M.E Carpenter: Findings of 2020 Independent Transit Operational Audit (Recommendation: Receive for Information) Moved by Councillor Radwan, seconded by Councillor Harris: RESOLVED that the letter from M.E Carpenter: Findings of 2020 Independent Transit Operational Audit be referred to the Transit Commission. MOTION CARRIED. 15.3 R. Chan2 —Train Horns (Recommendation: Refer to Citv Manager Moved by Councillor Norton, seconded by Councillor Lowe: K 11 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 RESOLVED that the letter from R. Chang regarding Train Horns be referred to the City Manager and more specifically that the City Manager schedule the delivery of a public presentation in Open Session on train whistling within the City of Saint John. The presentation would describe but not be limited to provincial regulations, train whistling cessation requirements and associated costs and risks, the difference between long and short rail operations and regulations and general FAQs related to short rail train whistling in our community. MOTION CARRIED. 15.4 S. Tobias: SJ Theatre Company Request to Present (Recommendation: Refer to the Clerk to Schedule) Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie: RESOLVED that the request to present from S. Tobias, be referred to the City Clerk to schedule. MOTION CARRIED. 16. Supplemental Agenda 17. Committee of the Whole 17.1 Termination of Lease Tea Infusion Room Moved by Councillor Norton, seconded by Councillor Lowe: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole having met on July 12, 2021, Common Council approve the following: 1. The City of Saint John, as landlord, terminate the City Market lease (the "Lease") with 670486 NB Inc, operator of the Tea Infusion Room, effective Monday, July 12, 2021, due to default under said Lease; 2. City staff be directed to re-enter the leased premises and subsequently take such steps as permitted by the terms of the Lease or otherwise at law to recover from the tenant damages for loss of rent; and 3. The Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute all such documents ancillary to such purpose. MOTION CARRIED. 17.2 Appointment to Committee Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Radwan: 12 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL July 12, 2021 / le 12 juillet 2021 RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole having met on July 12, 2021, Common Council approve the appointment of Councillor Norton to the Strategic Planning Advisory Committee. MOTION CARRIED. 8.1 Finalization of matters presented by UNB delegation In accordance with the Procedural Bylaw section 11.7 - finalization of matters presented by a delegation shall not be dealt with until after all items on the agenda have been dealt with. Moved by Councillor Norton, seconded by Councillor Ogden: RESOLVED that Common Council authorize the Mayor to write a letter of support as it relates to the UNBSJ Integrated Health Initiative (IHI) to the Provincial Government including Members of Southern Caucus along with letters copied to the UNBSJ Board of Directors, UNB Board of Directors and appropriate administration at that level. MOTION CARRIED. 18. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Lowe: RESOLVED that the meeting of Common Council held on July 12th, 2021, be adjourned. MOTION CARRIED. The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. 12 13 e + f COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-207 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Utilities and Infrastructure Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Engineering Services: Woodlawn Park Lift Station Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Gerald Mattsson J. Brent McGovern / Michael Baker John Collin RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the proposal from Dillon Consulting Limited, for engineering design and construction management services for the Woodlawn Park Lift Station project in the amount of $123,753.80 including HST be accepted and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the appropriate documentation in that regard. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The existing Woodlawn Park Lift Station was constructed in the early 1980s. The current station is beyond its useful life and exhibits problems and requires frequent maintenance. The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council award the contract for Engineering Services for the design of a new Woodlawn Park Lift Station to Dillon Consulting Limited. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION May 3, 2021: M&C 2021-135 — Utility and General Fund — 2021 Capital Programs, Revision II, approved. BACKGROUND The approved 2021 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program includes funding for design and construction management for a new Woodlawn Park Lift Station located at 1335 Red Head Road in East Saint John. The design of the new 14 -2- Woodlawn Park Lift Station will commence immediately following award of the Engineering Services and subsequent Agreement. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was advertised to engage an Engineering firm to carry out the following services for the project and included the following components: ♦ Part A — Site Surveys, Preliminary Investigation, Data Collection ♦ Part B — Preliminary Design, Cost Estimates and Design Report ♦ Part C — Conduct Public Consultation Process ♦ Part D — Detailed Design ♦ Part E —Tender Period Services, Materials Testing & Inspection, Red Books and Record Drawings ♦ Part F — Construction Management PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to make a recommendation for consulting engineering services for this project. With a comprehensive terms of reference document developed by staff, a public call for proposals was made for consulting engineering services. The Request for Proposal (RFP) closed on July 8th, 2021, with responses received from the following three consulting engineering companies: • Dillon Consulting Limited, Saint John, NB • Englobe Corp., Saint John, NB • CBCL Limited, Saint John, NB A Review Committee consisting of staff from Supply Chain Management, and Utilities and Infrastructure Services was formed to evaluate submissions. Each member completed an independent review of the submissions, and a meeting was held to develop the final ranking of submissions. The Review Committee concluded on their recommendation, which follows later in the report. The evaluation process uses the expertise of a variety of staff from Supply Chain Management, Engineering and Operations to ensure a thorough review of the various submissions. Care must be taken to ensure that the necessary level of effort and expertise is being directed to the various tasks involved in the work, while still ensuring that costs to be incurred are appropriate and controllable. It is for these reasons that cost, although very important, cannot be the sole nor most critical deciding factor in making the selection of a consulting engineering firm. 15 -3- The Committee was tasked with the role of reviewing each submission against the proposal evaluation criteria as defined in the proposal call document. These criteria consisted of the following: 1. Quality and Completeness — Does the proposal address all the needs raised? Is the proposal presented in an organized and professional manner? 2. Consultant's Experience — Has the consultant demonstrated a level of expertise with the requirements of this project? 3. Experience of Employees / Sub -consultants — Has the consultant demonstrated a level of expertise for the employees of the company and sub consultants listed? 4. Methodology— Does the approach to the project outlined in the proposal address, in a realistic sense, attainable goals and is it in keeping with the City's expectations for the project? S. Value Added — Has the consultant included any additional information, technology, process, or options in their proposal? 6. Cost — Cost will be a factor, however not the only factor to be considered. Is the price quoted in line with the City's estimate for the work and has it allowed for each aspect of the project to be adequately addressed? After careful, independent consideration of presentation, company experience, personnel and technical proposal, the Review Committee compiled the findings of each member. After completion of the "technical" evaluation, the financial proposals were opened and evaluated. The financial proposals were submitted separately and were not part of the technical review. After due consideration, the Review Committee selected the submission of Dillon Consulting Limited as the best proposal based on an overall rating of the evaluation criteria - presentation, company experience, personnel, technical proposal, value added and cost. The submission from Dillon Consulting Limited met all the requirements of the proposal call, in a manner acceptable to the committee and with a cost-effective bid for the project. POLICY — ENGAGEMENT OF ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS The costs incurred by the consultant will be paid in accordance with the terms of the Request for Proposal at the rates submitted and accepted in the consultant's proposal not to exceed the Recommended Hourly Rates as contained in The Association of Consulting Engineering Companies — New Brunswick fee guideline. The Construction Management component of this project fee is based on an estimated 8-week overall construction period. The final fee will be calculated based on the actual construction management period. 16 -4- 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. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The proposed cost of work from Dillon Consulting Limited to provide engineering design and construction management services for the Woodlawn Park Lift Station project is $123,753.80 including HST. An amount of $100,000 (Utility Share) is included in the approved 2021 W&S Utility Fund Capital Program for the design and construction management of a new pumping station. Engineering fees to cover the costs of design and construction management generally do not exceed 15-20% of the total overall project cost, depending on the nature of the project and the engineering services required. This maximum upset fee is approximately 20.6% of the total estimated project cost, which when reviewing the submitted prices from the three consultants would reflect current market value for this type of work. The projected budget shortfall after including the City's HST rebate is approximately $12,000. This shortfall can be managed within the overall Water and Sewerage Utility Capital Program envelope. The new station will replace the existing pumping station that is at the end of asset life and provide for the reliable collection of wastewater. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Supply Chain Management facilitated the RFP process to solicit proposals from Engineering Consultants for the Woodlawn Park Lift Station project. The committee was tasked with the role of reviewing each submission against the proposal evaluation criteria as defined in the proposal call document. In accordance with the City's policies and procedures, separate assessments of the technical and financial aspects of the submissions were undertaken by the evaluation committee members. The above process is in accordance with the City's Procurement Policy and Supply Chain Management support the recommendation being put forth. ATTACHMENTS N/A 17 COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-209 Report Date July 19, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Utilities and Infrastructure Services Her Worship Mayor Noade Reardon and Members of Council SUBJECT. Contract No. 2021-13 Asphalt Resurfacing 2021 — Program Adjustments AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioners/Dept. Head City Manager Rod Mahaney Brent McGovern/Michael Hugenholtz/Michael Baker John Collin RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council approve an increase to the Contract 2021-13 award amount to Galbraith Construction Ltd. for Contract 2021-13: Asphalt Resurfacing 2021 from $4,868,504.01 to $5,027,894.01 (including HST.) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council approve an increase to Contract 2021-13: Asphalt Resurfacing 2021. The intent being to use surplus funds from budgeted funds to replace existing deteriorated asphalt sidewalks with new concrete sidewalk and to resurface a section of McAllister Drive instead of Heather Way to allow for stakeholder input regarding the opportunities on Heather Way. This work will be completed within the original approved financial budget. PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS May 3, 2021: M&C 2021-135 — Utility and General Fund — 2021 Capital Programs Revision II approved. August 31, 2020: M&C 2020-218 — 2021 General Fund Operating Program approved. REPORT BACKGROUND On May 3, 2021 (M&C 2021-119), Common Council awarded Contract 2021-13: Asphalt Resurfacing 2021 to Galbraith Construction Ltd. at the tendered price of $4,868,504.01 (including HST). Within the Council report it was identified that im sM there was a $142,000 General Fund Operating Budget surplus following award of Contract 2021-13. Specifically, M&C 2021-119 contained the following statement: "It is the intention of City staff to make full use of the $142,000 operating budget surplus by selecting existing asphalt sidewalks that are in currently poor condition at various locations around the City and replace them with new concrete sidewalks." ANALYSIS In some parts of the city, neighbourhoods were constructed with asphalt curb, asphalt sidewalk, or both. Over time these curbs & sidewalks have not performed well and has resulted in curbs that are broken up and sidewalks that are uneven. City staff undertook a cursory review of these areas to identify potential areas that should be the focus of a replacement program. After considering factors such as pedestrian volumes, sidewalk condition, and citizen complaints received it was determined that the sidewalks along University Avenue (Millidge Avenue to Woodhaven Drive) will be replaced as part of the resurfacing program this year. While this street is on the reconstruct list for future years there is no certainty on the timeline of when this street will be reconstructed given the significant cost to do so. The renewal of the curb and sidewalk with concrete will enhance accessibility for the public in a growing area and address accessibility risks. Staff are conducting a thorough review of sidewalk condition this summer and replacement of sections in poor condition will continue to be part of our capital programs in future years. This sidewalk renewal will result in a new contract value of $5,027,894.01. The additional work will be paid for at the established contract unit prices and sees an increase of 840 metres of concrete sidewalk being added to the original contract bringing the total to 5,838 metres of concrete sidewalk for 2021. Other proposed program adjustments include the deferment of the resurfacing of Heather Way to a later date to allow staff time to have further discussions with various stake holders regarding potential changes to Heather Way. Council will recall that the resurfacing work on Heather Way was postponed pending further analysis and community feedback. Staff hosted a virtual public engagement session at the end of June, with additional opportunities for feedback offered until July 9. While the period of public feedback has closed, there remains some additional analysis and costing of options before staff will be able to report back with a recommendation. This street section represents a considerable portion of the resurfacing contract this year and it is important to avoid any delays to enable the contractor to complete the work before the end of the construction season. For that reason, staff are suggesting an alternate street be resurfaced this year instead. 19 am The contract quantities originally slated for Heather Way are proposed to be applied to the resurfacing of a section of McAllister Drive (Westmorland Road to Mountain View Drive). This proposed program adjustment will not result in any increase in the contract award amount. Staff is of the opinion that Galbraith Construction Ltd. has the necessary resources and expertise to perform this additional work and the unit prices in this contract are competitive. The concrete sidewalk installation will be closely monitored to ensure conformance with project specifications. Work is presently underway and is expected to continue until October 15, 2021. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The additional contract work (replacement of asphalt sidewalk on University Avenue) would be charged against the approved General Fund Operating Budget. Assuming approval of this additional work, a budget 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: Operating Budget $ 4,369,100 Project net cost $ 4,370,700 Variance (Shortfall) $ 1,600 F��:7_i�x�IC�1�C�L�Iu►�Pi� This report aligns with Council's Priority for Valued Service Delivery, specifically as it relates to investing in sustainable City services and municipal infrastructure. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES Asphalt pavements, and concrete curb and sidewalks are essential infrastructure which directly impacts the quality of life in our community. Roadway and active transportation infrastructure are important to the economic health of the community and citizens expect these assets to be maintained to an acceptable standard. Proper and timely maintenance of all roadway and active transportation assets will ensure public safety, extend service life of the asset, and achieve best value for the investment. This project will be completed within the original approved financial budget. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A ATTACHMENTS N/A 20 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-210 Report Date July 21, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Utilities and Infrastructure Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Council SUBJECT. Contract 2021-16: Coleson Cove Raw Water Transmission Main Upgrades AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Gerald Mattsson J. Brent McGovern / Michael Baker John Collin RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract 2021-16: Coleson Cove Raw Water Transmission Main Upgrades be awarded to the low tenderer, Keel Construction Ltd., at the tendered price of $371,812.37 (including HST) as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council award Contract 2021-16: Coleson Cove Raw Water Transmission Main Upgrades to the low tenderer. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION May 3, 2021: M&C 2021-135 —Utility and General Fund — 2021 Capital Programs Revision II approved. REPORT 111-TWIT4111 The approved 2021 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program includes funding for the design and construction of access road reconstruction and replacement of the smaller culverts, Phase I only. The work included in Phase I involves cleaning and completing corrosion protection within multiple chambers, brush clearing, regrading of roadway access, smaller culvert replacement and repairs, ditching along the access road from Spruce Lake to Coleson Cove Generating Station and associated landscaping. 21 sa TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on July 20, 2021, with the following results, including HST: 1. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $510,656.35 2. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $565,432.00 3. Keel Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $371,812.37 4. Maguire Excavating, Saint John, NB $642,949.82 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $479,625.75 including HST. ANALYSIS The tenders were reviewed by both staff and CBCL Limited and all 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 2021 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program. As this pipe services an industrial customer, the cost of this industrial water project will be funded solely by the industrial customer. 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 $ 525,000 Project net cost $ 450,635 Variance (surplus) $ 74,365 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. 22 -3- SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The rehabilitation of the access road and culverts will allow Saint John Water to maintain the industrial transmission main feeding the Coleson Cove Generating Station and quickly respond to emergencies should they arise. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A ATTACHMENTS N/A 23 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-132 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date June 26, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Proposed Public Hearing Date —1720 Manawagonish Road and 867 Millidge Avenue AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Jennifer Kirchner Jacqueline Hamilton I John Collin RECOMMENDATION RESOLVED That Common Council schedule the public hearings for the Zoning By- law rezoning application submitted by Kirit Patel for the property located at 1720 Manawagonish Road (PID 55237200) and the rezoning application submitted by Hughes Surveys for 867 Millidge Avenue (PID 55224810) for Tuesday, September 7, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. at the Council Chamber, City Hall 2nd floor, 15 Market Square, Saint John, NB. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to advise Common Council of the Zoning By-law amendment application and the rezoning application received and to recommend an appropriate public hearing date. The next available public hearing date is Monday, August 23, 2021. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION At its meeting of August 3, 2004, Common Council resolved that: 1. the Commissioner of Planning and Development receive all applications for amendments to the Zoning By-law and Section 39 [now referred as section 59] resolutions/agreements and proceed to prepare the required advertisements, and 2. when applications are received a report will be prepared recommending the appropriate resolution setting the time and place for public hearings and be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee as required by the Community Planning Act. 24 -2- REPORT In response to the motion above, this report indicates the applications received and recommends an appropriate public hearing date. Details of the applications are available in the Common Clerk's office and will form part of the documentation at the public hearing. The following applications have been received: Name of Location Existing Proposed Zone Reason Applicant Zone Kirit Patel 1720 Two -Unit General To legalize an Manawagonish Residential Commercial existing Road (PID (R2) (CG) accommodation 55237200) use Name of Location Existing Proposed Zone Reason Applicant Zone Hughes 867 Millidge One -Unit Two -Unit To enable an Surveys Avenue (PID Residential Residential (R2) infill 55224810) (R1) development. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT While the holding of public hearings for proposed Zoning By-law amendments and rezoning are a legislative requirement of the Community Planning Act, it is also a key component of a clear and consistent land development processes envisioned in the One Stop Development Shop Program. These processes provide transparency and predictability for the development community and City residents. On a broader note, the development approval process works towards fulfilling key Council priorities including: • ensuring Saint John has a competitive business environment for investment, • supporting business retention and attraction; and • driving development in accordance with PlanSJ which creates the density required for efficient infrastructure, services, and economic growth. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The scheduling of the public hearing and referral to the Planning Advisory Committee satisfies the legislative and service requirements as mandated by the Community Planning Act. 25 am INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A ATTACHMENTS None 26 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-214 Report Date July 19, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Letter of Support: Zoomers on the Go AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Emilie Murphy Jen Reed Jacqueline Hamilton John Collin RECOMMENDATION Council authorize the City Manager to draft a letter of support for Mayor Noade Reardon's signature to the 'Zoomers On The Go' program which identifies the City of Saint John as a program partner. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY "Zoomers on the Go" is a peer -run exercise program for older adults (50+) designed to provide physical, mental and social benefits, with a focus on improving mobility and reducing the risk of falls and injury. Led by Dr. Danielle Bouchard, program partners, Trauma NB and University of New Brunswick, the program is seeking a letter of support recognizing the City of Saint John as a program partner in recognition of its in -kind services provided by the Growth and Community Services team. The letter will be used for grant applications to facilitate the expansion and long-term sustainability of the program. ►�.7��L�1�1�i;���l��jJlL�1►�J N/A REPORT Zoomers on the go is a peer run older adults (50+) exercise program designed to provide physical, mental and social benefits, with a focus on improving mobility and reducing the risk of falls and injury. 27 -2- The program was developed in 2009 in Saint John by nurses and occupational therapists who identified the need for an exercise program designed to prevent injuries from falls. Promising evidence has shown the program reduces falls in senior participants. It is now currently offered throughout New Brunswick. In order to expand successfully and sustainably, the program organizers are seeking external funding through the Government of Canada's Healthy Cities Implementation Science Teams Grant. As a long-time supporter of seniors' wellness including the Zoomer's on the Go program, the City of Saint John Growth and Community Services team were asked to become a collaborator on this grant application, contributing valuable in -kind services to support the delivery of the program. Services would include staff assistance in connecting Zoomers with various community groups, identifying accessible space in the community for program delivery, and helping with promotion and recruitment of volunteers and fitness leaders. No operational funding from the City of Saint John will be allocated to the Zoomers program. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The proposed partnership and in -kind service delivery for Zoomers on the Go aligns with the following council priorities: ■ Vibrant, Safe City priority related to supporting liveable neighbourhoods and community pride; and ■ Valued Service Delivery priority through developing partnerships with organizations. These agreements also support Play SJ's vision of providing recreational services and programs through the community partnership model. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES In -kind services directly align with the duties and objectives of Community Services staff at no additional cost. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A am ATTACHMENTS Program overview of Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants Details CIHR Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants -Partner letter 29 7/21/2021 Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants Details Government Gouvernement 1 1 of Canada du Canada Canacta Canadian Institutes of Health Research Home ♦ Initiatives ♦Healthy Cities Research Initiative Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants Details Launching this spring, the Healthy Cities Implementation Science (HCIS) Team Grants is a $27 million+ funding opportunity designed to support interdisciplinary teams implement and evaluate interventions in diverse urban contexts with the goal of improving health and health equity. The HCIS Team Grants are being launched as part of the CIHR Healthy Cities Research Initiative (HCRI) and in partnership with the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC). Thematic Areas The HCIS Team Grants funding opportunity will support one research project in each of the six thematic research areas described below. Proposed research projects can be relevant to multiple thematic areas. The six CIHR thematic research areas are: • Healthcare Systems, Services and Policies • Healthy Aging • Musculoskeletal Health, Mobility or Prevention (including skin and oral health) • Type 2 Diabetes Prevention • Urban Indigenous Health • Population and Public Health Funding This funding opportunity has two stages: a Letter of Intent (LOI) stage where up to 18 successful applications will receive $25,000 development grants to support the development of their applications, and a full application stage where a minimum of six successful applications will each receive $3 million over six years to fund their research. Additionally, the Public Health Agency of Canada has contributed $9 million in supplemental funding. Applicants can choose to apply for up to $3 million in supplementary funding from PHAC to increase the impact, scope or complexity of their interventions or study design. To be eligible for PHAC funding, projects must be focused on the promotion of healthy living and the prevention of chronic diseases. PHAC will consider applications relevant to one or more of the following priority areas and/or relevant to healthy living and chronic disease prevention: • Active neighbourhoods • Healthy food environments • Supportive environments 30 https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52389.html 1/3 712112021 Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants Details LOI Application Requirements For the application to be eligible: The Nominated Principal Applicant (NPA) must be: a. an independent researcher affiliated with a Canadian postsecondary institution and/or its affiliated institutions (including hospitals, research institutes and other non-profit organizations with a mandate for health research and/or knowledge translation) at the time of funding. OR b. an individual affiliated with an Indigenous non -governmental organization in Canada with a research and/or knowledge translation mandate OR an Indigenous non -governmental organization in Canada with a research and/or knowledge translation mandate In addition to the NPA, each team must include: • A Principal Knowledge User who has expertise in the relevant research area and knowledge of the city as well as holds an active position in policy development, senior community leadership or management at a municipal or community -based organization that developed the intervention of study and/or will be involved in testing/rolling out the intervention. • An additional independent researcher, identified as a Principal Applicant • An Early Career Researcher, identified as a Principal Applicant • A minimum of one (1) municipality identified for the intervention research: i. This municipality must be the one to whom the PKU is affiliated with. ii. The research activities described must relate to an intervention in a municipality located wholly or partly within medium or large population centres as defined by Statistics Canada. V Requirements specific to the Urban Indigenous Health thematic area For applications to the Urban Indigenous Health thematic research area, teams must include: o A NPA who self -identifies as Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit or Metis) and/or provides evidence of having meaningful and culturally safe involvement with Indigenous Peoples. o A Principal Knowledge User who holds an active position in policy development, senior community leadership or management at an Indigenous organization that developed the intervention of study and/or will be involved in testing/rolling out the intervention. o A Knowledge User who is an Indigenous Elder or Indigenous Knowledge Keeper. o An Early Career Researcher who self -identifies as Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit or Metis) and/or provides evidence of having meaningful and culturally safe involvement with Indigenous Peoples. V Applications involving research with Indigenous Communities For applications involving research with Indigenous communities (but not solely focused on Urban Indigenous Health), teams must include: o A Principal Applicant (independent researcher or knowledge user) who self -identifies as Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit or Metis) and/or provides evidence of having meaningful and culturally safe involvement with Indigenous Peoples. 31 https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52389.html 2/3 712112021 Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants Details o A knowledge user who holds an active position in policy development, senior community leadership or management at an Indigenous organization that developed the intervention of study and/or will be involved in testing/rolling out the intervention. o One team member who is an Indigenous Elder or Indigenous Knowledge Keeper. V Requirements specific to the Healthcare Systems, Services and Policies thematic area For applications relevant to the Healthcare Systems, Services and Policies thematic area the leadership team must include: o A health services and policy researcher; and • A primary healthcare provider or a healthcare decision maker. Support for Applicants Webinar CIHR and PHAC will be hosting webinar(s) to support participants with the requirements of this funding opportunity and to answer questions. More information will be available upon the launch of this funding opportunity. Partner Linkage Tool CIHR is providing a linkage tool for the Healthy Cities Research Initiative designed to facilitate partnerships between researchers, municipal or other government organizations, non -governmental organizations, community -based organizations, not -for -profit or other organizations. Full details will be available upon launch of this opportunity. Date modified: 2021-03-24 32 https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52389.html 3/3 CIHR Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants — Partner Letter I am in support of the application by Dr. Danielle Bouchard and her group for the Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants, entitled: Peer -led Exercise Program for older adults to reduce the risk of falls, Zoomers on the go Across Canada The Zoomers on the Go exercise program was created by two nurses and an occupational therapist in the Greater Saint John area in 2009, without a solid funding plan. With the aid of research funding in 2017 attracted by Dr. Bouchard, the program has expanded greatly to numerous areas within New Brunswick. The program offers both English and French classes in - person and online. The program is currently present in Saint John; however, it is not formally managed nor funded. Therefore, sustainability is a challenge every year. Sustainable exercise programs are crucial for seniors, the city, as well as the health system. The Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants is an occasion for the municipalities to solidify the sustainability of Zoomers on the Go. With the assistance of the CIHR Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants, the Zoomers on the Go program that started in Saint John, NB can evolve across Canada. It is a very exciting opportunity for Eastern Canada, as programs rarely initiate and grow from this area. Once a firm foundation for the program is set with collaborators across the country, I am hopeful that the model developed in NB can be adapted across other Canadian provinces. Under the leadership of Dr. Bouchard, The University of New Brunswick currently manages the Zoomers on the Go program in New Brunswick using funding from Healthy Seniors Pilot Project, with funds ending in March 2023. The Zoomers on the Go program has shown evidence to reduce the risk of falls. Therefore, along with the partnership of Trauma NB, Saint John is excited to identify as the municipality affiliated with the Zoomers on the Go expansion across Canada. The Healthy Cities Implementation Science Team Grants offers the ability to develop a long- term sustainability plan for Zoomers on the Go. Indeed, a formal partnership between Trauma NB, funding costs relating to the delivery of the intervention (e.g., training, leaders, website, staff to support registration and promotion), and the municipality, offering in -kind contribution relating to facilities, recruitment, and promotion, in conjunction with the University of New Brunswick for management, will allow for a long-term sustainable program to succeed prior to expansion. Trauma NB will match in -kind or financial support from the city of Saint John. I am pleased for the opportunity to provide support for the Zoomers on the Go program in New Brunswick. Along with the partnership between Canadian municipalities, universities, and Health Authorities, I can see a sustainable future of this program. I cannot wait to assist in the expansion of our NB born program across Canada. 33 BY-LAW NUMBER L.G. 4-1 A BY-LAW RESPECTING THE CLOSING OF ROADS, STREETS OR HIGHWAYS IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by the Common Council of The City of Saint John as follows: A By-law of The City of Saint John entitled, "A By-law Respecting The Closing of Roads, Streets or Highways in The City of Saint John", enacted on the eleventh day of March, A.D. 2019, is hereby amended by adding thereto Section 4 immediately after Section 3 thereof, as follows: 4 The City of Saint John does hereby stop up and close permanently the following street: CONSUMERS DRIVE: All that portion of Consumers Drive, a public street in the City of Saint John, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, comprising 13 square metres as shown on a Plan of Survey titled, "Survey Plan Portion of Consumers Drive, City of Saint John, Saint John County, Province of New Brunswick," prepared by Don -More Surveys & Engineering Ltd. and dated July 6, 2021 attached hereto. 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: ARRETE No L.G. 4-1 ARRETE RELATIF A LA FERMETURE DES CHEMINS, DES RUES OU DES ROUTES DAN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors d'une r6union du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a d6cr&6 ce qui suit : Par les pr6sentes, Farr&6 de The City of Saint John intitul6, « Arr&6 relatif a la fermeture des chemins, des rues ou des routes dans The City of Saint John», d6cr&6 le 11 mars 2019, est modifi6 par Fajout de Particle 4 imm6diatement apr6s Particle 3, comme suit: 4 Par les pr6sentes, The City of Saint John barre et ferme de fagon permanente la rue suivante : PROMENADE CONSUMERS: Toute la partie de la promenade Consumers, une rue publique dans la ville de Saint John, court& de Saint John, dans la province du Nouveau -Brunswick, d'une superficie d'environ 13 metres carr6s comme le montre le plan d'arpentage intitul6 « Partie du plan d'arpentage indiquant la promenade Consumers , ville de Saint John, comt6 de Saint John, province du Nouveau -Brunswick », pr6par6 par Don - More Surveys & Engineering Ltd. et date du 6 juillet 2021, joint aux pr6sentes. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le pr6sent arret& le ** ***** 2021, avec les signatures suivantes : Mayor/Maire City Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture - Second Reading - Deuxi6me lecture - Third Reading - Troisi&me lecture - 34 Approvals/Approbations Watercourse and Wetlands Alteration Regulation Note These areas may be subject to the Watercourse and Wetlands Alteration Regulation 90-80 of the Clean Water Act. Prior to undertaking any alteration in this area, contact the Department of Environment's Regional Office to determine potential regulatory requirements. Areas identified as Regulated Wetlands or Provincially Significant Wetlands have been mapped using Service New Brunswick Digital Data, 2020 Version. 0 O N�3O � (D (D CD CCD os� W Q- DCD CD CD Partie du Consumers Drive, Portion of Consumers Drive Reglement sur la Modification des Cours d'eau et des Terres Humides Ces zones peuvent etre assujetties au Reglement sur la modification des cours d'eau et des terres humides 90-80 de la Loi sur I'assainissement de I'eau. Avant d'entreprendre toute modification dans ce domaine, communiquez avec le bureau r6gional du minist6re de I'Environnement pour d6terminer les exigences r6glementaires potentielles. Les zones identifiees comme des terres humides reglementees ou des terres humides d'importance provinciale ont ete cartographiees a I'aide des donnees num6riques de Service Nouveau -Brunswick, version 2020. 13m2 Parcel No. 7 (Consumers Drive) Plan 11299675 \ PID/NID 55151492 g6 o 3' 6„ Survey markers were not set due to possible underground utilities. Les marqueurs d'arpentage n'ont pas ete plac6s en raison de possibles services publics souterrains. Parcel No. 8 (Mark Drive) Plan 10974146 PID/NID 55150908 Notes 1. Tous les calculs effectu6s et les coordonn6es montrees sont bases sur la projection stereographique double du N.-B. et sur 1'ellipsoide NAD83(CSRS), realise par le syst6me de controle actif du Service Nouveau - Brunswick. 2. Toutes les distances indiqu6es sont en m6tres et sont des distances de grille calcul6es en utilisant un facteur d'echelle combine utilisant le modele de geoide 2 HT2.0. 3. Toutes les directions sont des azimuts de la grille N-B etablis en utilisant GNSS. 4. Les numeros des document et de plan mentionnes sont ceux des titres fonciers ou du bureau d'enregistrement du comte. 5. La certification n'est pas faite quant au titre juridique, etant le domaine d'un avocat, ni aux r6glements de zonage et de retrait, etant le domaine d'un agent de d6veloppement. 6. La certification n'est pas faite quant aux engagements enonc6s dans les documents et 1'emplacement des services souterrains et / ou des installations fixes ou non. 7. Les informations p6riph6riques et les informations sur les proprietaires adjacents ont ete derivees des enregistrements SNB. 8. Le leve sur le terrain s'est terminee en juin, 2021. Purpose of Plan • To accompany a Proposed Street Closing of a Portion of Consumers Drive. But du Plan • Pour accompagner la Fermeture Proposee d'un Partie du Consumers Drive. Area of Survey Zone d'Enquete i o OG� U° Key Plan / Le Plan Principal Scale / echelle= 1:10,000 Legend O Standard survey marker set Borne d'arpentage uniforme fixe O Standard survey marker found Borne d'arpentage uniforme trouv6e O Calculated point • Point de coordonn6e calcule Round iron bar found Tige de fer ronde trouve Square iron bar found Barre carree trouvee O IP - Iron pipe found Tuyau de fer trouve Tabulated coordinate reference Repere de coordonnee calcule 0 Control Point Point de contr6le Lands dealt with by this plan Les biens-fonds faisant I'objet du present plan sont delimites ainsi Notes 1. All computations performed and coordinates shown are based on the NB stereographic double projection and the NAD83(CSRS) ellipsoid as realized by Service New Brunswick's Active Control System. 2. All distances shown are in meters and are grid distances calculated using a combined scale factor utilizing geoid model HT2.0. 3. All directions are NB grid azimuths established using GNSS. 4. Document and plan numbers referred to are those of the land titles or county registry office. 5. Certification is not made as to legal title, being the domain of a lawyer, nor to the zoning & setback bylaws or regulations, being the domain of a development officer. 6. Certification is not made as to covenants set out in the document(s) and the location of any underground services and/or fixtures permanent or otherwise. 7. Peripheral information and adjacent owner information was derived from SNB records. 8. Field survey was completed in June, 2021. Survey Plan - Plan D'Arpentage Portion of / Une partie du Consumers Drive City of / Ville de Saint John Comt6 de Saint John County Province of New Brunswick Province du Nouveau -Brunswick 0 1.5 3 4.5 6 7.5 15 Scale / Echelle = 1:150 NB Grid Coordinate Values Coordonnees du Systeme de N.-B. A# Point Easting/Est Northing/Nord Remarks/Remarques 1 2537924.859 7367084.216 Control Point/Point de contr6le 2 2537965.338 7367055.866 Control Point/Point de contr6le 3 2537966.868 7367082.565 Calc SURVEYS & 4 2537970.324 7367081.559 Calc 5 2537969.318 7367078.102 Calc J�S��cK LqN� S ENGINEERING LTD. 6 2537965.862 7367079.108 Calc � N. B• 4• 0 9*4 4Q 3906 2537942.706 7366522.748 HPN Mon-Obs ; Qom' S Dated: 3910 2538334.469 7367707.795 HPN Mon-Obs A Garrett J. Keirstead Y No. 221227 July 6, 2021 m Date: le 6 Juillet, 2021 A.N.B.L.S. #402 • ?2 41 %w �fIV '9 GARRETT J. KEIRSTEAD, BLS/AGNB # 402 Ni 'q"'G �p�FTRE DU N��J�P Dwg : 21260S P2 35 Street Closing: Consumers Drive Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending "A By-law Respecting The Closing of Roads, Streets or Highways In The City of Saint John" at its regular meeting to be held via web conference on Monday, July 26, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. to permanently close the following street: CONSUMERS DRIVE: All that portion of Consumers Drive, a public street in the City of Saint John, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, comprising 13 square metres as shown on a Plan of Survey titled, "Survey Plan Portion of Consumers Drive, City of Saint John, Saint John County, Province of New Brunswick," prepared by Don -More Surveys & Engineering Ltd. and dated July 6, 2021 attached hereto. Click here for "Survey Plan Portion of Consumers Drive, City of Saint John, Saint John County, Province of New Brunswick" For details on how to participate in the Public Hearing, to inspect the amendment and plan, or to register to participate please contact the Office of the City Clerk at cityclerk@saintjohn.ca. Saint John Council meetings can be viewed online at https://www.youtube.com/user/saintjohnweb Written objections to the proposed amendment may be delivered to Mr. Jonathan Taylor, City Clerk at: i) P.O. Box 1971, Saint John, N.B., E2L 41-1; Or ii) cityclerk@saintjohn.ca If you require French services for a Common Council meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk at (506) 658-2862. 36 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. MC 2021-217 Report Date March 01, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Proposed By -Law Amendment — Heritage Conservations Areas By -Law OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Emma Sampson Jacqueline Hamilton I John Collin ;7��r•1uIu7�►�►�7- rrr•�►�i Your City Manager recommends that Common Council deny the proposed amendment to remove the property at 191 Princess Street from designation under HC-1 Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In March 2021, a letter was submitted by the property owners of 191 Princess Street through their lawyer to the City Clerk, which requested removal of the municipal heritage designation and any other designations from the property. Where removal of municipal designation from a property requires an amendment to HC-1 Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law, the item was referred to staff to begin this process. The request was reviewed by the Heritage Development Board at its meeting on May 51h, 2021, where the Board provided a unanimous recommendation to Common Council to move to deny the proposed amendment, with it now coming before Common Council for a public hearing. This report offers a summary of the report submitted to the Heritage Board (see Attachment 1), as well as a more thorough review of the impact of removing this property from designation. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION N/A m'06121 37 -2- 191 Princess Street is a two -storey, wood -framed Queen Anne Revival residence located mid -block on the north side of the street between Sydney Street and Carmarthen Street in the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area. Constructed c. 1877-1878 following the Great Fire, it forms part of a collection of similarly - massed wood -framed residences that occupy the majority of the block face. While these other properties represent good examples of the Second Empire and Italianate styles, 191 Princess Street is one of only two Queen Anne Revival residences on the block, and a relatively early example of the style at that. The property was designated in 2007 through the creation of the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area, which includes all properties on the north and south side of the block, as well as 71 Sydney Street, 80 Sydney Street, and St. Malachy's High School. The property in its current state is the effort of several years of rehabilitation work and includes a combination of restored or replicated detailing based on existing evidence from the original, and new detailing appropriate to the style of the building where it was missing. At this point, the property only requires regular maintenance. The character that has been developed for the property contributes to a strong theme between adjacent and neighbouring properties on the block face, evidenced through the pattern of two -storey bays, above -street level entrances, and strong wooden detailing, all reinforced through the literal connection of many of these buildings. While some of these properties are still undergoing active rehabilitation, 191 Princess Street stands as a central example and arguably a benchmark in terms of standard of care for Princess Street. City of Saint John Property History Through the previous owner, the property has been a relatively active participant in most aspects of the Heritage Conservation Service. From 2008 to 2016, five Heritage Permits were issued for the property, with three amendments to those permits subsequently issued. Through the Heritage Grant program, nine grants were given for work on the property from 2009 to 2017, totalling $26,705.25, and in 2016, the Heritage Development Board recognised 191 Princess Street with a Heritage Award for Residential Fagade Preservation. Request for Removal Any rationale may be provided by applicants in making a request to have the designation removed from a property, however, the request should be directly related to the property in question. From an email submitted by the applicants to am staff on April 1, 2021, two separate reasons were given for the request. The first, which does pertain directly to the property, is based around the challenges and expense in insuring a designated property, with the applicant identifying difficulty in first finding an insurer and then in being charged a premium because the building is designated. In speaking with local brokers, staff confirmed that it is largely mid -market insurers that are willing to work not only with designated buildings, but older buildings in general, with some national insurers refusing to provide insurance on buildings beyond a certain age. However, brokers also clarified that rather than increasing premiums on designated buildings, most insurers will utilise a clause that limits the maximum coverage available for these properties. Additionally, there are a number of factors outside of designation or a building's age that can affect premiums. These can include whether plumbing or electrical upgrades have been carried out, whether a property is multi -unit residential, if there is a shared party wall with another building, the purchase price of the property, or even the number of properties an owner has insured through a provider, all factors on which a heritage designation has no bearing. Staff would caution against interpreting the applicants' grievance with property insurance as being indicative of an argument toward financial hardship, as this was not a position or reason overtly stated in their communications. There are almost 500 designated properties in Saint John, and many hundreds more of a similar age, all of which are ostensibly insured. An argument for designation to be removed on the basis of property insurance expense could not be considered a unique claim for this property or any other, nor is there evidence that insurance coverage and cost is causing wide -spread impact on the demand or marketability of properties, designated or otherwise, in Saint John. The second reason provided by the applicants for removal of the designation is a general critique of the Heritage Conservation Service, which does not directly relate to the property itself or provide any substantial support to the request for removal. The Heritage Conservation Service is a small but fully occupied municipal service area, supported by the Heritage Officer, who is committed in whole to the operation of the program. Capacity for broader project work is often superseded by the primary responsibilities and functions of the service: permitting (including issuance, inspections, reports and presentations to the Heritage Development Board), grant administration, enforcement, by-law amendment requests, and inquiry response. The program is well -established, having gone through many instances of strategic planning in its 40 years, and although currently existing in 39 -4- what is largely an operational oversight and program delivery state, the program has demonstrated its benefit to the City financially through increased property values and highly sought-after properties. Further, the Heritage Conservation Bylaw has undergone a comprehensive review and renewal in 2020 to implement state -of the -art approach to heritage conservation, while ensuring an efficient approvals process. Previous Reauests for Removal This is not the first request for removal of designation that Common Council has reviewed, however it is the first request for removal of a mid -block building in a cohesive, designated streetscape. Past requests for removal have been considered for a variety of reasons, which are outlined below, but it is important to note that for each, the rationale was: a) Individual to the request/property; and, b) Specific to the mechanics of the Heritage By -Law, a piece of legislation that the City of Saint John maintains and is responsible for. For these two reasons, past requests have not been viewed as setting precedent. Property Reasoning 12-14 Bentley Street Board Rec. Council Decision Loss of heritage character due to existing vinyl windows/siding, past removal of Approval Approved architectural detail Financial hardship due to heritage- 100 Watson Street & specific repairs and materials; loss of 183 Duke Street West heritage character due to vinyl siding, past removal of architectural detail 100 Watson Street Financial hardship due to heritage - specific repairs and materials Denial of 100 Denial of 100 Watson Street; Watson Approval with Street; regrets of 183 Approval of Duke Street 183 Duke West Street West Denial King Street East Vacant lots, Board's inability to approve (Irving Oil Ltd. Parking proposed garage design against infill Approval Garage) standards at the time Lack of participation in program, King Street West HCA unrealized outcomes over 10+ years of Approval designation Vacant lot, unable to sell due 249 Douglas Avenue to perceptions of infill standards at the Approval time If Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved M 19.le There are four risks that arise should Common Council move contrary to the recommendations of staff and of the Heritage Development Board and approve the removal the designation from the property. The first two are connected: the allowance of as -of -right demolition and the loss of City investment. In removing the designation from a property, the additional protections that the Heritage By -Law provides are also removed. This means that demolition becomes an as -of -right permit, with no additional oversight or means of prevention. Work that also loses the oversight of Heritage includes the removal or alteration of the extensive restoration work that the property underwent with the assistance of the City's Heritage Grant Program. While the applicants were not the direct recipients of these funds, the loss of designation could mean the immediate loss, in full or in part, of almost $27,000 in City investment. The third risk that approval would create is the erosion of a cohesive heritage streetscape. This would mark the first instance of an existing building being removed from amidst other adjacent designated properties, rather than the removal of a vacant lot, removal from the edges of an area, or removal from a more irregular designated setting like Douglas Avenue. If Common Council is willing to remove the designation for a mid -block building, it would signal a marked change from what has only very recently been acknowledged and cemented in Heritage policy and by-law language: that strength of designation and cooperative effort toward conservation is best enabled through cohesive collections of properties, represented in complete streetscapes and broader areas. The last risk is one that extends beyond the property at hand, posing broader implications for the Heritage Conservation Service. As mentioned before, prior requests for removal have not been viewed as precedent -setting as the requests were individual and specific to the property or properties and were largely based on issues with the mechanics of the Heritage By -Law, a piece of legislation the City oversees. This request, however, stems primarily from a condition (insurance premiums) that a third party (the insurer) is applying to the property — something over which the City has no direct control. If issues with a third party are acknowledged by Common Council as valid grounds for removal of a designation (and, equally, if ideological disagreements as to the operation of a municipal service area are acknowledged as valid grounds), then Common Council should be prepared for the precedent that would be set. Namely, any owner of a designated property could ask to have their designation removed on the basis that they perceive the cost of their property insurance to be too high, and it would be 41 -6- difficult for Common Council to justifiably deny these requests. Coupled with the other risks outlined above, this decision could very well result in the slow erosion and loss of Saint John's Heritage Conservation Areas. Summary 191 Princess Street is an excellent example of dedicated rehabilitation of a long - neglected property. Its detail, condition, and placement on the streetscape help to mark it as a keystone for the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area and as a standard for rehabilitation of other properties. To allow the removal of designation for such an exemplary property, and for reasons that are either outside of the City's control or not directly pertinent to the property itself, would result in a remarkably dangerous precedent, one that could have far-reaching and permanent consequences. The City stands by its 40 years of Heritage Conservation, a program that helps Saint John to thrive as a tourism destination, but also provides its citizens with a sense of pride and a sense of place. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The proposed amendment does not align with existing corporate priorities relating to the importance of growth and of vibrant neighbourhoods. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES N/A INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The Heritage Development Board unanimously recommended for Common Council to move to deny the proposed amendment at the Board's meeting of May 5, 2021. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Report and Attachments to Heritage Development Board — May 5, 2021 2. Proposed Amendment — Draft 3. Staff Presentation 42 REQUEST FOR REMOVAL I CARRIE STEVENSON & JON FRASER OF DESIGNATION 1191 PRINCESS STREET Enter permit number here. I (PID 0008789) Date 2021-04-26 To: Heritage Development Board From: Growth and Community Services Prepared by: Emma Sampson Approved by: Jennifer Kirchner SUBJECT Application to remove the property at 191 Princess Street from designation under HC-1 Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law. DISCUSSION A request has been submitted by the owners of 191 Princess Street for the removal of the property from designation under HC-1 Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law. Because the removal or addition of properties from or to the By -Law requires an amendment, such requests are reviewed by the Heritage Development Board for their recommendation to Common Council. The standard amendment process follows, with a period of advertisement, mailed notifications, and a public hearing at Common Council. It should be noted that at the time of preparing this report, staff is unable to provide a timeline on the process following the Board's recommendation, as this is contingent on reporting and validation of the results of the upcoming municipal election. Similar to any typical application review, a request for removal is reviewed upon its own merit. Comparisons in search of precedent play little to no role in these reviews as every situation and more importantly every property is unique. In order to guide Staff's assessment of such requests, a background is prepared on the property, including architectural and historical context, current condition, and a high- level history of its designation, City permitting and grants. Where the applicants/owners have also submitted comment, included as Attachment A, staff will respond. Background 191 Princess Street is a two -storey, wood -framed Queen Anne Revival residence located mid -block on the north side of the street between Sydney Street and Carmarthen Street in the Princess Street Heritage P.O. Box 1971 C.P. 1971 Saint John, NB Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 Canada E21_4L1 SAINT JOHN www.s4!3john.ca Page 1 of 6 35 191 Princess Street Request for Removal of Designation April 26, 2021 Conservation Area. The property was designated in 2007 through the creation of the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area, which includes all properties on the north and south side of the block, as well as 71 Sydney Street, 80 Sydney Street, and St. Malachy's High School. Constructed c. 1877-1878 following the Great Fire, it forms part of a collection of similarly -massed wood -framed residences that occupy the majority of the block face. While these other properties represent good examples of the Second Empire and Italianate styles, 191 Princess Street is one of only two Queen Anne Revival style residences on the block, and a relatively early example of the style at that. Architectural Style Per the 2006 Statement of Significance prepared for the property, and as mentioned above, 191 Princess Street is identified as a Queen Anne Revival style residence constructed immediately following the Great Fire of 1877. Its character -defining elements include: • Building's height and width proportions • Window and entrance placement and proportions • Style and design • Shares similar set -back with neighbouring buildings • Metal octagonal peak • Two -storey octagonal bay window • One -storey bay window above the entrance • Vertical sliding wood windows • Paired wood panelled doors with upper glass panels • Segmented arch transom window above the entrance The Queen Anne Revival style, often grouped as part of the 'Victorian Eclectic' style, originated in England and was popular in North America from the 1870s through the 1890s. While the British and Central/Western Canadian iterations trended toward brick, the Eastern United States and Atlantic Canadian form of the style was most commonly framed and finished in wood. These properties can be distinguished through their asymmetrical assembly, the inclusion of one or more sets of bay windows, a turret or turreted roof, and elaborated detailing, including gingerbreading and changes in surface texture (e.g. decorative shingles). It should be noted that at the time the Statement of Significance was written, and at the time of designation in 2007, the property had not yet undergone the extensive rehabilitation that resulted in the building's current appearance. At the time, whatever remained of the building's original detailing was masked behind a more contemporary intervention of vertical and horizontal metal siding. Even without detailing, however, it would have been relatively easy to identify the property's original style through the inclusion of the turret above the two -storey bay. Historical Context 191 Princess Street is largely valued as an expression of the rapid rebuilding of residential properties following the Great Fire of 1877, showcasing the perseverance and resiliency of Saint John and its residents. It is also noted as the home of several local merchants and businesspeople, including Ralph Parker, who was part of the provincial champion Saint John Hockey Team of 1912-1913 and who served in a trench mortar battery during the First World War. Page 2 of 6 44 36 191 Princess Street Request for Removal of Designation April 26, 2021 Current Condition As referenced above, the property in its current state is the effort of several years of rehabilitation work and includes a combination of restored or replicated detailing based on existing evidence from the original, and new detailing appropriate to the style of the building where it was missing. At this point, the property only requires regular maintenance. The character that has been developed for the property contributes to a strong theme between adjacent and neighbouring properties on the block face, evidenced through the pattern of two -storey bays, above -street level entrances, and strong wooden detailing, all reinforced through the literal connection of many of these buildings. While some of these properties are still undergoing active rehabilitation, 191 Princess Street stands as a central example and arguably a benchmark in terms of standard of care for Princess Street. City of Saint John History The property was designated in October 2007 as part of the creation of the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area. While the area of designation is limited to just over a block, it is the first fully residential block of Princess Street, which spans across the peninsula from Water Street to Crown Street. Permits 191 Princess Street has been, through its rehabilitation, an active participant in the Heritage permitting process. From 2008 to 2016, five Heritage Permits (Certificates of Appropriateness) were obtained for the property, with three subsequent amendments to these permits. Grants Through the previous owner, the property has received nine grants from 2009 to 2017 totalling $26,705.25. Awards In 2016, the Heritage Development Board recognised 191 Princess Street with a Heritage Award for Residential Fagade Preservation. Communication from Applicants The applicants purchased the property in February 2021. Outside of communication with staff with regards to potential designation of another property and regular attendance as a member of the public at Heritage Development Board meetings, the applicants have not to date participated in the permitting or grant processes that the Heritage Conservation Service provides. On March 16, 2021 the City Clerk received a letter from the applicants' lawyer (Attachment B) which expressed the applicants' wish to have the municipal designation and any other designation removed from 191 Princess Street. This item was included as part of the March 22, 2021 Common Council Agenda, where it was referred to the City Manager (i.e. referral to staff to proceed with the application). Staff informed the applicants of the process, discussing the steps involved in getting the request to Common Page 3 of 6 45 37 191 Princess Street Request for Removal of Designation April 26, 2021 Council, informing them of what the staff report to the Heritage Development Board and to Common Council considers, and informing them of their ability to make their own comment or presentation with regards to their request at the Heritage Development Board meeting and/or the Public Hearing at Common Council. The applicants responded to staff's email on April 1, 2021 with some background and opinion on the property as well as their rationale for the request (Attachment A). While applicants may provide any rationale for why a designation should be removed, it should typically relate directly to the property at hand. The comments provided in relation to this request are in part directed toward the property itself but speak in majority toward the Heritage Conservation service and general heritage strategy and philosophy, and while they do not relate specifically to 191 Princess Street, all comments will be addressed, either broadly or specifically. Comments provided on the building itself are limited, although this is understandable where this is a somewhat newly purchased property. There are two specific points that staff believe require a response. The first is that the property was proposed for demolition in 2004 to accommodate the St. Malachy's High School expansion. Designation is a common device used to prevent a significant building's demolition, as has been seen in Saint John with the designation of the Red Rose Tea Building and the Quinton Farmhouse on Manawagonish Road. It is unlikely that the creation of the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area was done to directly prevent the demolition of 191 Princess Street (this was more probably a decision made prior), however an identified and continued benefit in having designation on a property is the additional level of oversight on demolition proposals provided through the By -Law. In removing the designation, demolition would become an as -of -right permit. The second point to address is a comment on "architectural significance". A common misperception with regards to heritage value is the idea that more elaborate buildings or buildings constructed out of "higher value" materials inherently have greater heritage value. While this was certainly a common approach to heritage conservation in its early years, the discourse has long advanced beyond only architectural merit. To suggest that the property is somehow inferior in its worth as a heritage place simply because it is not constructed of stone or brick is disingenuous. With regards to permitting and grants for 191 Princess Street, and as mentioned in the background on the property, all permits and grants were applied for and received under the previous property owner. Again, where the applicants have owned the property for only three months, this is to be expected. Acceptance of grant monies does not necessarily preclude a property from having its designation removed, and this is why it has not been included in policy, however it is the prerogative of Common Council to consider the value of tax -payer money that a property has received as part of the request. While the question of whether the City's investment in the property has been realised is a determination to be made by Common Council, the more important consideration ties into the previously mentioned topic of demolition. Again, in removing designation, demolition becomes an as -of -right permit. The applicants have indicated no intention of demolition, however with requests for removal of designation, all potential outcomes must be considered regardless of expressed intent. Given over $26,000 of public funds has been utilised by this property over the past 12 years, with grants received as recently as four years ago, the very real possibility of that investment being erased through the removal of designation must factor into the decision. Page 4 of 6 46 38 191 Princess Street Request for Removal of Designation April 26, 2021 In terms of rationale for removing the designation, two separate arguments are made. The first, which pertains directly to the property at hand, is based around the challenges and expense in insuring a designated property, with the applicants stating: "Securing insurance for heritage designated properties is exponentially expensive with minimal options. In fact, my insurance rate rose by 329% (1 did not forget a period in that number) as I was limited in insurers with many pointedly refusing to insure a heritage designated building, and I was subsequently charged a premium for insuring a designated heritage building." In speaking with local insurance brokers, it was confirmed that most coverage for designated buildings is provided through mid -market insurers, with many but not all major insurance providers declining to provide coverage. It was acknowledged that by and large, insuring any older property regardless of designation will often result in higher premiums solely on the basis of age, with secondary considerations relating to whether upgrades have been carried out on key items such as electrical and plumbing. In terms of additional premiums stemming from designation, brokers clarified that most insurers utilise a by-law clause, which does not increase the cost of insurance as a result of designation, but instead limits the maximum coverage available. There are almost 500 designated properties in Saint John and many hundreds more of a similar age, all of which are ostensibly insured. While insurance costs may be higher for designated properties than they would be for new construction, obtaining and affording insurance on these properties does not appear to broadly present so much of a challenge as to deter interest in heritage buildings or make an overly compelling case for their de -designation. It should also be noted that no reference point was provided for the stated insurance rate increase. It is unknown whether the comparator is an identical or similar property outside of a heritage conservation area, or what portions of the insurance premium are reflective of the property being multi -unit residential or having a shared party wall, as examples of higher risk items. The second argument for removal of designation is based around criticism of the Heritage Conservation Service and not in direct relation to its impact on the subject property. Members of the Heritage Development Board will know this well enough, but it does merit statement here: the Heritage Conservation Service is a small but fully involved municipal service, supported by the Heritage Officer, who is committed in whole to overseeing the program. Any capacity for broader project work is overwritten by the primary functions of the service: permitting (including issuance, reports and presentations to the Board, and inspections), grant administration, enforcement, by-law amendments (both City -initiated and externally initiated) and responding to inquiries from owners of designated properties. The program is well -established, having gone through many instances of strategic planning in its 40 years, and although currently existing in what is largely an operational oversight and program delivery state, the program has demonstrated its benefit to the City financially through increased property values and highly sought-after properties. Summary The removal of an occupied mid -block property from a Heritage Conservation Area is unprecedented. Given the efforts to promote and encourage cohesive collections of designated properties, as expressed through the By -Law, the removal of a property central to its Heritage Conservation Area would not only be detrimental to the area but would set a dangerous precedent that could see the piecemeal unravelling of other Heritage Conservation Areas. Requests for removal are somewhat rare but have typically Page 5 of 6 47 39 191 Princess Street Request for Removal of Designation April 26, 2021 presented substantiated arguments for their approval: vacant lots with no adjacent designated properties, the legislative inability of the Board to approve an infill design it supported for a vacant lot, the regrettably unrealized intent of designation for a small Heritage Conservation Area. From staff's perspective, the arguments presented for the request provide no strong justification for the removal of the designation. An argument on the premise of financial burden for a property that has already been rehabilitated is marginal at best, particularly when the property was purchased for more than 400% of its assessed value.' More concerning, however, is the idea that the City should remove a designation based on a reasoning it has no direct control over. If the requirements of a third party are taken as justification for the removal of designation, then the door is opened for reasonable consideration of any heritage property owner who feels that their insurance premiums are too high: a remarkably dangerous precedent. 191 Princess Street exists as an excellent example of dedicated rehabilitation of a long -neglected property. Its detail, condition, and placement on the streetscape help to cement it as a keystone for the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area and mark it as a standard for rehabilitation of other properties. Should the designation be removed for a property such as this, and on such limited grounds, the path may well be made for the loss of other key properties and the slow dismantling of Saint John's heritage. In light of concerns raised by the applicants, Staff will continue to ensure that the applicants are fully aware of the service offerings from the City of Saint John that support heritage homeowners. RECOMMENDATION Recommend to Common Council a motion to deny the removal of the property at 191 Princess Street from designation under HC-1 Saintlohn Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law. 1 SNB Property Assessment Online. http://paol.snb.ca (accessed 26 April 2021). PAN 01625918: 2021 Assessment 175,000; Sale Date 2021-02-02 725,000. Page 6 of 6 48 40 Re: 191 Princess Street Carrie Stevenson Thu 4/1/2021 2:09 PM To: Sampson, Emma <emma.sampson@saintjohn.ca> Cc: Jon Fraser ; Fred Fernandez [ 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 Dear Emma, Thank -you for your response and overview of the process. Any further correspondence can be directed to myself as opposed to our lawyer. 191 Princess — historical significance: • It is a vernacular building that contributes to the streetscape. It is a wood frame building - rather than the more architecturally significant masonry buildings found on this block and throughout Saint John. It was constructed after the Great Fire of 1877 - ca. 1890. As such it fits into the Queen Anne architectural style with several Greek Revival character defining elements. 191 Princess — current condition • Considerable work was done by a previous owner. 191 Princess - permitting history through the City of Saint John • It was proposed to be demolished in 2004 as part of the expansion of the adjacent school. 191 Princess - history of any grants or other incentives issued • No grants have been applied for or received by the current owners. • The HDB/Building Inspection does not enforce Violations of the Heritage ByLaw (HC-1). • Consequently, any grants received by previous owners must be treated equally and are moot to our concerns. o Regardless, any grants that were received are so long ago that their payback in return to City of Saint John has been amortized to again be moot. • Additionally, neither the Heritage Board, staff or Council has clearly articulated a policy that I am aware of indicating that acceptance of a grant constitutes a tacit acceptance by a future owner to remain under the purview of ByLaw HC-1. Rationale for the applicant request (I understand our response is not required, but am sharing our concerns) • Securing insurance for heritage designated properties is exponentially expensive with minimal options. In fact, my insurance rate rose by 329% (1 did not forget a period in that number) as I was 49 41 limited in insurers with many pointedly refusing to insure a heritage designated building, and I was subsequently charged a premium for insuring a designated heritage building. The City of Saint John does not have a published strategic heritage plan (akin to many other communities, including but not limited to Prince George, the Township of Langley, etc.) o I have been attending the HDB meetings since Q3 2020. 1 have observed that the City is not timely in responding to requests from owners and, most often, focuses discussions on transactional, not strategic issues. • There are extremely competent experts on this Board whose talents are not being utilized to support the City in taking a strategic position in looking at how to monetize its heritage assets and contribute, via partnerships etc., to the heritage protection and restoration of key historical assets in the City. • Consequently, the City imposes red tape without obvious benefit and demonstratable ROL It is not necessary to have a heritage designation to be committed to preserving architectural history and in fact, in my experience, it is a hindrance not a support. Comment on the process of "The report is first presented to the Heritage Development Board for its recommendation to Common Council on the proposed amendment, with the Board's recommendation and staff's report then being presented to Common Council to coincide with a Public Hearing following the required advertisement period. We encourage the applicant to also present and/or be available for questions both at the Heritage Development Board meeting and at the Public Hearing" Our research has indicated that Council has removed other buildings and the entire King Street West Area from the auspicious of ByLaw HC-1. We are unable to find any criteria or policy for determining how this decision was arrived at. We will decide at a later date should we choose to be available for questions at either the HDB meeting or at a Public Hearing. Comment on the $1,000 research fee. • We are aware of this fee. Please advise re next steps. Carrie Stevenson and Jon Fraser 191 Princess FREDERICK FERNANDEZ PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Barrister and Solicitor March 16, 2021 Saint John City Hall 15 Market Square Saint John, NB E2L 4L 1 Attention: Jonathan Taylor, City Clerk Dear Mr. Taylor: 58 Main Street West, 2nd Floor Saint John, New Brunswick Tel: (506) 214-7701 Fax: (506) 214-1286 Email: fred@fernandezlaw.ca Re: Jon Alexander Fraser and Carrie Eirene Stevenson 191 Princess Street, Saint John, New Brunswick (the "Premises") Request to Remove Heritage Conservation Area Designation from the Premises located at 191 Princess Street, Saint John, New Brunswick I am writing as solicitor for Jon Alexander Fraser and Carrie Eirene Stevenson who are the registered owners of the Premises. Please accept this letter as our request to remove the heritage conservation area and any other heritage designation from the Premises. Kindly advise the next procedure that we are required to take in order to proceed with our request. Yours truly, Frederick Fernandez cc: Heritage Development Board 51 43 pmq 6 AN 2 Yu 44 The Ralph Parker Residence is a two storey, two bay, early wood Queen Anne home with an off -centred entrance. Built about 1877 or 1878. The Ralph Parker Residence is recognized as a Local Historic Place as it is an expression of the significance of the rebuilding of a Saint John residential district after the Great Saint John Fire of 1877. The Great Saint John Fire was catastrophic and this building serves as a reminder of that fire and the strong will of the residents of Saint John to rebuild the city. Heritage value of this historic place is also recognized through its association with the past occupants of the home. This home and the home to the west were built shortly after the Great Saint John Fire for Harriett Trueman, widow of Thomas F. Trueman, at one time a leading citizen in Moncton. Harriett's husband passed away in 1867. Harriett's son, Thomas P. Trueman, lived here for the first 2 or 3 years. Through the late 1800's druggist J. P. Hanington, of Hanington Bros.; hardware merchant R. C. Thorne, of Clark, Kerr, and Thorne; and Mary Keator, widow of Dr. George Keator lived here. By 1913 James Daley moved here and in 1923 his daughter Ethel married Ralph M. Parker. Ralph and Ethel moved here after their marriage and this place remained the home of Ralph Parker for the next 30 years, until his death in 1953. Ralph was born in 1889 in Saint 53 45 John and educated in the local schools. He was a leading athlete in his younger days and was a member of the Saint John Hockey team which won the New Brunswick Championship in 1912-1913. In 1914 he enlisted into the war and served overseas. In 1915 he transferred to a trench mortar battery and remained with that unit until the end of the war. A mortar is a short, stumpy tube designed to fire a projectile at a steep angle so that it falls straight down on the enemy. The mortar was ideally suited for trench warfare. Ralph's father was district manager for Confederation Life Association for many years and as a young man Ralph became associated with the business. When he returned to Canada after the war he became the district manager until his retirement in 1951. Ralph died two years later at the age of 54. The character defining elements of the Ralph Parker Residence include: -building's height and width proportions; -window and entrance placement and proportions; -style and design; -shares similar set -back with neighboring buildings; -metal octagonal peak; -two storey octagonal bay window; -one storey bay window above the entrance; -vertical sliding wood windows; -paired wood panelled doors with upper glass panels; -segmented arch transom window above the entrance. 54 46 .o...Y+ 4-' � •' -'' �. i .—'y`'"". ..', �3 , �. d. \ �'tea �F',.�N c BF Mw . . . .. !..;=r• e - - 'r� .'+Atf ... thy' E`� ! ._. .:4 _._ ._, .. _n. ... .. ,. .>. i.._ e . . ... ,i '. .. ... .. ' I- I a-,: 4116 --4 i Nta, 4 2 m i r I j- J �� : i i �: �• / `� g .?�'71i1�1s� ':y -ARM,�t SOW' ON Mo -- \ /' Qom_ ` - �,i ��iis�.'•�, ,� r '®s� MW �,VP'i6•!`lss�fii".J�/'"• --'1 lei' �a r,a �vrj s v y , .Mz d Y� s� ; ,fir ..� h, r r- a y �' � '. � P ���_. a R. 1'7awr•A�r/���d'! cJ/�� �.�Q \ �f O� '.K•yp. � �, '✓ ! a '�,,+� s�r,•Y ' •;'1 \ �;�•.\\ '' •:�„ y-`�w4 Js Elal ` y.9�vY - "g�� r �X aMN a 4in . 9 y I �� • �i SEA awa rg 1 ; tc-�2.NONNI IN fill Mli �s dt' � R � I •� s'- 1 s i. f r oft fIq *�­* y g i g in = ��► �r 41 ff a = , • ' Ian fit_ �f„� rA fib• t �,wk 01, . I i r lop.�� • BY-LAW NUMBER HC-1- A LAW TO AMEND THE SAINT JOHN HERITAGE CONSERVATION AREAS BY-LAW ARRETE No HC-1- ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE SUR LES SECTEURS DE CONSERVATION DU PATRIMOINE DE SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Lors d'une reunion du conseil communal, The City of Council convened, as follows: Saint John a decrete ce qui suit : The Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By-law, enacted on the twenty-third day of September, A.D. 2019, is amended by: 1 Amending paragraph 2(1)(h) by adding immediately following "80 Sydney Street" and immediately preceding "as illustrated on Schedule 'H' which forms part of this By -Law, is hereby established as the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area.": "and excluding the property at civic address 191 Princess Street" 2 Amending Schedule "H", Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area, by removing from the heritage conservation area a parcel of land having an area of approximately 297 square metres, including buildings and structures thereon, located at 191 Princess Street, also identified as being PID No. 00008789 and by adding to the written description immediately following "80 Sydney Street": "and excluding the property at civic address 191 Princess Street" 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: L'arrete sur les secteurs de conservation du patrimoine de Saint John, decrete le vingt-trois (23) septembre 2019, est modifie par : 1 Le paragraphe 2(1)h) est modifie par adjonction, immediatement apres « 80, rue Sydney, » et immediatement avant « telle qu'elle figure a I'annexe H qui fait partie integrante du present arrete, est designee secteur de conservation du patrimoine de la rue Princess. » : mais a 1'exclusion du bien sis a I'adresse de voirie 191, rue Princess, ». 2 L'annexe H, Secteur de conservation du patrimoine de la rue Princess, est modifie par le retrait, du Secteur de conservation du patrimoine, d'une parcelle d'une superficie approximative de 297 metres carres, y compris les batiments et constructions s'y trouvant, parcelle qui est sise au 191, rue Princess et aussi designee par le NID 00008789, et par I'adjonction, clans la description ecrite, immediatement apres « 80, rue Sydney, », de ce qui suit : mais a 1'exclusion du bien sis a I'adresse de voirie 191, rue Princess, ». 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 : Mayor/Maire City Clerk/Greffier municipal First Reading - Premiere lecture - Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture - Third Reading - Troisieme lecture - 60 Saint Jahn Heritage Conse► valion Areas By -lacy Page: 27 Schedule "H" Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area Includes the properties, structures and lands located on both sides of Princess Street bounded on the west by Sydney Street, bounded on the east by Carmarthen Street, bounded on the north by the rear property line of all properties facing Princess Street and by all corner properties which are facing onto Sydney Street or Carmarthen Street, with a side facade facing onto Princess Street and shall include the property at the north-west corner of the intersection of Sydney Street and Princess Street as well as the property at civic address 80 Sydney Street, and excluding the property at civic address 191 Princess Street. 61 Arrete relatif aux secteurs sauvegardes de The City of Saint bhn r� aran�e SL- Page: 29 Annexe « H » - Secteur de conservation du patrimoine de la rue Princess Comprend les bien-fonds, les constructions et les terrains donnant sur les deux cotes de la rue Princess, delimites a Pouest par la rue Sydney, a Pest, par la rue Carmarthen, au nord, par la limite arriere de tous les terrains donnant sur la rue Princess, au sud, par la limite arriere de tous les terrains donnant sur la rue Princess et par tous les batiments dangle des rues Sydney et Carmarthen dont la facade laterale donne sur la rue Princess ainsi que le terrain situe a Tangle nord-ouest de ('intersection des rues Sydney et Princess et le terrain sis au 80, rue Sydney mais a Pexclusion du bien sis a I'adresse de voirie 191, rue Princess. 62 -- �� - 191 PRINCESS STREET Y G — . REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF wl DESIGNATION FROM 1--��'� HERITAGE CONSERVATION { F . _� E� r AREAS BY LAW � a 4 or JEP }f; m // ON 'Sit i • 9 d I r - r �d�s ®, ��s�L� '� & ''1`- r4l r�(I d++f�r��: "` 4�f � 'q'I' p�Aa"t' a MW gag w `/' �w • ,, gTe Yr6tily ify, 4 ,�i '�+ n � V• �r9 C Y =a; etil�y .� rn ai WAR lie `�ii��r'4ir' %V�l� ��'� •U�i' 9 d ��� r l�it�yv � �s''' Ii- r 11; FA w� +aim Iwo- L - r r P✓ - - _ ! ' IIli i r� Mal'�` R it /1e u LEp.. T• �� � �,..'Now- • Heritage Permits (2008-2016) • Five permits issued with three amendments • Heritage Grants (2009-2017) • Nine grants issued • $26,705.25 paid out • 2016 Heritage Award for Residential Fa4ade Preservation 67 1. Challenge and expense in insuring a designated property Clarification from local brokers: • Older buildings (including designated properties) are usually insured by mid -market insurers, rather than national insurers • Rather than increase premiums, more common approach is a clause to limit maximum available coverage for designated properties 1. Challenge and expense in insuring a designated property Factors beyond designation status that can affect premiums: REQUEST.WLR REMOVAL Permitting Grant Administration Issuance, Heritage Inspections, Development etc. Board Heritage ' Conservation Service Enforcement0 By -Law Amendments City -Initiated External Requests Inquiry Response Since 2007: • 6 Requests for Removal • Vacant lots, lost heritage character, financial hardship, challenges re: prior infill standards, intent of designation unrealized over 10+ years • Rationale for each: • Individual to the request/property; and, • Specific to the mechanics of the Heritage By -Law • Previous requests have not been viewed as precedent -setting 71 IF APPROVED As -of -Right Demolition Erosion of Streetscape Loss of City Investment Precedent As -of -Right Demolition Loss of City Investment • First instance of an existing building being removed from amidst a designated streetscape • 2019 Heritage By -Law and Policy: • Cohesive collections of properties, represented in complete streetscapes and broader areas rue �emste St. iUl rUe Pr1r`cess S fi rue Orange St. 74 Rationale Heritage By -Law City of Saint John Insurance Premiums Insurer rCCity of Saint „ John Previous Requests 75 Current Request That Common Council move to deny the proposed amendment to remove the property at 191 Princess Street from designation under HC- I Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law. 76 July 21, 2021 Mayor Reardon and Members of Common Council 15 Market Square Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Letter in Support of Request to Remove Heritage Designation 191 Princess Street I write in support of the letter from the owners of 191 Princess Street, to have their building removed from the heritage area. Yes, I previously owned this building. No, I did not put the current owners up to their request. Yes, I wrote the By -Law amendment that Council approved to designate it. No, I don't believe that the current heritage by-law or program, offers it any more protection than if it wasn't designated. Staff would have you believe that every application is evaluated in its own merit. They may wish it were so. However, the reality is that every court or appeal case is based on precedent. Section 15 of the Canadian Constitution ensures that every citizen shall expect equal and fair treatment under the law. Council has approved the removal of six buildings and a conservation area in as many years. Precedent has been set by actions taken. Council seemingly has little choice but to follow the precedent that it has established. Neither the Heritage Board, or Council has adopted any criteria to guide decisions. Trying to do so after a request has been received is not an option. The concept is simple: one doesn't try to close the door after the horse has bolted out of the barn. In this case the horse is not only gone; the barn has also burned down. Denying the request because it would make staff administration of the area more difficult, is unfortunate. Perhaps staff should have taken the request more seriously. Initiation of a conversation with the owners and an offer of assistance with their concerns, might have ameliorated this unfortunate situation. I spent considerable time, effort and money sensitively developing this building at 191 Princess Street. Council recognized this effort with a heritage award. Staff have referred to the work as ".... the high-water mark for heritage conservation." While I'm flattered, I did it out of personal interest, conviction and a passion to contribute to the heritage of Saint John. I did it to demonstrate that if there is a desire to do so, yes, indeed you can save EVERY old building even though it was scheduled for 77 demolition. I didn't do it because it was in the heritage area and, in fact, it was not heritage designated at the time that I started the heritage conservation project. I support the request of the owners to have their building at 191 Princess Street removed from the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area. Sincerely Jim H Bezanson 191 Princess Street The case to remove 191 Princess from the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law —hereafter HC-1 /heritage area Presented by Carrie Stevenson 79 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 w 80 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 Rationale • Bureaucratic and expensive process without shared benefits • Costs of insurance and limited options • Lengthy timeline for approvals • If approval requested, a lengthy process unfolds • Designated property owners, like myself, bear the costs without any obvious benefits —all stick no carrot 81 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 Process • As per the bylaw, we paid $1000 for a report, did not includes precedent setting information • The City has approved ALL requests to be removed from heritage designation AddresslArea Status Date of Decision of Council 112-14 Bentley Street Approved 013-01- 1 100 Watson Street Denied 014-02-03 1183 Duke Street Approved 014-02-17 100 Watson Street Approved 016-08- 2 Icing Street East (Irving Oil Ltd. Parking Garage) Approved2017-06-26 Icing Street West Heritage Conservation Area Approved 201 -09-23 249 Douglas ►4venue Approved 20 0-01-11 191 Princess Street Pending Pending 82 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 Criteria and Policy • Unable to find any criteria or policy for determining how decisions are arrived at we ask: • How can the City say no to this request when it has approved every other de - designation request? • Why isn't there a consistent evaluation criteria? • Note — we have never applied for nor been given any grant • If demolition is a fear, what is to prevent us from simply turning off heat and electricity? 83 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 Comment in a heritage discussion demonstrating common public perception "pro,ba,bly not worth fixing especially if it's heritage desig'na teG( so it Will sitlike that until it is condemned, which may ,be many more years ,because city council refuses to update there procedure for condemning ,buildings... Which as far as l can tell hasn't ,been updated for the past 100 years" Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 Closing Comments Heritage buildings are assets and owners should have a reciprocal relationship with the City of Saint John. We take pride in the stewardship of our buildings which is irrespective of any HC-1 designation. Nothing prevents us from neglecting our properties. The HC-1 designation is fiscally and bureaucratically punitive and not an enabler to conservation. We can live our values and better reinvest funds without the confines of HC-1- The City has never denied, according to its own data, a request for removal from HC-1. 85 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 Our Request The City support our request to have 191 Princess removed from HC-1 0 The City update its own process by clearly establishing criteria for future removal from HC-1 (and prevention of severe neglect). 86 Removing 191 Princess from HC-1 July 26, 2021 Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Councillors SUBJECT: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment — 60 Technology Drive A Public Presentation was made on June 14, 2021 of a proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would revise Policy LU-68 to recognize that the Somerset Business Park may be further developed with medium to high density residential land uses; redesignate on Schedule A of the Municipal Development Plan, land having an approximate area of 13.71 hectares, located at 60 Technology Drive, also identified as PID 55144109 and PID 55190458, from Employment Area, Local Centre, and Urban Neighbourhood to Urban Neighbourhood; and redesignate on Schedule B of the Municipal Development Plan, land having an approximate area of 13.71 hectares, located at 60 Technology Drive, also identified as PID 55144109 and PID 55190458, from Business Centre, Stable Residential, and Local Centre to Medium to High Density Residential to permit a development consisting of multi- unit residential buildings. The required advertising has been completed and attached you will find a copy of the public notice, and any letters of opposition or support received. If Council wishes, it may choose to refer the matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation and authorize the necessary advertising with a Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday, September 7, 2021 in the Council Chamber at 6:30 pm, or not to proceed with the proposed amendment process and adopt a resolution to deny the application. Respectfully submitted, Jonathan Taylor City Clerk lr - SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.R 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 7/20/2021 Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment Re: 60 Technology Drive I City of Saint John, New Brunswick Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment Re: 60 Technology Drive Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider an amendment to the Municipal Development Plan that would: 1. Revise Policy LU-68 to recognize that the Somerset Business Park maybe further developed with medium to high density residential land uses; 2. Redesignate on Schedule A of the Municipal Development Plan, land having an approximate area of 13.71 hectares, located at 60 Technology Drive, also identified as PID 55144109 and PID 55190458, from Employment Area, Local Centre, and Urban Neighbourhood to Urban Neighbourhood, as illustrated below; 3. Redesignate on Schedule B of the Municipal Development Plan, land having an approximate area of 13.71 hectares, located at 60 Technology Drive, also identified as PID 55144109 and PID 55190458, from Business Centre, Stable Residential, and Local Centre to Medium to High Density Residential, as illustrated below. 14,E A public presentation of the proposed amendment will take place at a regular meeting of Common Council, to be held in the Council Chamber at City Hall with a remote participation option on Monday, June 14, 2021. REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit a development consisting of multi -unit residential buildings. Written objections to the proposed amendment may be made to the Council, in care of the undersigned, by July 14, 2021. Enquiries may be made at the office of the Common Clerk or Growth & Community Services, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. 88 https://saintjohn.ca/en/news-and-notices/proposed-municipal-plan-amendment-re-60-technology-drive 1/2 7/20/2021 Jonathan Taylor, Common Clerk Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment Re: 60 Technology Drive I City of Saint John, New Brunswick (506) 658-2862 89 https://saintjohn.ca/en/news-and-notices/proposed-municipal-plan-amendment-re-60-technology-drive 2/2 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-216 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Section 59 Conditions - Rezoning - 489 Sea Street and 0 Woodville Road AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Mark Reade Jacqueline Hamilton I John Collin RECOMMENDATION 1. That Common Council give 3rd reading to the proposed rezoning. 2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the Community Planning Act, rescind the conditions imposed on September 13, 2010, rezoning of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.47 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street, also identified as PID Number 00385781. 3. 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 0.71 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street, also identified as a portion of PID Number 00385781 and a portion of PID number 00471557: a) That a detailed landscaping plan be prepared for the development by the proponent and submitted for the approval of the Development Officer. This plan is to detail landscaping within the following areas and seek to maximize the incorporation of native plant and tree species where appropriate and feasible: • along the Sea Street Right of way • along boundaries with existing residential areas • along the boundary with the proposed town house development. b) 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 a IrAN 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 c) The above landscaping, elevation and site plans be attached to the permit application for the development of the parcel of land. 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 0.71 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street, also identified as a portion of PID Number 00385781 and a portion of PID number 00471557: a) That a phasing plan for the proposed townhouse development be developed by the proponent for the approval of the Development Officer showing the area for the storage of materials and heavy equipment parking over the course of the construction of the proposed townhouse development. 5. That Common Council assent to the submitted subdivision plan, in general accordance with the submitted Sea Street Manor - Phase 3 - Proposed New Public Street Townhouse Development tentative plan, including any required Local Government Services Easements. 6. That Common Council accept money in -lieu of Land for Public Purposes dedication, for the LPP requirement, for the proposed Sea Street Manor - Phase 3-Proposed New Public Street Townhouse Development at 0 Woodville Road (PID 00394073 and 00471557 (portion)). 7. That Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of a City/ Developer Subdivision Agreement to ensure provision of the required work and facilities. During the Public Hearing for the rezoning application for 489 Sea Street and 0 Woodville Road, Staff committed to report back to Common Council with a revised Section 59 condition related to landscaping. This was in response to discussion at the Public Hearing related to the incorporation of native species in the proposed site landscaping to ensure congruency with the existing natural environment. The purpose of this report is to provide an amended Section 59 condition related to the incorporation of native species in the landscaping plan. Item 3a) in the above recommendation incorporates the revision and further explanation is integrated into the body of this report. 91 am PREVIOUS RESOLUTION On July 12, 2021, Common Council gave first and second reading to a proposed rezoning for the property at 489 Sea Street and 0 Woodville Road to allow for a proposed special care home and townhouse development. In response to questions from Common Council, Staff committed to report back to Common Council with a revised Section 59 condition related to landscaping. This revised condition incorporates the provision of native species in the landscaping plan with respect to plant species currently found in the area. REPORT Landscaping for new developments is a requirement of the City's Zoning By -Law. These standards include detailed requirements for the number of trees and shrubs within front yards of commercial, industrial, and institutional zones; landscaping required for visual screening purposes; and the height and spread of planting materials at the time of installation. The By -Law also requires that landscaping be completed within one year of the issuance of the building or development permit. Requirements for landscaping achieve several objectives including: • beautification and visual amenity, • environmental benefits such as reduced stormwater runoff and reductions in urban heat islands, and • screening of site features such as parking and loading areas from adjacent properties and the public realm to mitigate their visual impacts. The practice has been to avoid prescriptive requirements to provide a degree of flexibility in the implementation of site landscaping and given this, the By -Law does not take a prescriptive approach regarding the species to be planted, only requiring that the vegetation be of a species capable of healthy growth in New Brunswick. Policy NE-24 of the City's Municipal Plan encourages the use of native vegetation species of for landscaping, where appropriate, in public and private development. This policy sees to increase biodiversity throughout the City. The approach of having a broader Municipal Plan policy and less prescriptive requirements in the Zoning By -Law with respect to landscape species allows for the proponent and the Development Officer to respond to the unique site conditions, availability of plant materials, and the best overall solution to achieve the intended outcomes for the required site landscaping. Landscaping plans are typically submitted with the building permit application and approved by planning staff. In this instance planning staff can liaise with City Staff who have experience in horticulture to review of specific elements of the landscape plan. These plans are typically prepared by engineering consultants, architects, contractors, and other parties involved in the site planning and design. For larger projects, a landscape architect is often engaged by the proponent to prepare landscaping plans. 92 -4- Planning staff have liaised with other City Staff involved in the management of the City's Public Spaces and with Landscape New Brunswick. One issue that was highlighted was the availability of native plant species, which can be limited. While area landscaping contractors and landscaping suppliers would likely have sufficient knowledge to provide input to a project designer regarding appropriate natural species for landscaping for a specific site, there could be issues with the availability of native landscaping material. Given this, Staff have provided a revised condition which provides for flexibility in the landscaping plan that seeks to maximize the use of native species where appropriate and feasible rather than dictating a set percentage or amount that could prove to be unattainable. This seeks to ensure compatibility with the existing plant and tree species located in this area. This approach has been reviewed with the applicant and they agree with the proposed approach as outlined in the revised Section 59 condition. Staff note the issue of increased use of native in landscaping is a matter that is more appropriately addressed through amendments to Zoning By -Law in conjunction with a more holistic review of the landscaping standards for new developments. This review would occur in conjunction with the upcoming Municipal Plan Review and associated amendments to the Zoning By -Law. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The proposed approach aligns with the broad principle of mitigating the impact of new development on established development areas to support Growth and Prosperity while promoting livability. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The approach proposed by Staff with respect to the comments received from the Public and PAC, seeks to respect the interests and mitigate the concerns expressed by area residents. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The original planning application was circulated to Infrastructure Development, and Buildings and Technical Services for review and comment. ATTACHMENTS N/A 93 BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-113 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: 1. Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.38 hectares, located adjacent to 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN); 2. Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.14 hectares, located at 489 Sea Street also identified as a portion of PID Number 00385781, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to Low Rise Residential (RL); 3. Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1.79 hectares, located at 0 Woodville Road also identified as PID Number 00394973 and a portion of PID Number 00471557, from Two -Unit Residential (R2) to Low Rise Residential (RL) pursuant to a resolution adopted by Common Council under Section 59 of the Community Planning Act. ARRETE NO C.P. 111-113 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 : Uarrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, decrete le quinze (15) decembre 2014, est modifie par: 1. La modification de I'annexe «A», Plan de zonage de la ville de Saint John, permettant de modifier la designation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 0,38 hectares, situee a cote de 489, rue Sea, et portant une partie de NID 00471557 de zone residentielle bifamiliale (R2) a zone d'installations communautaires de quartier (CFN); 2. La modification de I'annexe «A», Plan de zonage de la ville de Saint John, permettant de modifier la designation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 0,14 hectares, situee a 489, rue Sea, et portant une partie de NID 00385781 de zone d'installations communautaires de quartier (CFN) a zone residentielle — Immeubles d'habitation bas (RL); 3. La modification de I'annexe «A», Plan de zonage de la ville de Saint John, permettant de modifier la designation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1,79 hectares, situee a 0, chemin Woodville, et portant de NID 00394973 et une partie de NID 00471557 de zone residentielle bifamiliale (R2) a zone residentielle — Immeubles d'habitation bas (RL) conformement a une resolution adoptee par le 01 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 July, A.D. 2021 and signed by: Mayor/Maire 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. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arrete le X juillet 2021, avec les signatures suivantes : City Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - July 12, 2021 Premiere lecture - le 12 juillet 2021 Second Reading - July 12, 2021 Deuxieme lecture - le 12 juillet 2021 Third Reading - Troisieme lecture - 95 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 a� e eacohsf e/ aq� a� o vj o � � t as c L FROM / DE TO / A Neighbourhood Community Facility CFN Zone d'installations communautaires de quartier Low Rise Residential RL Zone residentielle - immeubles d'habitation bas Two -Unit Residential R2 Neighbourhood Zone residentielle bifamiliale Community Facility CFN Zone d'installations communautaires de quartier 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: Hughes Surveys and Consultants on behalf of Sea Street Manor Location: 489 Sea Street, 0 Woodville Road PID(s)/NIP(s): 00471557, 00394973, portion of/de 00385781 Considered by P.A.C./Considers par le C.C.U.: May 18 mai, 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: July 13 juillet, 2021 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-224 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Noise Monitoring Program - Rezoning - 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Mark Reade Jacqueline Hamilton I John Collin RECOMMENDATION That Common Council give Third Reading to the proposed rezoning. That Common Council rescind the Section 39 conditions imposed on the November 2, 1987, rezoning of the property located at 864 Dever Road, also identified as PID 55002968. 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 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079: (a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed site and building elevation plans, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the design of the site, location of buildings and structures, garbage enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle parking, loading areas, landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and that the above site and elevation plans be attached to the permit application for the development of the parcel of land. (b) Modifications to the site driveway to allow for truck turning movements be made by the developer at their expense and that the applicable City permits and approvals be obtained for this work. 97 IrAN (c) That access to the Rezoned Properties via the existing access opposite Greendale Crescent be prohibited except for emergency purposes. (d) That the proposed noise barrier adjacent to the intermodal terminal be constructed in accordance with the general design presented in the noise study completed for the application, or an equivalent design, and as a condition of the development permit. This noise barrier must be built prior to operation of the proposed facility. (e) That the proposed treed berm along the Dever Road frontage be constructed in general accordance with the design submitted in the application, with the detailed design submitted for the approval of the Development Officer with the required permit application. This landscaped berm is to be built prior to construction of the proposed facility on the Rezoned Properties. (f) That a final illumination plan be prepared by the developer and submitted for the approval of the Development Officer, detailing the lighting for the proposed development of the Rezoned Properties. The revised illumination plan must incorporate the necessary revisions to reduce the illumination level in the northwest portion of the site to limit the spillage onto adjacent lands to a maximum of 3 lux. (g) That crossing of the water transmission main and combined sewer be subject to the approval of Saint John Water in accordance with the following: That the crossings be designed by an engineering consultant with proven experience in assessing major water transmission mains and performing structural designs for pipeline crossings. This consultant is to be engaged by the applicant. That the engineering design consultant provide a stamped letter written by the design engineer that states that in their professional opinion the design and loadings will have no structural effect on the transmission main and/or sewer, will not impact future maintenance of the transmission main and/or sewer, and that the design was done in accordance with all standards and guidelines. am iii. That any proposed fill overtop of existing municipal infrastructure must be subject to an engineering design provided by the developer and reviewed/approved by the City and must not adversely effect Saint John Water's ability to access their infrastructure. (h) In addition to the engineered design of any pipeline crossings, the City requires that the crossings be subject to a written agreement outlining details and conditions of the crossing and insurance to safeguard any work during the construction of the proposed crossing of the water transmission main. In addition, an Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement should be provided releasing the City from specified liabilities. Any failure of the existing 1500 mm water transmission main and 900 mm diameter sewer due to the actions of the applicant shall be the sole responsibility of the developer. (i) The applicant shall provide to the City, any easements and/or rights -of -way for all municipal infrastructure within the lands of the application. (j) If any municipal infrastructure improvements are required to service this proposal, it will be the owner/developer's full responsibility and cost to complete. Prior to determining this, detailed engineering plans and a design brief must be submitted by the owner/developer's engineering consultant to the City for review and approval by the City. (k) That Long Combination Vehicles are not used to transport goods from the Rezoned Properties without the approval of the City. (1) That the applicant abandon the water service to the demolished building on site in accordance with the City of Saint John requirements and install a fire hydrant at the new terminus of the main serving the demolished building. 4. That the City, upon third reading at Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(b) of the Community Planning Act, enter into an agreement with the developer of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, -4- 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties") respecting the following: a. The developer's obligation, with the City contributing to covering the purchase of materials and infrastructure inspection costs associated solely with the renewal of existing City infrastructure and the separating of the combined sewer, through the Rezoned Properties in order to separate the wastewater and stormwater. That the City, upon third reading at Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(a) of the Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties") respecting the following: a. The developer is obligated, to develop and conduct a noise evaluation program ("Evaluation Program") related to the proposed intermodal terminal and potential auto terminal. The City reserves the right to engage a third -party engineering consultant to provide advice to the City on matters related to noise from the proposed development and review and provide advice regarding work completed by the Developer and their consultant. The Evaluation Program shall be conducted by an engineering consultant with expertise in sound modelling and assessments with costs being the responsibility of the Developer. The scope work for this Evaluation Program is to be reviewed and approved by the City. In the event of a dispute between the developer and City related to the Scope of Work for the monitoring program, both parties will attempt to resolve the dispute in good faith, although the City's decision is final. This Evaluation Program will include the collection and assessment of ambient noise levels (characterized by A - weighted hourly average sound level equivalent, Leq(A)) at the nearby receptors, agreed upon by the City of Saint John through the scope of work of the program, at the following times: 1. Prior to the installation of the intermodal facility (pre -project #1) 100 19.le After the intermodal facility becomes fully operational (post -project #1) Prior to the auto -compound facility being constructed (pre -project #2) 4. After the auto -compound facility becomes fully operational (post -project #2) If the footprint of the proposed project is going to increase in size (i.e., expands) beyond the initially approved site plan a) Prior to the footprint increasing in size (pre - project #3) b) After the footprint is increased in size (post - project #3) The scope of the noise monitoring program will include the following: A. Pre -Project Ambient Noise Monitoring at Receptors Subdividing the residential in close proximity of the proposed project (intermodal facility and proposed auto compound / terminal) /existing railyard to areas with expected similar sound levels, based on setback distances from nearby roads and the railyard. Identification of a maximum of 7 representative receptor locations (i.e., residential dwellings) for ambient noise monitoring. Continuous (minimum of 48 hours) ambient noise monitoring at the receptor locations to gather hourly Leq(A) and various sound level percentiles (e.g., L10, L90, L99) at each of the representative receptors. This will be accomplished using calibrated and certified sound level meters / analyzers, equipped with data loggers, and where applicable with audio -recording capability. Analysis of the sound data obtained and preparation of a summary of the existing ambient noise levels, including hourly averages and various sound level percentiles for each of the representative receptors. 101 sM B. Post -Project Ambient Noise Monitoring at Receptors Continuous (minimum of 48 hours) ambient noise monitoring at the same receptor locations as the pre -project stage, to gather hourly Leq(A) and various sound level percentiles (e.g., L10, L90, L99) at each of the representative receptors. This will be accomplished using calibrated and certified sound level meters / analyzers, equipped with data loggers, and where applicable with audio -recording capability. Analysis of the sound data obtained and preparation of a summary of the existing ambient noise levels, including hourly averages and various sound level percentiles for each of the representative receptors. C. Data Comparison and Follow-up • Comparison of the pre -project and post - project ambient noise monitoring data (i.e., Leq(A)) for each of the representative receptors and determination of the average changes in measured values. If the average ambient sound levels for post -project are within 2 dB of the pre -project levels no further action would be required by the Developer (JDI). A report summarizing the results of the ambient noise monitoring program will be provided by the engineering consultant engaged by the developer and will be submitted to the City for review and approval If the post -project average ambient noise levels are greater than 2 dB at any of the locations the following steps will be carried out: The developer's engineering consultant will conduct a drilldown data analysis, with playback of relevant audio files in order to identify key sources that resulted in 102 post -project increases of average ambient noise levels by greater than 2 dB; If the identified sources relate to operations at the proposed Project, mitigation measures, including operational mitigation measures, will be developed by the developer's engineering consultant, and implemented by the developer at the developer's cost, to limit noise impact. If the identified noise sources do not relate to the proposed Project, advise the City of same and provide any and all supporting documents and expert reporting as requested by the City to support this conclusion; and, iii. If required and upon the request of the City, confirm effectiveness of the mitigation measures by repeating post -project ambient noise monitoring to demonstrate that the average ambient noise levels are within 2 dB of pre -project values. 6. That the City, upon third reading at Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(a) of the Community Planning Act, impose the following condition on the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties" a) That the City will complete its own sound assessment of the intermodal facility and auto terminal upon reasonable belief that noise levels at the locations have arose above 2 dB, with a maximum of four assessments in a continuous 10 calendar year period. Evaluation will be prepared by an engineering consultant experienced in noise assessments selected by the City, with the consultant selection and scope of work agreed to by both the City and Developer. In the event of a dispute between the developer and City related to the Scope of Work for the monitoring program, both parties will attempt to resolve the dispute in good 103 WE faith, although the City's decision is final. This assessment will include a base case assessment with the intermodal facility and auto terminal (if applicable) not operating ("Base Case") and an operating case with the intermodal facility and auto terminal (if applicable) operating ("Operating Case"). The City will provide New Brunswick Southern Railway (NBSR) with sufficient notice to determine a mutually agreed 24-hour period where the intermodal facility/auto compound operations will cease for the collection of Base Case sound data. Notice of the City's intent to engage a consultant to complete a City -initiated noise assessment will be provided to the Developer, and the consultant's report will be provided to the Developer with the Developer being provided with the ability to have a third party review the study and all sound data obtained at the Developer's expense. Should the results of the evaluation comparing the Base Case with the Operating Case determine that the noise level of the Operating Case is greater than 2 dB over the Base Case at any of the location, and that this increase is related to operations of the proposed intermodal terminal and auto terminal, the Developer will be responsible for mitigating the noise impacts such that the average ambient sound levels for the Operating Case are within 2 dB of the Base Case levels. The City will conduct an additional Operating Case assessment to confirm effectiveness of the mitigation measures by repeating post -project ambient noise monitoring to demonstrate that the average ambient noise levels are within 2 dB of pre -project values. b) That the Developer provides the City with the sum of $50,000, within 60 days of the City notifying the Developer of its intention to conduct a City -initiated assessment. to help support the completion of future noise assessment for the evaluation of noise from the proposed intermodal facility and auto terminal. 7. That Common Council authorize a Section 131 agreement between the City and the Developer related to the development of the proposed park area along Dever Road, southwest of the proposed 104 IRE auto terminal. The agreement would incorporate the following components: a) Development of the proposed publicly accessible park area in general accordance with the plans submitted with the rezoning application with consideration of additional tree retention in the southwest corner of the proposed park. b) Ongoing maintenance and liability for the proposed park will be the responsibility of the developer. c) Continued provision of the park area as long as the intermodal terminal and/or auto terminal or any other industrial use are operating on PIDs 55180079 and 55002968. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the Public Hearing for the rezoning application for the proposed intermodal facility located on Dever Road, concerns were expressed related to noise monitoring at the proposed facility and Staff were directed to prepare an amendment to the proposed Section 59 conditions related to noise monitoring. The purpose of this report is to provide an amended staff recommendation that gives effect to the views raised by Common Council related to noise monitoring. The amendment to the staff recommendations is found in item 5 of the recommendation related to noise studies for the project components item 6 of the recommendation providing a mechanism related to ongoing noise compliance monitoring. Here are a summary of the changes that were completed to the recommendation since the Council meeting of July 26: • The inclusion of more detail regarding the scope of the noise assessments including the geographic area and length of the sound monitoring. This is provided in Item 5 of the recommendation, • The provision for the City to undertake an independent sound assessment which is provided in Item 6 of the recommendation. 177 � �I CAI �1�i7 ���1 � �i�C�P► 7 On June 28, 2021, Common Council gave first and second reading to a proposed rezoning for the property at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road to allow for a proposed intermodal terminal. In response to community concerns related to noise Common Council also adopted the following resolution: "that the current proposal be referred to the City Manager to construct an amendment to the proposal that provides the City with long-term noise 105 M1112 monitoring within a scope approved by the City and paid by eitherJD1 Ltd., or one of its partners in order to mitigate the noise issue." REPORT The proposed intermodal terminal, located on lands which currently have industrial zoning, includes several design components to mitigate the impacts of the development on the adjacent neighborhood including: • A treed berm along the Dever Road site frontage to mitigate visual and noise impacts of the proposed development. • A sound wall, proximate to the proposed intermodal terminal, to mitigate noise associated with the loading and unloading of containers from railcars. • A noise monitoring program that is a component of the proposed Section 59 conditions to be imposed on the development. • Construction of longer rail trackage which reduces the need for shunting of rail cars. Staff note that, according to figures shared by the developer, the noise mitigation efforts and community benefit components of the project represent an expenditure of $ 2,000,000 of the total $5,000,000 project cost. In response to the Council resolution of June 28, City Staff have reviewed and revised the original Section 59 condition related to noise monitoring associated with the proposed intermodal terminal. This has included engaging an independent engineering consultant by the City. This consultant has provided a review of the work conducted to date related to noise monitoring including supplemental feedback received from the developer's consultant on a noise monitoring program, and the provision of advice to City Staff regarding the monitoring of sound. Staff have also completed a review of the approach taken by other Canadian municipalities. From this review the following key points were identified regarding regulatory approaches: • No requirement for ongoing "post -development" monitoring. • Regulatory approaches typically focus on new development and redevelopment proposals, rather than existing development. • For the most part, railway related noise is exempt. • Some municipalities set approved sound levels for residential and non-residential areas. Given this review, the approach originally proposed by Staff require sound assessments to the components of the proposed development, is consistent with the general approach taken by other Canadian municipalities. 106 Revised Section 59 Condition Staff have revised the Section 59 condition (Item 5.a) in the above recommendation relating to noise monitoring as originally proposed. This revised condition presents additional detail regarding the scope of the pre - development and post development noise monitoring including, number of receptor locations assessed and the data collection period. The proposed program relates to the analysis of pre -development and post development sound levels which has been identified as a best practice in the assessment and mitigation of sound impacts related to development. A 2 dBA threshold is provided as a requirement for the assessment of additional mitigation measures. The more detailed scope of work is based on information provided by the Developer's consultant (provided in Appendix A) and reviewed by the third -party advisor engaged by the City to advise on the matter. Enforcement Provisions under the Community Planning Act Under the Community Planning Act, Council has the authority to impose reasonable terms on conditions by resolution on a development during the re- zoning process. Once conditions are imposed, if a development does not comply with those conditions, Council (or a development officer, building inspector, or other person authorized by Council) may order: • cessation of the development; • alteration of the development to remove the violation; or • anything required to restore the land, building or structure to its condition immediately before the undertaking of the development. If such an order is issued (under Section 134 of the Community Planning Act), the owner of the property must comply at their own expense and if they do not comply, Council has the authority to undertake the ordered action and seek to recover the costs from the owner in a court proceeding. If further enforcement is required, the Community Planning Act provides broad authority to the Court to address the violation. Continuous Noise Monitoring City Staff have also discussed available technology and approached for continuous noise monitoring with the consultant engaged by the City. This technology does exist and is often employed by airport authorities for monitoring noise levels associated with aircraft operations which impact surrounding developments. Staff have followed up with the Developer regarding their willingness to conduct annual / continuous noise monitoring. The Developer asserts that it is not practical and cost -prohibitive conduct ongoing or annual monitoring for its rail 107 -12- operations. The Developer notes that New Brunswick Southern Railway is deemed by the Canadian Government and the Canadian Transportation Agency as providing an Essential Service as detailed in their reply to clarification questions posed by City Staff (Appendix B). City Staff have proposed a means of monitoring operation of the proposed intermodal terminal and auto terminal for noise emissions. This approach would allow for the City to engage a consultant to conduct noise to determine compliance. The Developer has noted that their railway operations are a 24/7/365 operation which provides Essential Service. Railways are also a Common Carrier and as such shippers have a "Right to freight rail service" and a Common Carrier must provide that service. Specifically New Brunswick Southern Railway (NBSR): • Must accept all business offered; • Must provide prompt pick-ups and carry and deliver freight; and • Must have reasonable facilities for pick-up, carrying, delivering and transferring of shippers freight (i.e. an intermodal and auto terminal) While the railway is a Common Carrier, they are prepared to shut down its intermodal facility/auto compound for no more than 24 hours so that a Base Case Ambient Noise Monitoring can be performed. The 24-hour period would need to be mutually agreed by the City and NBSR and will need to respect NBSR's rail service obligations to its customers. To manage the impacts on railway operations, the Developer is also agreeable that the Ambient Noise Monitoring will be limited 4 times over a 10-year period commencing as of the date the intermodal facility becomes operational. Staff acknowledge the impact of future assessments on the operations of the intermodal terminal and auto terminal, as every time an assessment is completed, there is a requirement to complete a baseline study, which requires to terminate operations for a period of time. The Developer and City have arrived at a program that would provide for operations of the intermodal facility and auto terminal to cease for a 24-hour period to allow for a baseline noise sample to be obtained. As a result, staff feel the limitations on the City's approach to the City -initiated noise assessments are reasonable. Broader Implications of Noise The broader implications of noise associated with rail operations is an ongoing matter that is being reviewed by City Staff in conjunction with Provincial, Federal, and railway officials. As this is an ongoing dialogue, Staff will be reporting back to Council on this matter in the future. The City has no jurisdictional authority when it comes to rail traffic and efforts on our part will be of an advocacy nature. -13- The issue with noise related to industrial developments has highlighted the need for a review of the City's Noise By -Law. This could be incorporated into the City's 2022 workplan. The upcoming review of the City's Municipal Plan also provides an opportunity for an evaluation of the impacts of industrial development on adjacent non- industrial land uses. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The proposed approach aligns with the broad principle of mitigating the impact of new development on established development areas to support Growth and Prosperity while promoting livability. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The approach proposed by Staff with respect to the comments received from the Public and PAC, seeks to respect the interests and mitigate the concerns expressed by area residents. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The original planning application was circulated to Infrastructure Development, and Buildings and Technical Services for review and comment. The General Counsel's Office has reviewed the recommendation proposed in this report. ATTACHMENTS Appendix A — Dillon Consulting Scope of Work for Noise Monitoring Program Appendix B — J.D. Irving reply to clarification questions posed by City Staff (and corresponding materials) Appendix C - Council report from July 26 Council Meeting Appendix D — PAC Recommendation Letter Appendix E - Staff Report to Planning Advisory Committee and attachmemnts 109 Memo To: Doug Dean - JDI From: Amir Iravani, Geoff Allaby Date: July 14, 2021 DILLON ,==�� CONSULTING Subject: JDI Railyard - Greenlane Proposed Ambient Noise Monitoring Program Our File: 19-1915 DRAFT FINAL Background The City held a Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) meeting on Tuesday June 15, 2021 for the proposed installation of a new intermodal facility and a potential auto -compound facility (the proposed Project) adjacent to the existing JDI railyard operations in Greendale. JDI and their acoustic consultant (Dillon Consulting Limited) attended the meeting and heard noise -related comments and concerns put forward by members of the public and the PAC members. Responses to comments were provided at the meeting by JDI and Dillon, within the limited time that was allotted. The proposal then went before Mayor and Council on June 28, 2021. Comments from members of the public and other stakeholders / organization as well as Council was heard that were for and against the proposed project. On an overall basis, the noise -related concern, as it pertains to the Project can be summed up as follows: • The noise environment at the nearby receptors is already impacted by the existing legacy railyard operations. • What steps JDI has/will take to ensure the proposed Project will not exacerbate the elevated ambient noise environment at the nearby residential areas? • Request by Council for a long-term noise monitoring program to mitigate noise issue before third reading. In February 2021, JDI undertook a detailed noise impact assessment consisting of ambient noise monitoring at the subject property and noise propagation modelling in order to establish general ambient noise levels and to determine mitigation measures that are required to ensure the ambient noise environment will not worsen as a result of the proposed Project. A comprehensive noise assessment report was prepared by Dillon for the proposed Project which outlines noise mitigation measures that are to be implemented for the proposed Project such that the incremental change in ambient noise level (hourly Leq(A) values) will be within +/- 2 dB of the current levels. In order to further address the concerns of the nearby residential community, JDI is proposing to undertake a comprehensive ambient noise monitoring program as outlined below. The program is designed to capture incremental changes in ambient noise levels at receptors (if any) and is developed specific to the proposed project. The monitoring program is in line with relevant noise monitoring DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED www.dillon.ca Page 1 of 4 110 protocols and guidelines, including: Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks noise publication guidelines: NPC-102, NPC-103, and NPC-300. It is noted the application that is before the City for approval is specific to installation of an intermodal facility and a potential auto -compound facility and not the existing railyard operations. Proposed Ambient Noise Monitoring Program The ambient noise monitoring program will consist of establishing and comparing ambient noise levels (characterized by A -weighted hourly average sound level equivalent, Leq(A)) at the nearby representative receptors at the following times: 1- Prior to the installation of the intermodal facility (pre -project #1) 2- After the intermodal facility becomes fully operational (post -project #1) 3- Prior to the auto -compound facility being constructed (pre -project #2) 4- After the auto -compound facility becomes fully operational (post -project #2) 5- If the footprint of the proposed project is going to increase in size (i.e., expands) beyond the initial approval: a) Prior to the footprint increasing in size (pre -project #3) b) After the footprint is increased in size (post -project #3) A. Pre -Project Receptor -Based Ambient Noise Monitoring 1. Subdivide the residential areas in close proximity of the proposed Project / existing railyard to areas with expected similar sound levels, based on setback distances from nearby roads and the railyard. Identify representative receptor locations (i.e., residential dwellings) within each area for ambient noise monitoring. Based on review of the neighbouring residential areas, selection of between 5 to 7 representative receptor locations is recommended. 2. Setup long-term (minimum of 48 hours) continuous ambient noise monitoring at the receptor locations, using calibrated sound level meters / analyzers, equipped with data loggers, and where applicable with audio -recording capability. Gather hourly Leq(A) and various sound level percentiles (e.g., L10, L90, L99) at each of the representative receptors. 3. Analyse the data and prepare summary of the existing ambient noise levels, including hourly averages and various sound level percentiles for each of the representative receptors. B. Post -Project Receptor -Based Ambient Noise Monitoring DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED www.dillon.ca Page 2 of 4 111 1. Conduct long-term (minimum of 48 hours) ambient noise monitoring at the same receptor locations as the pre -project stage, using calibrated sound level meters / analyzers, equipped with data loggers, and where applicable with audio -recording capability. Gather hourly Leq(A) and various sound level percentiles (e.g., L10, L90, L99) at each of the representative receptors. 2. Analyse the data and prepare summary of the existing ambient noise levels, including hourly averages and various sound level percentiles for each of the representative receptors. C. Data Comparison and Follow-up a. Compare the pre -project and post -project ambient noise monitoring data (i.e., Leq(A)) for each of the representative receptors and determine average changes in measured values. If the average ambient sound levels for post -project are within 2 dB of the pre - project levels no further action would be required by JDI. A report summarizing the results of the ambient noise monitoring program will be provided by a qualified engineer and will be submitted to the City for review and approval. If the post -project average ambient noise levels are greater than 2 dB at any of the locations the following steps will be carried out: i. Drilldown data analysis, with playback of relevant audio files in order to identify key sources that resulted in post -project increases of average ambient noise levels by greater than 2 dB; ii. If the identified sources relate to operations at the proposed Project, implement appropriate mitigation measure(s), including operational mitigation steps, to limit noise impact. If not related to the proposed Project, advise the City of same; and, iii. If required, confirm effectiveness of the mitigation measures by repeating post - project ambient noise monitoring to demonstrate that the average ambient noise levels are within 2 dB of pre -project values. JDI will provide the City with the results of the ambient noise monitoring program, as described above. All reports will be signed and sealed by a qualified professional engineer and will be submitted to the City's Development Officer for review and approval. JDI agrees to all noise reports being reviewed by third -party engineers/subject matter experts that the City may retain for confirming the findings. DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED wwwAillon.ca Page 3 of 4 112 Definitions a) "Ambient Sound Levels" — means the background sound level; the sound level that is present in the environment, produced by sources other than the "Source"; b) "dBA" — means the sound pressure level measured in "Decibels". The suffix "A" refers to the use of a weighting filter to more closely approximate the human ear's response to sound. It filters out very high and low frequencies that the human ear would not typically hear or respond to. "A" also reflects, sound at any moment in time at the Receptor; c) "Leq" — means the Logarithmic Energy Equivalent Continuous Sound Level; i.e. the constant sound level over the time period in question, that results in the same total sound energy as the actual varying sound. It must be associated with a time period. Leq is a measure of a total sound energy dose over a specified time period; d) "Lmax" — means the maximum sound level (dBA) during a single event; e) "Leq(h)"- means a Receptor's cumulative noise exposure from all events over a one hour time period; DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED wwwAillon.ca Page 4 of 4 113 1. What was Dillon's baseline monitoring total duration (e.g. 24-hours, 48-hours, multiple days)? Please identify the star and end times and dates. The initial ambient noise monitoring was completed over two days, total of —54 hours (Feb 17 — 19, 2021), however, the data presented in Table 1 of the noise report is based the first day (-25 hours) of the monitoring program, as the report was submitted on February 18, 2021. The noise data for the second day of monitoring is quite similar to the first day. Subsequent confirmatory ambient noise monitoring was conducted from June 41h to June 111h, with monitoring locations closer to the rail operations. The results are indicative of the same general noise environment as the first ambient monitoring campaign, with average Leq being around 50 dBA. As indicated in the proposed ambient monitoring program (dated July 14, 2021) there will be a follow-up baseline noise monitoring campaign prior to operation of the proposed intermodal facility and proposed auto -compound and at any time there is an expected change in the footprint of the proposed facilities. 2. What was the rational for selecting the day(s) for the assessment? The monitoring occurred during weekdays, reflective of typical rail operation at the existing railyard. It is our understanding that the ambient noise level is dominated by vehicular traffic and railyard operations. The railyard operation is 24/7. Variation in vehicular traffic along Dever Rd. is captured between daytime and nighttime periods. 3. Why did the assessment not include both weekday and weekend assessment data? If not, should the baseline monitoring also include evaluation of variations of sound levels with the day of the week? See answer to #2 above. Also note that the subsequent ambient noise monitoring (June 4 —June 11) included weekdays and weekends. 4. What rationale was used by Dillon in selecting the three sites for the sensors in the baseline monitoring? Why were the monitoring locations not spread further across the geography of the study area? The ambient monitoring locations were selected based on where the dominant noise sources would be located for the proposed facilities and the nearest receptors that could potentially be impacted by those noise sources. The monitors were set over a span of 400m to capture variation in rail related noise, as it pertains to onsite activities. 5. Does the data from the baseline monitoring have details findings for nighttime and daytime? If so, can you share it with us. Yes. The raw data from ambient noise monitoring (Both February and June Campaigns) are attached hereto. 6. In table one in the Dillon report, what was used to generate the averages that were presented? When were the maximums and minimums of this assessment observed? Do the Leq min and Leq max represent the minimum and maximum of the 1-hour Leq metrics collected? 114 Please see raw data provided. Yes. 7. The baseline monitoring occurred in February 2021. Did Dillon account for potential periods of inclement weather in their analysis of the noise data? If so, how much data was excluded due to inclement weather? What was the source of weather data? Can Dillon present a full table of noise monitoring data coordinated with weather information? For the February ambient noise monitoring campaign, there was no precipitation, mostly overcast with low to moderate winds, and temperatures range of approximately -11°C to -3°C. No data was removed from the data set due to weather. For June ambient noise monitoring campaign, the weather can be described as mix of sun and clouds, with scattered drizzles and shower for short durations, low to moderate winds, and temperature range of 2 °C to 29 °C. 8. The report indicates in Section 1.2 that the peak traffic for the intermodal facility is from 6am to 8pm. In Section 4.0 states that "majority of activities occur during daytime hours" — this is further given as a reason for the 50 dBA limit. However, as per most regulatory bodies the 6am-7am period identified as a peak operation is considered nighttime. Can Dillon comment on the difference between daytime limits and nighttime limits, and why the report indicates that there should only be one threshold of 50 dBA? Is there not a standard for 45 dBA at nighttime as identified in Table 2? It is important to note that the railyard operation (existing and future proposed) are 24/7. Currently, typical train arrival occurs at the early hours of morning and this is expected to remain the same when the proposed facilities are in operation. The statement in the report pertains to PEAK operations, with most number of trucks arriving and leaving the site between 6am and 8pm. 9. The mitigation measure is a 10-m high noise wall. Has the stability of the sound wall been considered/assessed? If a feasibility study not been conducted, what is the potential for the noise wall not being technically feasible from a structural point of view or any other engineering/operational standpoint. If so, how will this be addressed? The proposed noise barrier wall will be designed by a professional engineer (structural) with appropriate measures to deal with wind / snow load. Stabilizing components of the wall include container locking mechanism to connect the containers together, with the bottom row of containers ballasted with crushed aggregate to add the appropriate weight for stabilization. Final design drawings will be provided to the City for review and approval as part of the development permit. 10. Is it possible for Dillon to provide a map showing the numeric difference in noise levels between the existing rail yard model results and the cumulative noise results from existing rail yard and proposed expansion? Areas of particular concern are the southern portion of Greenhead and the area to the west of the baseball fields on Dever Road. No. The purpose of the assessment is to determine the noise level associated with the proposed facilities. Existing railyard operation is not under noise investigation and is operating in accordance with all applicable regulations. Also please see response to question 16 (sources from existing railyard operation that have been included in the assessment). 11. Are we able to access data from each sensor in the collection of the baseline data (similar to what was provided across all sensors in table one)? 115 We assume this is in reference to the already gathered ambient noise monitoring data. Raw data is attached hereto for your review. 12. Is Dillon intending on completing additional baseline monitoring to address the concerns raised by the independent noise consultant? We believe that the response / clarifications provided above address the concerns raised by the independent noise consultant. Furthermore, additional noise monitoring was conducted in June and the raw data is provided. Since this data was collected subsequent to the issued noise report, it was not provided as part of that report. As indicated in our submission of July 14, 2021, baseline ambient noise monitoring will be conducted prior to operation of the proposed facilities (3 stages as outlined in our submission). 13. Is JDI prepared for the City of Saint John to engage a noise engineer of its choice to complete future noise assessments on the site at cost covered by JDI? The draft proposal from Dillon Consulting dated July 14, 2021 provides for future noise monitoring at JDI's cost. JDI has agreed to provide the City with the results of the ambient noise monitoring program. All reports will be signed and sealed by a qualified professional engineer and will be submitted to the City's Development Officer for review and approval. JDI agrees to all noise reports being reviewed by third -party engineers/subject matter experts that the City may retain for confirming the findings. 14. Does Dillon agree that in the event JDI was to expand its operations outside of the agreed open boundaries, a new noise contour map as well as new monitoring site selection would be required prior to proceeding with a new assessment? Yes, agreed. As indicated in our July 14, 2021 document, ambient noise monitoring (future baseline and future scenario with expansion of the operational footprint) will be carried out. If the operational footprint is to expand, JDI will update the noise assessment (i.e., noise prediction modelling, noise assessment report containing updated noise contour map) to reflect the proposed expansion and the report will be submitted to the City for review and approval. 15. What is JDI's position on financing future ongoing noise monitoring, either through periodic sound metering or through ongoing remote monitoring aimed at collecting data to assess impacts related to the operations of the proposed facility and further the potential to make the data available for public consumption? What are the implications of such a program to the operations of the facility and what are JDI's plans should Council impose long term monitoring conditions? See answer to question 13 above. Railyard operations are 24/7/365 and by nature generate high levels of noise with impacts that extend beyond the boundaries of such operations. This is not unique to NBSR's railyard operations, which has been in existence since 1885. The NBSR railyard is an operational railyard today and will continue to be one. It is important to point out that as a Railway, NBSR is deemed by the Canadian Government and the Canadian Transportation Agency as a Company/Industry that provides an Essential Service and as such, we have a Common Carrier Obligation. As a Common Carrier — by definition, Shippers have a "Right to freight rail service" and we must provide that service. Specifically: o We must accept all business offered; 116 o We must provide prompt pick-ups and carry and deliver freight; and o We must have reasonable facilities for pick-up, carrying, delivering and transferring of shippers freight ( i.e. an intermodal and auto terminal ) When CP and CN trains arrive at the NBSR interchange, we cannot pick and choose the type of freight or the service requirements that we will accept. Unlike the trucking industry where shippers have multiple options in terms of timelines/scheduling, location and services offered, railways are very limited in where they operate and schedules that they have to adhere to and as such have little to no control over such factors. As indicated during the PAC, the rail related operations that pertain to intermodal / auto -compound (i.e., loading / unloading shipping containers and vehicles onto/from rail cars and trucks) is already occurring at the railyard. The proposed intermodal and auto -compound facilities are simply an expansion/relocation of the existing operations to include a larger paved parking area for the vehicles to be parked at and larger truck chassis parking areas. The operations at the railyard are consistent and do not vary on daily / weekly basis. Furthermore, ambient noise levels can change due to change in traffic volumes along public roads or other industrial/commercial facilities that may move into the area with no connection to the proposed intermodal and auto -compound facilities. On the technical side, it would not be possible to distinguish between the noise that is generated by the existing railyard operations and those that are potentially associated with the proposed auto -compound and intermodal facility. To the best of our knowledge continuous/annual noise monitoring has not been done at any other intermodal / auto -compounds in Canada. JDI has already committed to conduct ambient noise monitoring at certain time periods as specified in the July 14, 2021 Dillon document. Linking the ambient noise monitoring data to noise complaints will not be helpful or practical as it is clear from the public's comments that the concerns are mainly to do with the existing railyard operations. It is highly likely that noise complaints will continue but not due to the newly proposed facilities, but due to the existing rail operations. As per the explanations provided above, JDI is not prepared to conduct annual / continuous noise monitoring for its rail operations. 16. Table 5 of the report shows that all the four assessment locations are under the proposed performance limit, however, the noise contour map presented in Figure 5 show that receptors West of R4, East of R3 and North of R1 are within the 50-55 dBA contour area, therefore above the 50 dBA. How does Dillon reconcile the fact that the selected receptor locations presented in Table 5 may not be the worst -impacted noise receptors? It should be noted that the noise propagation modelling includes some of the sources that are associated with the existing railyard operations (i.e., idling locomotive, train movement, existing shunting). For receptors to the far east and far west end of the railyard, it is those existing operations that are dominating the impact and not those associated with the proposed intermodal and auto - compound facilities. The receptors that are selected for the assessment are expected to be most impacted by the proposed facilities. 117 17. One of the noise mitigation measures identified is an anti -idling policy to be developed. What would be the commitment of this policy in terms of maximum idling allowed? The way the modeling was conducted it identifies this as a zero -time duration. If not the case, how was this been accounted in the model and assessment? Trucks are expected to shutdown engine when not in motion. This will be enforced by JDI. 18. Is JDI prepared to offer any additional measures beyond the current recommendations? As noted at Council, JDI is constructing a significant sound wall (approximately 10m high and 240m in length), building a significant berm with trees on top and adding a park with playground to the west end of our property at a total cost of approximately $2,000,000. On a $5,000,000 initial project cost scope the financial allocation to noise mitigation is considered significant. In addition, we have offered to perform additional sound monitoring in accordance with the draft proposal prepared by Dillon Consulting dated July 141h, 2021 which should address potential noise concerns. Pre -Project Receptor -Based Ambient Noise Monitoring Subdivide the residential areas in close proximity of the proposed Project/existing railyard to areas with expected similar sound levels, based on setback distances from nearby roads and the railyard. Identify representative receptor locations (i.e., residential dwellings) within each area for ambient noise monitoring. Based on review of the neighbouring residential areas, selection of between 5 to 7 representative receptor locations is recommended. Is the intent here to have 3 or 4 subareas with 5 to 7 monitoring locations in each one (i.e. 15-28 total monitoring locations) or 5 to 7 subareas with 1 monitoring location in each (i.e. 5-7 total monitoring locations). The intent is to have 1 monitoring location in each sub -area. 118 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-186 Report Date June 22, 2021 Meeting Date June 28, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. Supplemental Report - Dever Road Council Report - Final 2021 June 24.docx AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Mark Reade Jacqueline Hamilton I John Collin RECOMMENDATION 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864, and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties"), from Light Industrial (IL) to Transportation (T) 2. That Common Council rescind the Section 39 conditions imposed on the November 2, 1987, rezoning of the property located at 864 Dever Road, also identified as PID 55002968. 3. 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 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079: (a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed site and building elevation plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the design of the site, location of buildings and structures, garbage enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle parking, loading areas, landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and that the above site and elevation plans be attached to the permit application for the development of the parcel of land. (b) Modifications to the site driveway to allow for truck turning movements be made by the proponent at their expense and that -2- the applicable City permits and approvals be obtained for this work. (c) That access to the Rezoned Properties via the existing access opposite Greendale Crescent be prohibited except for emergency purposes. (d) That the proposed noise barrier adjacent to the intermodal terminal be constructed in accordance with the general design presented in the noise study completed for the application, or an equivalent design, and as a condition of the development permit. This noise barrier must be built prior to operation of the proposed facility. (e) That the proposed treed berm along the Dever Road frontage be constructed in general accordance with the design submitted in the application, with the detailed design submitted for the approval of the Development Officer with the required permit application. This landscaped berm is to be built prior to construction of the proposed facility on the Rezoned Properties. (f) That a final illumination plan be prepared by the proponent and submitted for the approval of the Development Officer, detailing the lighting for the proposed development of the Rezoned Properties. The revised illumination plan must incorporate the necessary revisions to reduce the illumination level in the northwest portion of the site to limit the spillage onto adjacent lands to a maximum of 3 lux. (g) That crossing of the water transmission main and combined sewer be subject to the approval of Saint John Water in accordance with the following: That the crossings be designed by an engineering consultant with proven experience in assessing major water transmission mains and performing structural designs for pipeline crossings. This consultant is to be engaged by the applicant. That the engineering design consultant provide a stamped letter written by the design engineer that states that in their professional opinion the design and loadings will have no structural effect on the transmission main and/or sewer, will not impact future maintenance of the transmission main and/or sewer, and that the design was done in accordance with all standards and guidelines. iii. That any proposed fill overtop of existing municipal infrastructure must be subject to an engineering design 1.1 am provided by the proponent and reviewed/approved by the City and must not adversely effect Saint John Water's ability to access their infrastructure. (h) In addition to the engineered design of any pipeline crossings, the City requires that the crossings be subject to a written agreement outlining details and conditions of the crossing and insurance to safeguard any work during the construction of the proposed crossing of the water transmission main. In addition, an Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement should be provided releasing the City from specified liabilities. Any failure of the existing 1500 mm water transmission main and 900 mm diameter sewer due to the actions of the applicant shall be the sole responsibility of the proponent/developer. (i) The applicant shall provide to the City, any easements and/or rights -of -way for all municipal infrastructure within the lands of the application. (j) If any municipal infrastructure improvements are required to service this proposal, it will be the owner/developer's full responsibility and cost to complete. Prior to determining this, detailed engineering plans and a design brief must be submitted by the owner/developer's engineering consultant to the City for review and approval by the City. (k) That Long Combination Vehicles are not used to transport goods from the Rezoned Properties without the approval of the City. (1) That the applicant abandon the water service to the demolished building on site in accordance with the City of Saint John requirements and install a fire hydrant at the new terminus of the main serving the demolished building. 4. That the City, upon third reading at Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(b) of the Community Planning Act, enter into an agreement with the developer of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties") respecting the following: a. The developer's obligation, with the City contributing to covering the purchase of materials and infrastructure inspection costs associated solely with the renewal of existing City infrastructure IM -4- and the separating of the combined sewer, through the Rezoned Properties in order to separate the wastewater and stormwater. 5. That the City, upon third reading at Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(b) of the Community Planning Act, enter into an agreement with the developer of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties") respecting the following: a. The developer's obligation, to develop a noise evaluation program conducted ("Evaluation Program") related to the proposed intermodal terminal and potential auto terminal. The Evaluation Program shall be conducted at the developer's sole expense and shall include an expert opinion from an expert in the field of noise control. The Evaluation Program shall include delivery to the City of pre -project and post -project noise assessments. The pre- and post -project noise assessments shall be compared and if the post - project noise levels indicate a greater than 2 dB(A) change, the developer shall implement noise mitigation measure(s) to decrease the noise level at the receptor to a maximum of 2dBA above pre -project levels. The developer shall be responsible for providing an expert opinion from their engineering consultant on the appropriateness of any proposed noise mitigation measures for the approval of the Development Officer. These noise evaluations will be required at the following times: the initial construction of the intermodal terminal, the construction of the proposed auto terminal, and in the event that operations of the proposed intermodal terminal and auto terminal extend beyond the area initially approved by the Development Officer on the site plan for the development. The Developer shall publish on their website the results of the Evaluation Program as well as corresponding mitigating measures, if required. 6. That Common Council authorize a Section 131 agreement between the City and the Developer related to the development of the proposed park area along Dever Road, southwest of the proposed auto terminal. The agreement would incorporate the following components: a. Development of the proposed publicly accessible park area in general accordance with the plans submitted with the rezoning application with consideration of additional tree retention in the southwest corner of the proposed park. u WE b. Ongoing maintenance and liability for the proposed park will be the responsibility of the proponent. c. Continued provision of the park area as long as the intermodal terminal and/or auto terminal or any other industrial use are operating on PIDs 55180079 and 55002968. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the June 15 Planning Advisory Committee (referred to as the "Committee") meeting, the Committee recommended approval of the staff recommendation for the rezoning application for the JDI Intermodal Terminal on Dever Road and also adopted added conditions on the approval. The added conditions approved by the Committee required further analysis by staff, determination of feasibility, and consideration on how they can be effectively actioned. As is illustrated in this report, staff's updated recommendation integrates the added conditions from the Committee, and in turn, responds to the valuable feedback received from members of the public and Committee members during the June 15th meeting. The purpose of this report is to provide an amended staff recommendation that gives effect to the views raised the Committee. The added staff recommendations are found in sections 3, (d), (e), 5. (a), and 6. (a) of the above -mentioned recommendation and further explanation is integrated into the body of this report. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION On April 19, 2021, Common Council referred the rezoning and Section 59 Amendment application from Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. on behalf of J.D. Irving Limited for the property at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road to the Committee for a report and recommendation. Common Council also set the Public Hearing for the application for June 28, 2021, at 6:30 p.m. REPORT The proposed rezoning would allow for a portion of the site to be developed as an intermodal terminal. Over the short term, a facility for transferring containers between rail cars to tractor trailer chassis will be developed, with a longer -term plan to develop an auto terminal to receive new vehicle shipments by rail. The application was on the agenda for the June 15 Committee meeting. Area residents attended the meeting and made presentations to the Committee related to concerns associated with sound impacts from the facility. Staff note sM the site contains an existing rail yard that operates on a 24-hour basis, with sound generated by rail shunting and other railway operations at the site. Incremental sound impacts will result from activities such as container unloading, unloading of vehicles from auto carriers, and additional truck and rail traffic. Representatives from New Brunswick Southern Railway noted additional tracks will be constructed in the railyard area of the site, which will allow for a reduction in shunting operations and associated sound impacts. The applicant is also proposing a 240 metre long, 10-metre-high wall adjacent to the proposed container loading area to mitigate sound impacts. A sound study prepared by Dillon Consulting notes post -development sound levels at residences south of Dever Road will be no greater than the current ambient sound levels of 50 dBA to 55 dBA. The Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Staff recommendation supporting the development. However, the Committee also made amendments to the Staff Recommendation as follows: • A requirement to construct the proposed berm along Dever Road and noise wall prior to the commencement of construction on the proposed intermodal terminal. • That the proponent evaluate additional tree retention in the proposed park/playground area to maintain the existing visual buffering between the residential properties and the subject site. • That Staff report to Common Council prior to Third Reading with a review of the potential for a noise monitoring program and additional mitigative measures and or enforcement to be incorporated as an additional Section 59 conditions on the approval. The following highlights how staff have reviewed these conditions and integrated them into the updated staff recommendation. The below staff direction and rationalization has been shared with the applicant and the Chair of the Committee. PAC Added Condition #1— Timine of berm The Committee amended the condition related to the timing of the berm and wall construction, requiring it to be constructed as the first component of the project, prior to construction beginning on the intermodal terminal. The objective was to mitigate construction and operational impacts on surrounding residents. Staff have discussed this item with the applicant, who noted that it is their intent to have the berm constructed prior to the broader construction of the site, but the wall cannot be erected at the same time as the berm as it would interfere with construction activity in preparing the site. The proponent has committed to having the wall constructed prior to the container facility being operational. Staff are satisfied with the applicant's commitment to erect the wall as soon as possible within their construction timeline. Staff believe this satisfies -7- the nature of the PAC recommendation, and the condition will remain in the final staff recommendation as originally proposed in the PAC report (item 3(d) of the Staff recommendation). PAC Added Condition #2 — Additional Tree Retention A component of the Staff recommendation is the preparation of an agreement related to the construction of a park area in the southwest corner of the site along Dever Road. An issue raised by area residents and the Committee was increased tree retention in the final design of the park area provide additional privacy to adjacent properties. The applicant is in agreement with the proposed condition and will work with staff to incorporate additional tree retention within the final park design (Item 6(a) of the Staff recommendation). PAC Added Condition #3 — Noise Monitoring Program The City currently has a by-law to regulate noise, however it does not apply to large industrial operations such as the existing railyard or proposed intermodal terminal. Standards for sound emissions for large industrial operations are typically applied by the province in conjunction with other approvals granted such as air quality approvals or an Environmental Impact Assessment. Examples of Provincial air quality approval which incorporate a noise emissions component are those issued to the Irving Oil Refinery and AIM metal shredder Based on Staff's initial discussion to date with the Government of New Brunswick, there are no required Provincial environmental approvals for this application. Staff note operations at the existing rail yard and associated sounds from rail activity are existing conditions. Rail operations will continue regardless of the addition of the proposed intermodal terminal. It is also worth highlighting that the applicant has qualified in their application that the new use will not increase the existing quantity of noise and/or volume associated with rail activity. Staff note the proposed sound wall and treed berm represent a major investment on behalf of the proponent to mitigate impacts of the development. With respect to a noise monitoring program, these are not typically an item that is imposed on a municipal planning approval within Saint John. While the Community Planning Act provides a degree of authority for municipalities to regulate this through conditions imposed on a rezoning, the City does not have the staff resources or expertise to administer such a requirement. Current enforcement of noise levels within the City of Saint John is authorized by the Saint John Noise By -Law (By-law M-22), which is acted upon through a complaint basis through the Saint John Police Force and designed to monitor noise complaints amongst residents. The City has discussed updating its policy around noise amongst residential and commercial properties, but due to work plan demands, this has not been able to be prioritized for the past two years. 0 WE To account for the Committee's desire for a sound monitoring program, Staff recommend the onus for sound monitoring and mitigation be placed on the proponent through an appropriate Section 59 agreement. Item 5(a) would require the proponent and their consultant to develop sound monitoring program tied to the initial construction and any proposed changes to the intermodal or auto terminal operations. This program would include an assessment of pre -project and post -project levels with a requirement that if post -project noise levels indicate a greater than 2 dBA change, the proponent will be responsible to implement appropriate noise mitigation measure(s). The applicant would be expected to publish on their website the results of the program as well as corresponding mitigating efforts in the event a response is needed. In turn, staff will require the applicant to submit monitoring reports to the City's Development Officer for review prior to publication. In conclusion, staff are proposing an amended staff recommendation as presented in this report to give effect to the views raised the Planning Advisory Committee which are intended to respond to the input received from members of the public who participated at the June 15, 2021 Committee meeting. �ir:7rrx�r�- I �C�IJIu1 �Ji� The proposed approach aligns with the broad principle of mitigating the impact of new development on established development areas to support Growth and Prosperity while promoting livability. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The approach proposed by Staff with respect to the comments received from the Public and PAC, seeks to respect the interests and mitigate the concerns expressed by area residents. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The original planning application was circulated to Infrastructure Development, and Buildings and Technical Services for review and comment ATTACHMENTS PAC Recommendation Letter PAC Report Package PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE June 22, 2021 Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning and Section 59 Amendment 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road On April 19, 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 June 15, 2021, meeting. The City of Saint John Mr. Rick Turner, of Hughes Surveys and Consultants, representing the proponent, appeared before the Committee and noted the proponent agreed with the Staff recommendation but had concerns with conditions i) and j) related to the infrastructure crossing agreements. Mr. Wayne Power of J.D. Irving also appeared before the Committee and provided an overview of the rationale for the project. Amir Iravani of Dillon Consulting, who prepared the sound study for the project, and Ian Simpson of New Brunswick Southern Railway also appeared before the Committee in support of the project. Mr. Simpson provided an overview of train switching operations at the existing facility and the additional rail lines that will be constructed in the rail yard with Mr. Iravani providing an overview of sound impacts from the development and background noise. Mark Reade, Senior Planner confirmed that the City has jurisdiction over land use, while railway operations are regulated by the Province as it is a short line railway. Mr. Reade also noted that any concerns the proponent may have with respect to conditions i) and j) can be discussed with the City's General Counsel staff for clarification with the applicant. Corey Jackson, Andy MacNeil, Paul O'Neil, David Drinnan, Derek Mitchell, Michelle Parent, Anne Baker, and Larry and Debbie Brien, area residents, appeared before the Committee and spoke in opposition to the application. The residents citied concerns with noise from the existing rail facility, particularly Page 1 of 6 VH Hughes Surveys and Consultants 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 18, 2021 sound spikes related to shunting operations, emissions, and truck traffic. Resident Debbie Brien played sound recordings that were taken in her bedroom in the middle of the night to demonstrate the effect of the railyard noise on her quality of life. David Drinnan and Derek Mitchell noted that in their opinion, the proposal was contrary to the policies and direction of the Municipal Plan (PlanSJ), in particular Policy LU-74, and Policy TM-83 which have to do with incompatible zoning adjacencies. Concerns were also expressed regarding the proximity of the proposed recreational area and playground to neighbouring residential properties. It was also suggested that in place of the new park, that the applicant could spend funds on existing parks in the area (Dominion Park, Memorial Field) Responding to issues raised by the area residents and questions from Committee members, Rick Turner noted the proposed sound wall will reduce sound impacts of the proposed facility with Wayne Power noting J.D. Irving has been responsive to residents' concerns. Ian Simpson noted the railway has moved some rail operations involving switching and shunting to other area railyards to reduce impacts on Dever Road area residents. Mr. Simpson also noted the railyard operates on a 24/7 basis due to the schedules of incoming rail traffic from other railways, customer demand, and border crossing requirements. With respect to alternate locations for the proposed facility, Mr. Simpson noted locating the facility at the Bayshore yard would result in increased rail traffic through Simms Corner. Committee members also inquired about the potential to adding additional trees in the proposed park / playground area to further mitigate sound impacts. No other persons appeared before the Committee and eight letters were received regarding the application. Following consideration of the presentations, letters, and Staff report, the Committee unanimously adopted an amended Staff Recommendation. The amended Staff Recommendation incorporated a requirement that the proposed landscaped berm be constructed prior to construction commencing on the proposed intermodal facility, consideration of additional tree retention in the proposed park/ playground area to further mitigate sound impacts, and that Staff report to Common Council prior to Third Reading with a review of the potential for a noise monitoring program and additional mitigative measures and or enforcement to be incorporated as an additional Section 59 conditions on the approval. Committee members also noted the Committee should provide additional input to Common Council, regarding concerns related to livability impacts on residential areas from adjacent heavy industrial and rail operations in advance of the Municipal Plan review. Although the recommendation was adopted unanimously by the committee, it is worth noting that the presentations from residents of the area had a profound Page 2 of 6 UB Hughes Surveys and Consultants 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 18, 2021 effect on Committee members and that the deliberations for this single item took over 3.5 hours. From their presentations, the residents who appeared before the Committee are unhappy with the current situation with the rail yard and are frustrated that their voices are not being taken seriously. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties"), from Light Industrial (IL) to Transportation (T) 2. That Common Council rescind the Section 39 conditions imposed on the November 2, 1987, rezoning of the property located at 864 Dever Road, also identified as PID 55002968. 3. 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 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079: (a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed site and building elevation plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the design of the site, location of buildings and structures, garbage enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle parking, loading areas, landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and that the above site and elevation plans be attached to the permit application for the development of the parcel of land. (b) Modifications to the site driveway to allow for truck turning movements, be made by the proponent at their expense and that the applicable City permits and approvals be obtained for this work. (c) That access to the Rezoned Properties via the existing access opposite Greendale Crescent be prohibited except for emergency purposes. (d) That the proposed noise barrier adjacent to the intermodal Page 3 of 6 UB Hughes Surveys and Consultants 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 18, 2021 terminal be constructed in accordance with the general design presented in the noise study completed for the application, or an equivalent design, and as a condition of the development permit. This noise barrier must be built prior to construction of the proposed facility. (e) That the proposed treed berm along the Dever Road frontage be constructed in general accordance with the design submitted in the application, with the detailed design submitted for the approval of the Development Officer with the required permit application. This landscaped berm is to be built prior to construction of the proposed facility on the Rezoned Properties. (f) That a final illumination plan be prepared by the proponent and submitted for the approval of the Development Officer, detailing the lighting for the proposed development of the Rezoned Properties. The revised illumination plan must incorporate the necessary revisions to reduce the illumination level in the northwest portion of the site to limit the spillage onto adjacent lands to a maximum of 3 lux. (g) That crossing of the water transmission main and combined sewer be subject to the approval of Saint John Water in accordance with the following: That the crossings be designed by an engineering consultant with proven experience in assessing major water transmission mains and performing structural designs for pipeline crossings. This consultant is to be engaged by the applicant. That the engineering design consultant provide a stamped letter written by the design engineer that states that in their professional opinion the design and loadings will have no structural effect on the transmission main and/or sewer, will not impact future maintenance of the transmission main and/or sewer, and that the design was done in accordance with all standards and guidelines. iii. That any proposed fill overtop of existing municipal infrastructure must be subject to an engineering design provided by the proponent and reviewed/approved by the City and must not adversely effect Saint John Water's ability to access their infrastructure. (h) In addition to the engineered design of any pipeline crossings, the City requires that the crossings be subject to a written agreement outlining details and conditions of the crossing and insurance to safeguard any work during the construction of the proposed Page 4 of 6 Hughes Surveys and Consultants 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 18, 2021 crossing of the water transmission main. In addition, an Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement should be provided releasing the City from specified liabilities. Any failure of the existing 1500 mm water transmission main and 900 mm diameter sewer due to the actions of the applicant shall be the sole responsibility of the proponent/developer. (i) The applicant shall provide to the City, any easements and/or rights -of -way for all municipal infrastructure within the lands of the application. (j) If any municipal infrastructure improvements are required to service this proposal, it will be the owner/developer's full responsibility and cost to complete. Prior to determining this, detailed engineering plans and a design brief must be submitted by the owner/developer's engineering consultant to the City for review and approval by the City. (k) That Long Combination Vehicles are not used to transport goods from the Rezoned Properties without the approval of the City. (1) That the applicant abandon the water service to the demolished building on site in accordance with the City of Saint John requirements and install a fire hydrant at the new terminus of the main serving the demolished building. 4. That the City, upon third reading at Common council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(b) of the Community Planning Act, enter into an agreement with the developer of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties") respecting the following: a. The developer's obligation, with the City contributing to covering the purchase of materials and infrastructure inspection costs associated solely with the renewal of existing City infrastructure and the separating of the combined sewer, through the Rezoned Properties in order to separate the wastewater and stormwater. 5. That Common Council authorize a Section 131 agreement between the City and the Developer related to the development of the proposed park area along Dever Road, southwest of the proposed auto terminal. The agreement would incorporate the following components: Page 5 of 6 10 Hughes Surveys and Consultants 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 18, 2021 a) Development of the proposed publicly accessible park area in general accordance with the plans submitted with the rezoning application with consideration of additional tree retention in the southwest corner of the proposed park. b) Ongoing maintenance and liability for the proposed park will be the responsibility of the proponent. c) Continued provision of the park area as long as the intermodal terminal and/or auto terminal or any other industrial use are operating on PIDs 55180079 and 55002968. 6. That prior to third reading for the proposed rezoning, Staff review the potential for a noise monitoring program and additional mitigative measures and or enforcement to be incorporated as additional Section 59 conditions on the approval, with this review summarized in report to Common Council. 7. That, subject to Third Reading being given to the rezoning by Common Council, that the Planning Advisory Committee grant variances to: a. Increase the access width from 12 metres to between 20 and 25 metres; b. Reduce the required side yard along the boundary of PID 55224570 (municipal lift station) from 7.5 metres to 3.26 metres; and C. Reduce the required landscaping within the area proposed to be rezoned to Transportation (T) along the boundary of residentially zoned lands owned by the applicant from 15 metres to between 15 metres and 0 metres. Respectfully submitted, ALL -- Alex Weaver Crawford Chair Attachments Page 6 of 6 1m The City of Saint John Date: June 11, 2021 To: Planning Advisory Committee From: Growth & Community Services Meeting: June 15, 2021 SUBJECT Applicant: Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. on behalf of J.D Irving Limited Landowner: J.D Irving Limited Location: 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road PID: 00405589 (portion), 55002968 (portion), and 55180079 (portion) Plan Designation: Light Industrial Existing Zoning: Light Industrial (IL) Proposed Zoning: Transportation (T) Application Type: Rezoning, Section 59 Amendment 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 and proposed amendments to Section 59 conditions. Common Council will consider the Committee's recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, June 28, 2021. The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to grant reasonable variances from certain Page 1 of 18 1TB Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 requirements of the Zoning By-law. Terms and conditions can be imposed. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proponent is seeking a rezoning to develop an intermodal terminal over the short term and a proposed auto terminal over the longer term. These facilities would involve the shipment of containers and automobiles via rail and truck. The application seeks to rezone a 13.2-hectare area from Light Industrial (IL) to Transportation (T). Staff have assessed the proposal against the applicable policies and standards of the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law and are recommending approval of the application subject to Section 59 conditions related to mitigation measures related to noise, illumination, visual impact, and traffic. Variances are also required due to reduced setbacks and landscaping. These variances are recommended as the impacts of the landscaping variance are mitigated through the applicant's proposal to construct a landscaped berm along the Dever Road frontage. The applicant is also proposing to construct a publicly accessible park on residentially zoned land it owns along Dever Road. Authorization of an agreement with the proponent related to this component of the project is also recommended. RECOMMENDATION That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties"), from Light Industrial (IL) to Transportation (T) 2. That Common Council rescind the Section 39 conditions imposed on the November 2, 1987, rezoning of the property located at 864 Dever Road, also identified as PID 55002968. 3. 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 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079: (a) The development and use of the parcel of land be in accordance with detailed site and building elevation plans, prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, illustrating the design of the site, location of buildings and structures, garbage enclosures, outdoor storage, driveway accesses, vehicle parking, loading areas, landscaping, amenity spaces, signs, exterior lighting, and other such site features; and Page 2 of 18 ,lam Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 (b) The above site and elevation plans be attached to the permit application for the development of the parcel of land. (c) Modifications to the site driveway to allow for truck turning movements, be made by the proponent at their expense and that the applicable City permits and approvals be obtained for this work. (d) That access to the Rezoned Properties via the existing access opposite Greendale Crescent be prohibited except for emergency purposes. (e) That the proposed noise barrier adjacent to the intermodal terminal be constructed in accordance with the general design presented in the noise study completed for the application, or an equivalent design, and as a condition of the development permit. This noise barrier must be constructed before the facility becomes operational. (f) That the proposed treed berm along the Dever Road frontage be constructed in general accordance with the design submitted in the application, with the detailed design submitted for the approval of the Development Officer with the required permit application. This landscaped berm is to be constructed prior to the commencement of any change of use of the Rezoned Properties. (g) That a final illumination plan be prepared by the proponent and submitted for the approval of the Development Officer, detailing the lighting for the proposed development of the Rezoned Properties. The revised illumination plan must incorporate the necessary revisions to reduce the illumination level in the northwest portion of the site to limit the spillage onto adjacent lands to a maximum of 3 lux. (h) That crossings of the water transmission main and combined sewer be subject to the approval of Saint John Water in accordance with the following: i. That the crossings be designed by an engineering consultant with proven experience in assessing major water transmission mains and performing structural designs for pipeline crossings. This consultant is to be engaged by the applicant. ii. That the engineering design consultant provide a stamped letter written by the design engineer that states that in their professional opinion the design and loadings will have no structural effect on the transmission main and/or sewer, will not impact future maintenance of the transmission main and/or sewer, and that the design was done in accordance with all standards and guidelines. iii. That any proposed fill overtop of existing municipal infrastructure must be subject to an engineering design provided by the proponent and Page 3 of 18 ,M5 Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 reviewed/approved by the City and must not adversely effect Saint John Water's ability to access their infrastructure. (i) In addition to the engineered design of any pipeline crossings, the City requires that the crossings be subject to a written agreement outlining details and conditions of the crossing and insurance to safeguard any work during the construction of the proposed crossing of the water transmission main. In addition, an Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement should be provided releasing the City from specified liabilities. Any failure of the existing 1500 mm water transmission main and 900 mm diameter sewer due to the actions of the applicant shall be the sole responsibility of the proponent/developer. Q) The applicant shall provide to the City, any easements and/or rights -of -way for all municipal infrastructure within the lands of the application. (k) If any municipal infrastructure improvements are required to service this proposal, it will be the owner/developer's full responsibility and cost to complete. Prior to determining this, detailed engineering plans and a design brief must be submitted by the owner/developer's engineering consultant to the City for review and approval by the City. (1) That Long Combination Vehicles are not used to transport goods from the Rezoned Properties without the approval of the City. (m) That the applicant abandon the water service to the demolished building on site in accordance with the City of Saint John requirements and install a fire hydrant at the new terminus of the main serving the demolished building. 4. That the City, upon third reading at Common council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59(1)(b) of the Community Planning Act, enter into an agreement with the developer of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as portions of PID Numbers 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079 (collectively the "Rezoned Properties") respecting the following: a. The developer's obligation, with the City contributing to covering the purchase of materials and infrastructure inspection costs associated solely with the renewal of existing City infrastructure and the separating of the combined sewer, through the Rezoned Properties in order to separate the wastewater and stormwater. 5. That Common Council authorize a Section 131 agreement between the City and the Developer related to the development of the proposed park area along Dever Road, southwest of the proposed auto terminal. The agreement would incorporate the following components: Page 4 of 18 ,m Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 a) Development of the proposed publicly accessible park area in general accordance with the plans submitted with the rezoning application. b) Ongoing maintenance and liability for the proposed park will be the responsibility of the proponent. c) Continued provision of the park area as long as the intermodal terminal and/or auto terminal or any other industrial use are operating on PIDs 55180079 and 55002968. 6. That, subject to Third Reading being given to the rezoning by Common Council, that the Planning Advisory Committee grant variances to: a. Increase the access width from 12 metres to between 20 and 25 metres; b. Reduce the required side yard along the boundary of PID 55224570 (municipal lift station) from 7.5 metres to 3.26 metres; and c. Reduce the required landscaping within the area proposed to be rezoned to Transportation (T) along the boundary of residentially zoned lands owned by the applicant from 15 metres to between 15 metres and 0 metres. DECISION HISTORY On November 2, 1987, portions of PID number 55002968 were rezoned from "R-1A" One Family Residential to "I -I" Light Industrial and "R-4" Four Family Residential, these areas are subject to the following conditions imposed by Common Council pursuant to Section 39 (now Section 59) of the Community Planning Act: a) a 25-foot wide strip of land, situated immediately north of the chainlink fence along Dever Road, and extending west immediately north of the proposed zoning line behind the Dexter Construction Company Limited residential buildings, be reserved as a buffer strip, said buffer strip to have a length of 1,000 feet more or less; b) a continuous row of deciduous or coniferous trees, having a height of approximately 25 feet at maturity, be planted and maintained at 25-foot intervals along the entire length of the buffer strip; c) a low screen of shrubs or a vine plant on the chainlink fence be planted and maintained along the entire length of the chainlink fence adjacent to Dever Road; d) the entire buffer strip be hyrdoseeded and not used for storage of equipment, vehicles or similar items; Page 5 of 18 1W Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 e) all work necessary to complete the buffer strip adjacent to Dever Road, in accordance with conditions (a), (b), and (c) be completed before September 31, 1988; f) all work necessary to complete the balance of the buffer strip, in accordance with conditions (a), (b), and (c) be completed before September 31, 1989; and g) the existing driveway be reconstructed in accordance with the plan titled Residential and Industrial Entrance, dated October 21, 1987 and all work necessary to complete the reconstruction of the driveway be completed within six months of the commencement of occupancy of all or part of the office building as a residential building. On December 6, 1994, the Planning Advisory Committee recognized the use of the large building located in the eastern portion of the site, located at 730 Dever Road (PID 00405589) for the manufacturing of corrugated cardboard, boxes, and related items as being similar or compatible to other uses permitted under the I-1 Light Industrial zoning of the property. ANALYSIS Proposal The proponent is proposing to rezone the site to construct the "Lancaster Logistics Park". Initial components of the development will be an intermodal facility to provide for the unloading of shipping containers that arrive via rail onto truck chassis for delivery to their destinations and consist of two additional tracks within the existing rail yard, a loading and unloading area, and parking area for tractor trailer chassis that will be accessed via the existing warehouse driveway. Approval is also being sought for the development of an auto terminal that would incorporate a large vehicle storage area in the western portion of the site. New vehicles would be unloaded from rail cars using a motorized ramp, driven to the storage area to be parked, and stored there until they are shipped to dealerships via trucks. The proponent notes the proposed intermodal terminal and adjacent auto facility benefits the City of Saint John and the Region in several areas. In addition to the immediate creation of both direct and indirect jobs, this project strategically supports the Port of Saint John's modernization upgrade and CP Rail's purchase of the CMQ Railway in 2020. These investments are being made to pursue global and domestic intermodal business and the New Brunswick Southern Railway (NBSR) and the City of Saint John are perfectly situated to participate in these opportunities. Moving forward with this project will provide more competitive supply chain options and prices not only to the shippers in the City of Saint John but throughout the Province and Region. NBSR Page 6 of 18 im Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 directly services the Port of Saint John and interchanges with both of Canada's major railways (CN and CP) and with the Pan Am Railway in Maine that is in the process of being sold to the CSX Railroad. Having direct access to three of North America's Class 1 Railroads is extremely unique and all of this aligns perfectly with the City's goal to be a Global Transportation and Logistics Hub and will be a foundation for attracting future development and creating more jobs and investment in the future. Site and Neighbourhood The subject site consists of a 13.2-hectare portion of three parcels of land located along the north side of Dever Road. The eastern portion of the site contains a large warehouse, with the western portion of the site being vacant. The western portion of the site formerly housed a construction yard and a series of residential dwellings. A City -owned parcel of land, developed as a roadway, is located between the two main parcels of the site. A rail yard and industrial area are located to the north of the subject site. An area of single -unit residential development is located along the south side of Dever Road, with residential development also located along the north side of Dever Road, west of the subject site. A recreational area, including two baseball fields and an arena, is located along the south side of Dever Road, southwest of the subject site. Municipal Plan and Rezoning Municipal Plan The site is designated Light Industrial in the Municipal Plan. These areas are intended to accommodate industries which generally do not create nuisances which extend beyond the property line, such as noise, heavy truck traffic, smoke, dust, heat, particulate matter, or highly visible outdoor storage. While areas designated as Light Industrial in the Municipal Plan are generally not envisioned for uses that generate truck traffic or have highly visible outdoor storage, the site does contain an existing warehouse which generates truck traffic. A Traffic Impact Study found that the increased truck traffic from the proposed development can be accommodated on the area's roadway network. In addition, the applicant is proposing a treed berm to mitigate noise and visual impacts. The Municipal Plan, through Policy LU-81, also provides direction given the location of the site adjacent to a long-standing industrial area. The applicant is proposing measures to help mitigate any potential incompatibility issues between the Logistics Park and the surrounding neighbourhood. These include a treed berm to mitigate the visual impact and noise and a sound barrier internal to the site to further reduce noise associated with rail loading operations. Section 59 conditions are recommended related to these initiatives. In addition, transportation -related policies in the Municipal Plan support the increased development of rail infrastructure and goods movement by rail. Page 7 of 18 ,m Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 Based on the analysis contained in Appendix 2, Staff are of the opinion the proposal conforms to the intent of the Municipal Plan. Rezoning The applicant is seeking to rezone the site from Light Industrial (IL) to Transportation (T) as the transportation zone allows for a transportation terminal which is defined as follows: "transportation terminal" means any use for the facilitation of transporting goods or people by air, land, or water. The proposed intermodal terminal would meet the definition of a transportation terminal. A warehouse facility is also a permitted use in the Transportation Zone, allowing for continued use and expansion of the existing warehouse onsite. Studies and information detailing noise, lighting, and traffic impacts of the proposed intermedial facility have been provided by the proponent. These impacts are discussed below. Noise Currently, the existing railyard operates 24 hours per day, 7 days per week with operations consisting of rail car storage, switching, and shunting. Rail cars from the existing railyard are taken to and from various customers in Saint John (e.g., Praxair, Moosehead, American Iron and Metal (AIM), the Port of Saint John, Irving Oil, and Irving affiliates) and the rail cars are assembled into trains (shunted) for eastbound and westbound travel. Dominant noise sources from existing operations include rail shunting/switching, train movement, and idling locomotives. The average train travel speed through the railyard is approximately 8 km/h and railyard operations can have up to 5 locomotives idling at any given time (day or night) with a total idling time of approximately 10 minutes in any given hour, per locomotive. Post -development noise sources at the proposed intermodal facility and the potential auto terminal include container lifters, a motorized ramp in the auto terminal, idling trucks, truck traffic to/from the site, and additional rail traffic and shunting/switching of rail cars. The applicant has provided a noise study' which summarizes existing noise levels and reviews the anticipated noise levels with the intermodal and auto terminal operations completed. The study also identifies post -development noise mitigation measures. A key consideration of the study was the noise impacts on the residential area along the south side of Dever Road. Noise monitoring was conducted on February 17, 2021, and the existing noise environment for the residential neighbourhood south of Dever Road is dominated by railyard activities and vehicular traffic along Dever Road. Dever Road accommodates heavy and medium trucks, ' Dillon Consulting. J.D. Irving Limited Noise Study Report Intermodal Facility and Potential Auto Compound. March 2021. Page 8 of 18 ,m Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 resulting in notable traffic noise. The location of the noise monitoring is provided in Figure 1 with observed sound levels provided in Table 1. Figure 1: Sound monitoring locations. Source: Dillon Consulting Table 1 - Existing Measured Hourly Sound Pressure Levels (dBA)' Location Leq avg Leq max Leq min 1 53 61 46 2 50 60 38 3 53 61 47 Source: Dillon Consulting Note: 1. Leq is the Logarithmic Energy Equivalent Continuous Sound Level; i.e., the constant sound level over the period in question, that results in the same total sound energy as the actual varying sound. It must be associated with a time period. Leq is a measure of a total sound energy dose over a specified period. While peak sound levels collected at all three stations range from low 80's dBA to mid 90's dBA, the study noted these peak values, likely associated with rail shunting activities, are of a short duration and as such do not significantly impact the hourly averages presented in Table 1. With respect to rail noise, the sound study notes criteria recommended by CMHC and the FCM/RAC (Federation of Canadian Municipalities/Railway Association of Canada) are consistent with other leading international jurisdictions in adopting maximum indoor sound levels at receptors of 35 dBA for sleeping quarters/bedrooms, and 40 dBA for other residential rooms. Page 9 of 18 Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 The noise study notes the City and the Province do not have a regulatory guideline for maximum sound levels. With respect to noise from larger industrial uses, the study also notes the Approval to Operate for the Irving Oil Refinery in Saint John limits the noise level from the refinery operations to the following levels: Daytime: 07:00 to 23:00 55 dBA Nighttime: 23:00 to 07:00 50 dBA. Given this, and the ambient sound levels of 50 dBA to 55 dBA in the area observed through the monitoring program, an outdoor sound level of 50 dBA was selected as the target value for post - development noise levels at the residential receptors along Dever Road. As a result of the noise modelling, mitigation measures were developed as follows: • Construction of a 10m high, "L" shaped noise barrier wall, approximately 240m in length, to be installed on the south side of the container loading/unloading area. This wall will shield the nearby receptors from noise generated by lifting equipment and idling trucks. • Implementation of an anti -idling policy for other areas within the intermodal site. The proponent also notes the landscaped berm proposed along the Dever Road frontage of the site will also play a role in reducing noise from the site. Post development sound levels in relation to the surrounding area are presented in Figure 2. These post development sound levels at residential receptors along Dever Road will be between 45 dBA and 50 dBA. Rail traffic for the proposed Logistics Park will travel to and from the west, travelling past the at - grade public rail crossings of Gault Road, Acamac Backland Road, and Ketepec Road. Staff note that train whistles will continue to be used for trains travelling by these at -grade crossings. However, in discussions with representatives of the railway, it has been noted based on current plans, no additional trains will cross these at -grade crossings with any additional train cars being generated from this development will be added on to existing trains that already currently cross these crossings. Based on current plans residents will not experience more train whistles across the crossings because of the proposed development. Page 10 of 18 92 Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 Figure 2: Model Predicted Sound Level Contours and Receptor Noise Levels (in dBA) — with all mitigation measures incorporated. Source: Dillon Consulting. Staff recommend a Section 59 condition to require construction of the noise barrier prior to operation of the proposed intermodal terminal. Staff also propose a condition requiring the proponent to construct the landscaped berm along the frontage of the site as detailed in the drawings submitted with the application in conjunction with the initial phase of the intermodal terminal. This berm will also serve to mitigate the noise impacts of the intermodal terminal and proposed auto compound and to mitigate the visual impact to the adjacent residential area. Traffic The proponent has engaged a consultant to complete a Traffic Impact Study for the proposed development. The study reviewed post -development traffic operations resulting from the new development and confirmed the adequacy of the intersection geometry at the site access for the expected vehicle dimensions. The existing warehouse access will be utilized for the proposed development. Available sight distances (stopping sight distance and Intersection sight distances) at the access exceed the minimum intersection sight distance standards as recommended by the Transportation Association of Canada. The development is expected to generate 80 additional one-way truck trips per day in addition to the existing traffic currently using the access. This will increase truck volumes along the truck route; however, the daily truck volumes will still be lower than they were in 2014, largely due to Page 11 of 18 im Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 increased use of rail traffic for wood chip delivery to the west side mills operated by J.D. Irving Limited. When travelling from the Lancaster Logistics Park to Route 1, trucks will take the following route: Dever Road, Main Street West, Ready Street, and Catherwood Street. With the reverse route being taken by trucks accessing the site from Route 1. These street segments are an established truck route identified in the City's Traffic By-law. Although this route is slightly longer than the shortest route between the site and Route 1, it avoids sections of Manawagonish Road and Catherwood Street which are not feasible for truck traffic due to grade and intersection geometry limitations for turning vehicles. This route is currently used as a truck route and accommodates approximately 258 trucks per day. Currently Long Combination Vehicles (LCVs), which are tractor trailer units with two trailers (individual trailer lengths 14.5 metres to 16.2 metres) and an overall length of 40 metres or less, are not proposed to access the site. These vehicles, which are longer than traditional tractor trailer units, are subject to Provincial and Municipal approval. Given this, an additional Section 59 condition is recommended requiring municipal approval prior to the use of these vehicles to access the development site. The study notes modifications to the site driveway are required to widen the driveway. Staff recommend a Section 59 condition requiring these improvements to be made prior to the facility becoming operational. Staff also recommend a Section 59 condition prohibiting any access to the facility via the existing access opposite Greendale Crescent. The consultant also reviewed the potential to add an additional crosswalk along Dever Road to provide better access to the proposed park area, however due to sight distance issues along Dever Road, it was recommended that the existing crosswalk at Greendale Crescent be utilized. Lighting The applicant has provided a site plan showing post -development illumination levels for the facility when its operational. The light spillage reaching the residential properties along the south side of Dever Road is below the level of 3 lux (0.3 footcandles) recommended by the Illumination Engineering Society of North America. From a review of the illumination plan, there is an area in the northwest corner of the proposed auto terminal where the light spillage is more than this level. Staff recommend a Section 59 condition requiring that the lighting for this area be designed to ensure that the light spillage onto this area of privately owned lands be no more than 3 lux and that the final lighting plan for the development be subject to the approval of the Development Officer. Existing Section 59 conditions Portions of the western area of the site, where the proposed auto terminal will be located, are subject to conditions imposed on the site as part of the 1987 rezoning. At that time, a previous Page 12 of 18 Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 property owner converted a former office building into a multiple unit dwelling and sought to rezone an area from residential to industrial. Conditions were imposed on the rezoning related to a buffer between the residentially zoned and industrially zoned areas. At the time of the 1987 rezoning and until the early 2010's, the residentially zoned portion of the subject lands in the western area of the site contained a number of single-family dwelling units that have since been demolished by the applicant. This residentially zoned area along Dever Road, located on PIDs 55180079 and 55002968, is where the applicant is proposing to develop a park area that would be owned by the applicant, but would be accessible to the Public. Plans for this area were submitted with the application and detail a walking path along Dever Road and a play structure in the southwestern portion of the site. Given the landscaped berm proposed by the applicant, along with the proposed park area, Staff recommend that the conditions imposed on the 1987 rezoning be rescinded and be replaced by relevant conditions relating to the mitigation of impacts associated with the current proposal. In this instance the proposed additional green space will be located on a portion of the site that is designated as residential in the Municipal Plan and zoned as such in the Zoning By-law and external to the industrially zoned portion of the site that will be developed for the intermodal and auto terminal. This is also an additional component of the project that is being proposed by the developer which presents the need to establish conditions that are additional to those required by a Zoning By-law. Given this, Staff recommend the preparation and execution of an agreement (Section 131 Agreement) with the developer related to the development and maintenance of the proposed park area. This agreement would be based on the following general principles: • Development of the proposed park area in general accordance with the plans submitted with the rezoning application. • Ongoing maintenance and liability for the proposed park will be the responsibility of the proponent. • Continued provision of the park area if the intermodal terminal and/or auto terminal or any other industrial use are operating on PIDs 55180079 and 55002968. Infrastructure The area of the proposed development contains underground municipal infrastructure, some of which is governed by registered easements. This underground infrastructure consists of a 150C mm diameter water transmission main from Spruce Lake serving Irving Pulp and Paper and a 900 mm diameter corrugated steel combined sewer. Given the location of this infrastructure on site, the final site design will also require the approval of Saint John Water to understand the impacts to existing municipal infrastructure. The existing 900 mm combined sewer is in poor condition and should be replaced prior to any proposed loadings, crossings, or parking of vehicles overtop of this pipe. Due to capacity limitations, the Page 13 of 18 ,INE Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 sewer cannot have any additional storm or sanitary sewer flows added to this pipe and the proposed stormwater ponds cannot be connected to nor discharge to this existing sewer. Given the condition and location of the 900 mm combined sewer under the proposed parking area for the tractor trailer container chassis, Staff are recommending a Section 59 condition related to an agreement with the proponent regarding the separation of this combined sewer with the City responsible for the materials and construction inspection costs. Crossings of the water transmission main and combined sewer must be designed by an engineering consultant with proven experience in assessing major water transmission mains and performing structural designs for pipeline crossings. This consultant is to be engaged by the applicant. A key component of this design will be the requirement to cross the water pipeline at a 90-degree angle so that any truck wheels are crossing perpendicular to pipeline flow. The City requires that the design consultant provide a stamped letter written by the design engineer that states that in their professional opinion the design and loadings will have no structural effect on the transmission main and/or sewer, will not impact future maintenance of the transmission main and/or sewer, and that the design was done in accordance with all standards and guidelines. Any proposed fill overtop of existing municipal infrastructure must be engineered and reviewed/approved by the City and must not adversely effect Saint John Water's ability to access their infrastructure. In addition to the engineered design of any pipeline crossings, the City requires that the crossings be subject to a written agreement outlining details and conditions of the crossing. Insurance will also be required to safeguard any work during the construction of the proposed crossing of the water transmission main. In addition, an Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement should be provided releasing the City from specified liabilities. Any failure of the existing 1500 mm water transmission main and 900 mm diameter sewer due to the actions of the applicant shall be the sole responsibility of the proponent/developer. A Section 59 condition is recommended regarding the pipeline crossings and associated agreements. Design of the site must provide for the ability of Saint John Water to access and drain this section of the 1500 mm diameter water transmission main via the existing "blow off' valve and incorporate a drainage path for water draining from the transmission main. It is not recommended that the proposed truck traffic travel overtop of this infrastructure. There are multiple Right of Ways, Municipal Services Easements, Utility Easements and Sewer Easements located across the development site. Absolutely nothing permanent (i.e., a structure or building) is to be constructed overtop of existing easements and/or right-of-way in favor of the City and access must be always provided to Saint John Water to access this infrastructure. Should an easement not exist for existing City infrastructure, the applicant shall provide, to the City, any easements and/or rights -of -way for all municipal infrastructure within the lands of the application. A Section 59 condition is recommended with respect to this requirement. Page 14 of 18 ,m Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 The proposed development will also be subject to the City's Drainage By-law and Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual. Consistent with the Drainage By-law, the applicants'/owners' engineering consultant must provide an engineered storm drainage submission (plan and design report) indicating how stormwater collection and disposal will be managed. Saint John Water also notes the demolition of the existing building on site will require the abandonment of the 100 mm diameter watermain serving the building. This water main shall be abandoned by the applicant, in proximity to the existing municipal lift station and the new terminus of the watermain shall have a fire hydrant installed by the applicant. Variances The proposed development requires variances from the Zoning By-law to: • Increase the access width from 12 metres to between 20 and 25 metres; Reduce the required side yard along the boundary of PID 55224570 (municipal lift station) from 7.5 metres to 3.26 metres; and Reduce the required landscaping within the area proposed to be rezoned to Transportation (T) along the boundary of residentially zoned lands owned by the applicant from 15 metres to between 15 metres and 0 metres. These variances are discussed in detail below. Access Width Variance The existing driveway serving the existing warehouse must be widened from 12 metres to between 20 and 25 metres to accommodate the turning movements of tractor trailers entering and exiting the site. This widened driveway will allow for vehicles to remain in their travelled lane when exiting and entering the site. Given the safety and operational need for the widened driveway, Planning and Infrastructure Development staff are supportive of the variance and recommend approval of the variance. Reduced Side Yard Variance The Transportation zone requires a 7.5 metre side yard adjacent to lands within another industrial zone. The provided side yard along the western side of the container chassis parking area will be between 7.5 metres and approximately 3.26 metres adjacent to the parcel which contains an existing City lift station (PID 55224570). The reduced side yard is not anticipated to result in an operational impact on the lift station nor impact the overall aesthetics in the area, therefore staff recommend approval of the variance. Reduced Landscaping Variance A 15-metre landscaped buffer is required on industrially zoned lands that are adjacent to lands having residential zoning. This standard is achieved in most areas which are adjacent to residentially zoned land, including all residential lands owned by parties other than the Page 15 of 18 1W Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 applicant. The applicant owns an area of residentially zoned land along Dever Road on which several dwellings were located which have since been demolished. While the 15-metre landscaped buffer is provided in most of this area, there is an area where the landscaped buffer varies between 0 metres and 15 metres triggering a variance. Staff are supportive of the variance and recommend approval of the variance given the applicant's proposal to develop a landscaped berm along the Dever Road frontage of the site to provide a visual buffer between the public realm and the auto compound and chassis parking areas. Staff also note the applicant owns both the industrially zoned land where the intermodal terminal/auto terminal will be located and the residential area adjacent to these lands along the north side of Dever Road. This provides additional grounds to support the variance as the variance does not result in a direct impact to an adjacent landowner other than the applicant. Conclusion Staff recommend approval of the application as it conforms to the overall intent of the Municipal Plan and provides for expansion of an existing industrial area. Given the analysis provided in this report, the rezoning is recommended along with a series of conditions to mitigate the impacts of the development on the surrounding neighbourhood and existing City infrastructure. ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS No alternatives were considered. ENGAGEMENT Proponent The proponent used a broad engagement strategy including: • A project -specific website offering a comprehensive overview of the project proposal, with renderings and a video. • Media outreach and coverage. • Multiple print advertisements and close to 750 delivered postcards directed interested parties to the website and / or a community open house. • A community open house which was attended by 90 community members and members of the media at St. Mark's United Church on April 29, 2021, from 3 PM to 5 PM and 6 PM to 8 PM. Open house participants were encouraged to make use of comment cards to ask questions and / or evaluate the proposal. The proponent has provided the following summary of the suggestions and issues raised, as well as any adjustments made to the proposal resulting from community input: Page 16 of 18 im Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 • Sound - A number of residents raised the concern that the project would generate additional railway noise. New Brunswick Southern Railway is making a number of operational changes that will assist in noise mitigation. In addition, a comprehensive sound study was completed by Dillon Consulting as part of the rezoning application. As a result of this study, a sound wall will be constructed to lessen the noise coming from a particular area of the new logistics park. In addition to the sound wall, a berm and trees will be added around the perimeter of the area. Truck traffic - Truck traffic, particularly in West Saint John, has been a historical conversation in the community and was raised as a potential issue by residents at the Open House. A traffic study was performed by Englobe Corporation as part of the rezoning application. The project will add up to 80 one-way truck trips per day (40 trucks) to the facility (this amounts to a net truck increase of 40 one-way truck trips per day as the current intermodal facility on the north side of the tracks currently does 40 one-way trips). As well, the truck traffic on Church Avenue is substantially lower (36%) from 2014 levels based on City of Saint John reports. This reduction in truck traffic information from the City is consistent with the applicant's experience as they have reduced truck traffic substantially to Irving Pulp and Paper due to transporting wood via rail. • Community - Early outreach to stakeholders and community representatives resulted in the inclusion of additional green space and a playground in the final submitted proposal. As well, feedback captured because of the community open house led the project proponent to focus first on the establishment of the berm and trees, rather than other construction elements. 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 June 3, 2021. The rezoning was posted on the City of Saint John website on June 3, 2021. APPROVALS AND CONTACT Author Manager 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: 21-0044 Page 17 of 18 'I� Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road June 11, 2021 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: Site Plan Submission 2: Berm Plan Submission 3: Park Plan Page 18 of 18 UM 730-906 Dever Road - Future Land Use • ` ` f A. Of �� ,As : 'Will 7 DOW MIF- � err ��o �,�� �,�►, . �. �► - ,, . 9wrS - - - 2021-05-31 Subject Site 0 Primary Development Area Property Parcels 1:9,028 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi 0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km Govt of New Brunswick, Maxar I 730-906 Dever Road - Future Land Use JO 'r r . � OF + 'u rt A 2021-05-31 0 Subject Site Future Land Use 0 Regional Retail Centre 0 Property Parcels Medium to High Density Residential 0 Heavy Industrial 0 Primary Development Area 0 Mixed Use Centre 0 Light Industrial) Idfif �I 1:9,028 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi 0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km Govt of New Brunswick, Maxar Akwa KIM b Wh.4 View from reserved road looking southwest. View from reserved road looking west. Site Photography — 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road Hughes Surveys and Consultants View from reserved road looking northeast. City of Saint John 2021June 11 :M Attachment 2: Municipal Plan Review - Dever Road Policy LU-71 Concentrate major new industrial developments in Industrial Parks. Although not a designated industrial park operated by the City, the site is located adjacent to an existing long-standing rail yard and is designated and zoned industrial in the City's Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law. Policy LU-80 While areas designated as Light Industrial in the Municipal Plan are generally Notwithstanding Policy LU-75, recognize there are a number of not envisioned for uses that generate truck traffic or uses that have highly existing capital intensive heavy industrial facilities in the City that visible outdoor storage, the site contains an existing warehouse which are not located in Industrial parks. generates truck traffic and a traffic impact study found that the increased truck traffic from the development can be accommodated on the area's Council may consider the re -zoning of lands that are contiguous roadway network. In addition, the applicant is proposing a treed berm to with these existing uses to Heavy Industrial without an mitigate noise and visual impacts. amendment to the Municipal Plan, provided the proposed use is generally compatible with the surrounding land uses, appropriate While a rezoning to Heavy Industrial is not being sought, Policy LU-81 does mitigative measures are provided, transportation needs can be provide direction given the location of the site adjacent to a long-standing accommodated, and municipal servicing is adequate to service rail yard. The applicant is proposing measures to promote the compatibility the proposed expansion. of the Logistics Park with surrounding areas including a treed berm to mitigate the visual impact and noise and an additional sound barrier internal Policy LU-81 to the site to further reduce noise associated with rail loading operations. Create the Light Industrial land use designation on the Future Section 59 conditions are recommended related to these initiatives. Land Use map (Schedule B). The Light Industrial designation is intended to accommodate industries which generally do not Comments have been provided by Saint John Water regarding impacts on create nuisances, such as noise, heavy truck traffic, smoke, the City's infrastructure. A Section 59 condition(s) have been recommended dust, heat, particulate matter, or highly visible outdoor storage, to prevent impacts to the City's underground infrastructure located within which extend beyond the property line. Examples of such the development site. industries include, but are not limited to, light manufacturing and assembly, warehousing, wholesaling, distribution, research & development activities, equipment or vehicle servicing, sales or rental. Uses in the Light Industrial designation will be connected to the City's water and wastewater systems. Policy NE-6 Noise mitigation measures are a component of the proposed development Carefully consider the appropriate location for and the potential with a wall proposed, internal to the development, to mitigate noise impacts impact of heavy or noxious industrial uses when considering on surrounding residential areas. In addition, a treed berm proposed for the development applications frontage of the site along Dever Road provides additional noise mitigation as well as mitigating the visual impact to adjacent residential properties. 2 Attachment 2: Municipal Plan Review - Dever Road Policy TM-78 The proposal builds on the existing rail infrastructure located in the area and Work with rail transportation providers to maintain a system of will involve the construction of additional trackage in the rail yard. The rail services that supports economic prosperity in the City. proposed intermodal facility is supported by Policy TM-82 as it is a facility that requires rail access, which is supported by the proposed location Policy TM-79 adjacent to the existing rail yard. Support rail infrastructure improvements that will allow for faster and more convenient movement of goods by rail, with careful consideration of the impact of such improvements on the quality of life for residents of the City. Policy TM-80 Consider the potential for the resurgence of passenger and freight rail service in the future when considering Municipal Plan amendments, rezoning applications and land disposition relating to former rail lands and rights -of -way. Policy TM-82 Maximize the utilization of rail infrastructure for the movement of goods by directing industrial development that requires rail service to locations adjacent to rail corridors and yards within Employment Areas. Policy TM-83 The proponent has engaged a consultant to conduct a noise study to Carefully consider development locating adjacent or near rail evaluate the proposed development and recommend mitigation measures infrastructure to ensure that noise or environmental concerns related to the increased noise associated with the intermodal and auto are appropriately addressed. Council shall evaluate land use terminals. Section 59 conditions are recommended with respect to compatibility, compatible noise and vibration levels, and mitigative measures. appropriate separation distances and/or safety barriers when evaluating development proposals. Policy 1-2 These are addressed through proposed Section 59 conditions. 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: Attachment 2: Municipal Plan Review - Dever Road a. The proposal is in conformity with the goals, policies and intent of the Municipal Plan and the requirements of all City bylaws; 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 I- 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; .:; Attachment 2: Municipal Plan Review - Dever Road 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. ;g , 11-01\'000I- \1-1000, 000 0000 10000 100000 �.. ////✓/0 ////✓ ✓ PRO, �� �j ✓/00- //�j / i PD�N �Qo P�OC ==Q) 'I -'000-\ vI zjN -0410111 r DEVER ROAD WAREHOUSE M I DESCRIPTION I BY I DATE 1 J.D. 'rving, Limited IRVING PROJECT ENGINEERING SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK Tel. No. 506 632-7777 fax No. 506 632-6408 PROJECT NBSR BUISNESS PLANNING TITLE PROPOSED COMBINED TERMINAL AT DEVER RD WAREHOUSE 23.1 s IMS Tech) ADT DESIGNED JOB. No. DRAWN Z S 2021.07 CHECKED PLAN No. REV. DATE 2021-05-03 �07 rc SCALE FS r Dever Road Sound Attenuation (5 Years) Earth Berm 10 foot High Trees Burgess, Aimee From: Reade, Mark Sent: June 11, 2021 1:54 PM To: OneStop Cc: Burgess, Aimee Subject: FW: Trains, and Future Development at Lancaster Logistics Park -----Original Message ----- From: Andy MacNeil <amacneilnb@gmail.com> Sent: May 24, 2021 7:15 PM To: Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca> Subject: Fwd: Trains, and Future Development at Lancaster Logistics Park [ 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, please see below email we had previously sent to Mayor Darling, Dorothy Shephard, Greg Norton, and others. Please send me an invitation to the meeting on this subject scheduled for June 15. The main points I have are that this development is suited for an industrial park. Recognizing that is not likely to happen, I suggest a condition be placed on the applicants to construct a berm and sound reducing wall at their expense on the northern side of the Denver Road, starting at the road to Milford from Dever, and continuing west to the first residential zoned property on Devers north side. (similar to forest hills in Fredericton to buffer noise from highway). This condition must be completed before phase 1 zoning change is approved. >> We are writing this letter to voice our great concern regarding the developments in our neighborhood along with future development proposed. >> Firstly, we want to be clear that we know these is a need to be progressive and we are definitely not apposed to it. However, over the last few years our quiet residential neighborhood has changed drastically. Yes, we always had rail system but definitely not to the degree we have now. The trains go 24/7 and the lack of consideration for the noise, pollution and disruption to our once quiet safe neighborhood is non existent. >> In the last few years we have had to deal with blasting on Bald Mountain, heavy trains constantly shunting at all ours, blowing their train whistle at all hours. >> As residents of Greendale we have lived in this neighborhood for over 30 years and have for the most part enjoyed our quality of life. However it seems now we are considered an industrial park whereby expansions continue to happen with no consideration for the residents. >> We have been trying to work with both the Provincial Government and The City of Saint John to recognize our concerns but to no avail. There need to be some policies in place to protect us becoming an extinct neighborhood. >> Concerns that should be accountable by Corperations operating businesses in this area. >>. Noise pollution >> . Air pollution >> . Environmental issues 1 1W >> . Property Values >>. Maintenance of Infrastructure >> . Beautification of the areas >> . Traffic of heavy trucks operating through our Residential Areas >> As the Lancaster Logistics Park comes before PAC in the next couple of days, we want to be very clear, we are not in support of this new business development when we have not had any positive support from our current concerns. To have a public information session during a pandemic, is again reiterating no concern for us as residents. We have watched the railings increase three fold,.; the Pulp Mill increase and the traffic from the port through West Saint John increase substantially. >> We have been voicing our concerns for several years and being patient hopeful that things would improve, but unfortunately we are not being heard. >> Concerned Saint John Citizens, >> Heather and Andrew MacNeil, 70 Clover Court, Saint John 2 to Good day May 06,2021 We wanted to share our extreme frustration regarding the impact NBM Railway is having on our lives. This has been an ongoing issue for many years and now we have been made aware they are looking at expanding their operations with the proposed development of the Logistics Park in Saint John. Many of us have lived in the area for over 30 years and the growth that has taken place over the last few years at the railroad is significantly impacting our lives. There does not seem to be any monitoring by any governing body, and they basically do whatever they want in the area. We used to live in harmony with the railroad but now our life is a nightmare. We are now subject to loud banging, squealing, and engines idling at all times of the day and night. This noise often last for hours at a time. The areas impacted include Glenwood Subdivision, Westfield Road, Manchester Avenue, Denver Road, Greendale, and Milford. It also impacts the Ridgewood Veterans Center. We can assure you the noise and disruption would rival anything the AIM facility is doing in the lower west side and there sure seems to be lots of concern about that facility. Over the years we have spent a lot of time trying to get someone to listen to our concerns to no avail. (dating back to 2015). We do know we are not alone and that other complaints have been made to both the city and the railroad. 1) Firstly, several calls were made to the city only to be told they had researched the matter based on previous complaints and that they discovered that the railroad is provincially regulated and therefore they have no authority. We were referred to the city police to file a noise complaint and they told us they would share our concerns with the railroad, but that they were exempt from noise regulations. 2) We made several complaints to the railroad itself and in June 2016 met with representatives of the railroad to express our concerns. This resulted in no improvement. 3) We then approached our councillor, Greg Norton in March 2018. He has tried to help and support us by attending meetings, bringing a motion to counsel, etc. 4) We had subsequent meetings with representatives from the railroad in May 2018 and October 2018 as the disruptions had not improved and in fact, continued to get even worse. Again, lots of promises but never any improvements. We do still send complaints from time to time but honestly feel they fall on deaf ears. One of the last responses we received explained in detail why trains are noisy. 5) In July 2018 we contacted the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure. They told us trains in west Saint John are provincially regulated. There is nothing in the regulations to cover noise other than the cessation of whistling at a crossing and that reasonable noise from a railroad is generally accepted. Reasonable? We would love to see that definition but, in any case, no help seemed to be forthcoming. It is interesting to note they told us the railroad in east Saint John is federally regulated. 5) In Sept 2018 Greg Norton presented a motion to Common Council to have the city work with the province to establish a formal complaint process like what is available for long haul railroad and those federally regulated. This passed unanimously so this would indicate the city is aware of our concerns. Nothing has ever come of this and it is our understanding the province did not respond. 6) We also sent our MLA, Dorothy Shepard emails asking for her assistance and met with her in June of 2019. We believe she did start an email chain trying to do something for us, but it seemed to get lost in the shuffle of the provincial election and then Covid happened. So again, nothing happened. How does it impact us? 1)We are subject to loud bangs and squealing at all hours of the day and night. It does not last for a minute or two but goes on for hours. We have asked for monitoring of the noise levels and vibration. This has never happened. If you think we are exaggerating as to the disruption you are welcome to come and tent in one of our back yards. We also have recently done a few short recordings and if you are interested, we are more than willing to meet and share these with you. 2)This is really affecting our mental and physical well-being. There was a commentary in the Telegraph Journal on April 30,2021 titled "Province should crack down on noisy vehicles". It refers to a 10-year survey of studies of environmental noise in Western Europe. This resulted in the World Health Organization 2011 report "Burden of Disease from Environmental Noise. The study found overwhelming evidence that exposure to environmental noise has adverse effects on the health of a population. It said traffic noise is second only to the threats from air pollution The article also states the UK has developed incredibly comprehensive noise legislation covering everything from model airplanes to real airplanes. Complaints are taken seriously and investigated. 3)There are also the trains idling and blowing their whistles. This pollution we are subject to because of this seems completely unnecessary. 4) We are unable to open our windows and the recommendation at one of our meetings with the railroad was to consider buying something to create white noise. Really? Some residents do sleep with ear plugs and leave TV's running to try and drown out the noise. 5)There is vibration to the point that window rattle, dishes shake, and we can feel it while lying in our beds or sitting on our sofa's. 6) We are concerned about our safely. There was a train derailment in east Saint John last year and one in front of our homes just last month. There are hazardous products being transported. 7) If we are sitting on the deck having a BBQ it is often difficult to carry on a normal conversation. We have stopped inviting people over or if we do, we just move inside when the trains start shunting. If we have overnight guests, we suggest they leave the windows closed and turn on the fan. When our kids were small, we slept in tents in the backyard now ...imagine doing that now! 8)Winter snow clearing of the tracks and switches appears to be a done by jet engine. We are not kidding! 9)We are concerned about our property values and even the ability to be able sell our homes. Many of us have been apprehensive of bringing more attention to our situation because of these concerns. 10) Many of us used to have lovely views of the river but now often we are looking at parked rail cars covered in graffiti. This might seem minor, but would you appreciate it in your back yard? We ask you what other business venture can operate with no regulations in place to protect its residents? What other city or province would find what we are experiencing acceptable? The current operation bears no resemblance to what it used to be there even a few years ago. We certainly feel we would not see anything like this happening in Moncton or Fredericton. Considering what we currently experiencing we are obviously concerned about any further development in the area. Several of us did attend the open house for the Logistics Park and while the pictures looked lovely, we did not hear any concrete plans as to how rail noise was being considered. In fact, our area was not even on the maps being used at the meeting. They did mention that a noise barrier was to be built in the Dever Road Area and while this may help with the train noise it is specifically designed to block out the noise of the new forklifts to be used on the Logistics site. More noise? When asked they did mention there may be a reduction of train noise due to two new tracks currently being built as this may result in less shunting. They also said they may be diverting some traffic elsewhere. We certainly hope these actions come to be and bring us some relief, but bottom line is there is no concrete plan and nothing in writing. We certainly did not feel we were in anyone's radar. ]: At this point are very concerned about the Logistics Park being developed in our neighbourhood. For starters it would result in increased rail traffic, increased truck traffic, increased noise from forklifts, and increased pollution. What do we want: 1)We want an investigation into our concerns, so you understand what is happening in our neighbourhood. 2)We want noise regulations and monitoring on an ongoing basis that will allow for swift action to be taken when the regulations are violated. We read in the paper the AIMS facility now has this in place and they are immediately forced to shut down when they deviate from the standards. 3) We certainly do not want any further development in our beautiful residential neighbourhood without a complete impact assessment. One of the goals of the Logistics project is to increase rail traffic, so we are understandably very concerned given our current experience. Sudbury Transport has already quietly been moved to the Dever Road. Glossy presentations and promises from the railroad certainly do not hold much weight with us. We have had so many promises over the years and the situation has just continued to get worse. It was mentioned at the open house that east Saint John could be a site for the Logistics Park given their access to the highway. Has this been considered? What would be the impact in that area? What is the purpose of our Industrial Parks? If we continue to develop Saint John with no consideration for the residents, you are going to soon end up with Saint John being one big industrial park. We have always said we understood development is good for the city and we have tried to be reasonable. We have certainly never expected to experience no noise from the trains. We just want to be able to enjoy our properties again and be able to sleep properly. After all our efforts all we have received is pats on the head and nods of understanding as to our concerns. We do not think people fully understand the impact of a shunting yard or maybe they just do not care. We do know that a whistle was stopped in east Saint John a couple of years ago as it was disturbing some of the residents in the area. We can assure you what we are experiencing is far worse that a whistle blowing periodically. Also truck traffic was rerouted on Harding street as it was disturbing peoples sleep. We find it interesting to note that Fredericton just enacted laws to deal with noise from cars and bikes, but we can do nothing regarding the trains. Again, we can assure you there is no comparison. They also have buffering zones from the highway noise. Why does no one care what is happening to us? We do pay a lot of taxes and have been residents of the city for many years. We feel we have essentially been forgotten by the municipal, provincial, and federal governments. We are extremely dissatisfied and want action by our elected representatives and civic officials. We are willing to meet to discuss this matter further and sure hope you will take our concerns seriously. We have addressed this to as many people as possible as honestly, we are at a loss as to how to get our concerns addressed. Who is responsible? Concerned Citizens Contact, Debra Brien, 506 672-8713, Dlbrien2@gmail.com From: Reade, Mark To: OneStoo Cc: Burgess, Aimee Subject: FW: Irving logistics park expansion Date: June 11, 2021 2:10:40 PM Attachments: image001.ong From: Hamilton, Jacqueline <jacqueline.hamilton@saintjohn.ca> Sent: June 8, 2021 11:17 AM To: O'Reilly, Tim <tim.oreilly@saintjohn.ca>; Crawford, Barb <Barb.Crawford@saintjohn.ca>; Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca>; Ouellette, Phil <Phil.Ouellette@saintjohn.ca> Subject: FW: Irving logistics park expansion These are the concerns we have heard. SAINT JOHN Jacqueline Hamilton, RPP, MCIP Commissioner / Commissaire Growth and Community Services / Service de la croissance et de la communaute City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Office / Bureau: (506) 658-2911 Cell / Cellulaire: (506) 977-2636 Website I Facebook I Twitter I Instagram From: Hamilton, Jacqueline Sent: April 30, 2021 1:20 PM To: Ouellette, Phil <Phil.0uelletteC@saintjohn.ca>; Kirchner, Jennifer <Jennifer.kirchner(@saintjohn.ca>; Reade, Mark <mark.readeCCDsaintiohn.ca> Subject: FW: Irving logistics park expansion FYI. SAINT JOHN Jacqueline Hamilton, RPP, MCIP Commissioner / Commissaire Growth and Community Services / Service de la croissance et de la communaute City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Office / Bureau: (506) 658-2911 U.;. Cell / CeIIuIalre: (506) 977-2636 Website I Facebook I Twitter I Instagram From: mitchfor(@nb.sympatico.ca <mitchfor(@nb.sympatico.ca> Sent: April 30, 2021 1:18 PM To: Norton, Greg <greg.norton(@saintjohn.ca> Cc: donna.readon(@saintiohn.ca; McAlary, Shirley<shirley.mcalary(cDsaintiohn.ca>; Armstrong, Blake <blake.armstrong(cDsaintjohn.ca>; iohn.mckenziePsaintiohn.ca; Hickey, David <david.hickeyPsaintiohn.ca>; Merrithew, David<david. merrithew(@saintiohn.ca>; Strowbridge, Ray <ray.strowbridge(@saintiohn.ca>; Sullivan, Gary <gary.sullivanPsaintiohn.ca>; Collin, John <iohn.collin(@saintiohn.ca>; Darling, Don <don.darlingPsaintiohn.ca>, Hamilton, Jacqueline <iacqueline.hamilton(@saintiohn.ca>; Common Clerk <commonclerk(@saintiohn.ca> Subject: Irving logistics park expansion [ 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 snamsamnle&saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047. * * Good afternoon Councillor Norton, I appreciate that you are campaigning and that it is a hectic time for you; however, I am compelled to register my concerns with you with respect to the proposed expansion of JDI's facility off of Dever Road. The expansion of this facility does not surprise me as I have been anticipating a development of this nature since JDI purchased the residential properties along Dever Road a few years ago. This development has the potential to disrupt a large area including Greendale, Glenwood, the lower end of Quinton Heights, Randolph, Milford, South Bay, etc. I will not take up your time with a lengthy email so I will outline my concerns in point form: • Over the years I have registered many complaints with Southern NB about shunting rail cars at all hours of the night (usually around 3 am). Typically there is no response which indicates to me that Southern NB (JDI) no intention of being a good corporate citizen and respect the surrounding neighbourhoods; • This is primarily a residential neighbourhood and the proposed plan does not provide enough buffer between residential neighbourhood and industrial use. I am aware that they want to rezone to transportation from light industrial, but there will most certainly be a significant increase in train traffic and shunting of rail cars which is really the major source of noise. Light industrial uses typically do not generate a lot of noise, the same cannot be said about rail yards. I know this for certain because my neighbourhood has experienced this for years - at times the noise and traffic is barely tolerable; 1.%''1 • Idling of trains and resultant air pollution from diesel electric engines is a significant concern. Again this is primarily a residential neighbourhood and the pollution can be unbearable at times when the engines are fast idling which occurs regularly (I have a video to prove how polluting this can be); and, If approval is granted, will the facility then be regulated by Transport Canada? I will cite the controversial AIM facility at the port as an example of how bad this can be — essentially the municipality has no jurisdiction once it is regulated by Transport Canada. Other concerns will likely arise as the details of the proposed development are made clear and I am hopeful that JDI will FULLYdisclose their plans for this site. I am fearfully that public concerns will not be heard due to the limitations that Covid has thrust upon us. The citizens of the west side deserve to be heard on this issue and with the current situation I fear that they will not and that this development will be expeditiously approved without a robust discussion and public debate. I would suggest that public hearings on this proposal be postponed until hearings can be attended in person again. We are not talking about placing an apartment building in Milledgeville here — we are talking a major expansion of a facility that already impacts the surrounding neighbourhoods. Six plus years of experience on PAC and a thorough knowledge of PlanSJ has taught me that SJ has made some very bad planning mistakes in the past, especially when it comes to locating industrial uses within residential neighbourhoods. This has resulted in diminished quality of life for citizens and has resulted in a loss of residents and desperately needed tax dollars. It is my sincere hope that my concerns, and neighbourhood by extension, will not be brushed aside as NIMBYism. Regardless, Derrick Mitchell NOTICE: This communication and any attachments ("this message") may contain information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise subject to restricted disclosure under applicable law. This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on, this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you are not an authorized or intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies. lr, From: Downina. Laura (Analyst) To: OneStop Cc: Laura Downing; Reade, Mark Subject: FW: Dever Rd Industrial Proposal Date: May 18, 2021 11:10:11 AM [ 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 concerns below. Thank you, Laura Internal From: Downing, Laura (Analyst) Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 11:09 AM To: Mark.reade@saintjohn.ca Subject: Dever Rd Industrial Proposal Good Morning, Mark. I apologize for the late reply and understand if my concerns are not able to be added to the committee meeting, but I will be brief. Being a family with a young child, my concerns are related to traffic patterns & noise. • Trains already make noise starting at 3-3:30 am with their horns/whistles blowing, plus the shunting rumbles our entire house. Will this noise increase? It is already a nuisance and has increased significantly over the 6 years we have lived here. (The trees will not mature for many years in order to block some sound and the berm will only deflect so much) • Road traffic: Transport trucks already enter this lot through the direction of Manchester Ave, as opposed to Main Street. Is this to continue? This is already a very busy street without proper signage for crosswalks, and so my concern is for large transport trucks causing traffic congestion and noise in front of my home. Thank you for allowing us to voice our concerns. Laura Downing 789 Dever Rd (506) 721-4069 Internal If you wish to unsubscribe from receiving commercial electronic messages from TD Bank Group, please click here or go to the following web address: www.td.com/tdoptout Si vous souhaitez vous desabonner des messages electroniques de nature commerciale envoyes par Groupe Banque TD veuillez cliquer ici ou vous rendre a I'adresse www.td.com/tddesab NOTICE: Confidential message which may be privileged. Unauthorized use/disclosure prohibited. If received in error, please go to www.td.com/legal for instructions. AVIS : Message confidentiel dont le contenu peut titre privilegie. Utilisation/divulgation interdites sans permission. Si regu par erreur, priere d'aller au www.td.com/francais/avis_juridique pour des instructions. From: One$toD To: Planning Admin; Burgess, Aimee Subject: FW: Dever Road rezoning application Date: May 17, 2021 8:41:50 AM Importance: High Paula Hawkins One Stop Development Shop Customer Service Centre Ground Floor — City Hall (506) 658-2911 paula.hawkins&saintjohn.ca From: m.anderson@bellaliant.net <m.anderson@bellaliant.net> Sent: May 17, 20218:39 AM To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca> Cc: Reade, Mark <mark.reade@saintjohn.ca> Subject: Dever Road rezoning application Importance: High [ 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 snamsample(a�saintjohn.ca or contact IT Service Desk at 649-6047. * * Dear Sirs: Under whose policy or government regulations are residents only given three days to respond to the request for approvals associated with the construction of a (transportation terminal)? I am the resident and property owner of 897 Dever Road. I am against the proposed rezoning of Dever Road from "light industrial" to "transportation" in connection with the construction of an intermodal terminal. With the increased movement of large, heavy trucks, extra rail tracks, and rail presence, the noise level along Dever Road will only increase to unacceptable levels, in spite of the proposed treed berm. The proposed sound wall would not be effective, as it does not extend to cover the full length of the new track area. Even as it stands right now, the noise from shunting trains is disturbing, at any time of day, or night. In additiion, the increased truck traffic on Dever Road will become a hazard for pedestrians (Dever Road is a popular and important walking and jogging area) area, and drivers alike. :i I If the proposed rezoning application goes through, Dever Road will become an undesirable area in which to live. Residents will become frustrated and move out, and people will be reluctant to buy in this area. Saint John cannot afford to lose an important tax base, which Dever Road is, and property values will decrease. A letter will follow to confirm this email. Respectfully submitted, Mary G. Anderson 897 Dever Road Saint John, NB E21M 4.14 From: OneStop To: Planning Admin; Burgess, Aimee Cc: OneStoD Subject: FW: Rezoning of Dever road Date: June 10, 2021 10:34:22 AM Paula Hawkins One Stop Development Shop Customer Service Centre Ground Floor — City Hall (506)658-2911 paula.hawkins@saintj ohn. ca -----Original Message ----- From: Paul O Neill <poneill@exitrealtyspecialists.ca> Sent: June 10, 2021 10:23 AM To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca> Subject: Rezoning of Dever road [ 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 My wife and I live at 914 Dever road!! We live in very close proximity to this proposed rezoning and I would say our property will be most affected by this new rezoning! ! ! Mr Irving's land runs up to my driveway now!! His intention to put a park at the most western point on his land right next door to my property is not what we want!! He would bring increased traffic to my backyard which would take away from our current privacy!! This land has been vacant for years now with fallen trees and a broken chain link fence with has been an eye sore since we have lived here, in 2000 Also with the increase in train activity our home has been affected by the increase in the banging of connecting trains together!!! Our home literally shakes like there is an earthquake near by and this happens several times per week!!! If the city is going to rezone this property we would want that lot next to ours to remain vacant but totally cleaned up with all fallen trees and fallen chain link fence to be remove, so it looks cleaner and we retain our privacy!! This could also have a negative affect on our property value when we go to sell!!! We are already not happy with the increase in train activity!! We would like to attend the virtual meeting scheduled for next week!! Can you register us?? Thanks Sent from Paul O'Neill Port Saint John June 9t", 2021 Members of the Planning Advisory Committee: I am writing to voice my support for the Lancaster Logistics Park proposed by J.D. Irving, Limited as it will continue to complement the modernization project underway at Port Saint John. New Brunswick's economy is grounded in trade, and we know its future relies on a sustainable and strong multimodal transportation sector. Developing a world -class supply chain for shippers is essential. This is an important reason why projects like the Port Saint John Modernization and the Lancaster Logistics Park are linked and so essential. As intermodal transportation continues to grow, regions with robust and connected intermodal transportation networks will be in a strong competitive position and will enjoy the economic benefits that come along with that. That most effective of these intermodal networks strike a balance between import containers coming into ports like ours and domestic intermodal container movement. This means that, once delivered, empty import containers are returned to ports by rail alongside domestic container shipments, making the journeys more cost-effective for railways and shippers. The Lancaster Logistics Park will help facilitate this domestic intermodal segment. I again wish to state my unequivocal support for the proposal in front of you. I see this as another essential logistics component that is needed for the City of Saint John to truly become a critical node on the global supply chain. Regards, Jim Quinn CEO Saint John Port Authority 111. rue water Street. Saint John, New/Nouveau Brunswick Canada E2L 061 nada TeI It6l. 506 636 d$69 Faxltelec. 506. 636.4443 sjport-com From: David Ryan To: OneStoD Subject: June 15, 2021 PAC Agenda Item 5.1 Date: June 14, 2021 10:27:17 AM [ 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 confirm receipt of this email. I would like the following to be included in the information for the June 15, 2021 PAC Meeting for the agenda item 5.1. 712 Dominion Park Road Saint John, NB, E2M 4Y8 June 14, 2021 City of Saint John, Planning Advisory Committee 15 Market Square Saint John NB, E2L 4L1 Attention: Planning Advisory Committee RE: 730, 858, 864, & 906 Dever Road - Rezoning, Section 59 Amendments, & Variance Dear Planning Advisory Committee, I submit this to record my objections to the proposed JDI Lancaster Logistics Transportation Terminal. I have two main objections in regard to this proposed variance. I also did attend the Open House hosted by JDI a few months back at St. Mark's Church and also presented these objections to the JDI Team. My first objection relates to the noise. Currently at least 5 times per week trains are being shuttled and prepared for transport during the overnight hours. It seems that on a regular basis a train departs at 3am; prior to this departure the train blows its whistle a number of times. The large number of residents that are currently affected by this 3am wakeup call will be subject to more and more frequent overnight whistle blowing should this park move forward. I discussed this issue with the JDI Team and I was told that this is a safety factor. I am, however, aware that the area near Bayside Drive was able to get a special consideration to not blow the whistle during the overnight hours and I ask that this consideration be forced upon JDI should the decision be made to proceed. My second objection relates to the safety factor of the increased truck traffic on Main St West, Church Avenue, Dever Road, Greenhead Road and Milford Road into and out of the JDI Compound. The present situation is bad enough. The current size of trucks make it impossible 129 for drivers to safely make the turns needed without crossing into the oncoming traffic lanes. Frequently the traffic is backed up in this area as trucks must wait for the ability to fully block the roads as they progress forward. The traffic situation is this area is dangerous today and will present a more dangerous situation if the traffic is not diverted. If any of you are not familiar with the area, I suggest that you should tour the area, sit and watch the traffic from the hill of St Rose Church and then consider your decision. To make a decision on this matter if you are not aware of the current disruptions and safety issues could be considered neglectful. Years ago JDI applied to council and was granted permission to build an industrial road parallel to and behind Main St West. This road was specifically presented to council at the time to remove the truck traffic off the above mentioned roads. There was even a design having a roadway up to the back off Moosehead Brewery. This road and a newly designed and aligned entrance/exit at on Bridge Street near Simms Corner exist. This industrial private road should be the only truck route to/from this terminal. At the Open House I was told by a JDI representative that they cannot access the Warehouse on Dever Road from this road due to the train tracks, but I suggest that this is more of a not wanting to invest in the traffic directing needed on this property owned by JDI to ensure that the trucks can access the warehouse from the back as opposed to Dever Road. Below is a picture of the Milford Road/Greenhead Road intersection looking towards St. Rose Church and Snackers. This is the intersection used by the large size trucks, and by those employed in the compound. This intersection is the site of many accidents yearly. 136 Two weeks ago, at 5.45am I was injured because an employee coming out of this work area, after a 12 hour shift, did not see the stop sign and continued through Greenhead Road. I am not the only person to have suffered from the poor structure of this intersection. This area is not designed for the current traffic; more personal injury and potential death will occur should the intersection not be addressed and more traffic is allowed to use this roadway. To conclude, my two objections that I know need to be addressed for any expansion to occur is 1. Address the current overnight noise and 2. Force all truck traffic to this proposed transportation park to enter/exit through the Bridge Street intersection and travel the existing roadway that was built years ago for this exact purpose. Thank you David Ryan 506 333 0906 Dave Ryan 139 From: m.anderson()bellaIiant.net To: Reade, Mark Cc: Common Clerk; OneStop Subject: Proposed Dever Road Rezoning and Intermodal Terminal Date: June 15, 2021 1:11:52 PM Importance: High [ 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 Sirs: I have a question for which I would like an answer. If the proposed rezoning goes through and the Intermodal Terminal is built, my house value, and the value of houses in the area will plummet. Who then would be responsible for compensating home owners for the difference in value??? Yours truly, Mary Anderson 897 Dever Road Saint John, NB E2M 4J4 Tel. 506 650-2609 ;r, From: David Drinnan To: OneStOD Subject: 730, 858, 864, & 906 Dever Road - Rezoning, Section 59 Amendment, & Variance Date: June 14, 2021 6:48:16 AM [ 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 wish to address PAC regarding the application on Dever Road tomorrow. What is the protocol for doing so? Thanks, Dave 506.643.8490. TXD/E300 183 BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-112 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: 1. Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located at 730, 858, 864 and 906 Dever Road, also identified as being portions of PIDs 00405589, 55002968, and 55180079, from Light Industrial (IL) to Transportation (T). as illustrated below pursuant to a resolution adopted by Common Council under Section 59 of the Community Planning Act. ARRETE NO C.P. 111-112 ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE DE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors d'une r6union du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a d6cr&6 ce qui suit: L'arr&6 sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, d6cret6 le quinze (15) d6cembre 2014, est modie6 par: 1. La modification de 1'annexe «A», Plan de zonage de la ville de Saint John, permettant de modifier la d6signation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 13,2 hectares, situ6e au 730, 858, 864 et 906 chemin Dever, et portant des parties des NID 00405589, 55002968 et 55180079 de zone d'industrie legere (IL) a zone de transports (T), comme it est indiqu6 ci- dessous conform6ment a une resolution adoptee par le conseil municipal en vertu de Particle 59 de la Loi sur Furbanisme. all as shown on the plan attached hereto and - toutes les modifications sont indiqu&es forming part of this by-law. sur le plan ci joint et font partie du pr6sent arr&6. 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 xxxx, A.D. 2021 and signed by: EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le pr6sent arr&6 le X xxxx 2021, avec les signatures suivantes : Mayor/Maire City Clerk/Greffier communal First Reading - June 28, 2021 Premiere lecture - le 28 juin 2021 Second Reading - June 28, 2021 Deuxi&me lecture - le 28 juin 2021 Third Reading - Troisi&me lecture - 182 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 ps 0. .e � s e Jet mod. Gr,o � o FROM / DE TO / A Light Industrial Transportation Zone d'industrie legere MR IL T Zone de transports 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: Hughes Surveys and Consultants Inc. on behalf of J.D. Irving Limited Location: 730, 858, 864, 906 Dever Road PID(s)/NIP(s): Portion of/de 00405589, portion of/de 55002968, portion of/de 55180079 Considered by P.A.C./Considers par le C.C.U.: June 15 juin, 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: July 13 juillet, 2021 183 Received Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Open or Closed Open Session Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council Subject: Federal Government Department for Saint John Background: The examples of the other Atlantic Cities losing major economic drivers and that did this I am sure you are aware of and the results were good: St. John's - employment Insurance, Miramichi - gun control then the Phoenix Payroll system, Charlottetown - Veterans Affairs, Moncton - Fisheries, CRA, Heritage Canada (moved from Saint John) and other departments and agencies such as ACOA and military departments. Federal jobs would diversify our economy. In addition, would give us higher income and education levels with benefits which many of you know in our community we do not have. Our high poverty level is also an argument for this request for a Federal Government Department. Saint John has the highest national child poverty rate, high illiteracy and obesity rate, very low number of university students, much lower rates of homeowners, lower wages and often with no benefits then other Atlantic Canadian Cities. The intent is to get a federal department for Saint John and have a buy in from all our federal candidates in the upcoming federal election. As you know this was used successfully in the provincial election to have the municipal power and tax issue brought forward. I was one of the candidates and it had a positive effect for the city. This made us focus as candidates and was a good move by the last common council. What to me was surprising was how supportive David Coon was of our need to keep local government in control and return our taxes and power that was taken away 55 years ago. The past matters if the rules and laws still exist that have caused and continues to cause this damage. We had a tremendous loss in the dry dock loss, many high wages and benefits and a lot of young people and new people and immigrants. This also shows that it is not just main party candidates that can help us raise and bring forward and educate about a certain issue. lr _ SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 HE Motion: Council direct the City Manager to propose a strategy to ask the Federal Candidates in the upcoming Federal Election to work towards bringing a Federal Government Department to Saint John. Respectfully Submitted, (Received via email) Barry Ogden Councillor Ward 2 City of Saint John SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 185 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-213 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Growth and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Demolition of Vacant, Dilapidated and Dangerous Building at 110 Victoria Street (PID 00376517) AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Benn Purinton J Hamilton /A Poffenroth I John Collin RECOMMENDATION RESOLVED, that the building located at 110 Victoria Street, PID# 00376517, is to be demolished as it has become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that one or more by-law enforcement officers appointed and designated under the SaintJohn Unsightly Premises and Dangerous Buildings and Structures By-law are hereby authorized to arrange for the demolition, in accordance with the applicable City purchasing policies. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to advise Council that a Notice to Comply was issued under Part 13 of the Local Governance Act for the building located at 110 Victoria Street. The hazardous conditions outlined in the Notice have not been remedied by the owner within the required time frame and staff is looking for authorization from Council to arrange demolition of the building. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION N/A REPORT The City of Saint John's Dangerous and Vacant Building Program works to address problematic vacant buildings throughout Saint John. The program is a key driver for growth in the City as it addresses hazardous and unsightly buildings that create sM unsafe conditions for the community and lower property values in the surrounding area. The program addresses these issues either by working with property owners to see a building be repaired and reoccupied or by demolishing a building if it becomes a hazard to public safety. The program was accelerated in 2017 when Common Council dedicated additional resources to the program. This has resulted in approximately 70 vacant building cases being resolved per year, two thirds of which are repaired and reoccupied. As a result of the increased resources and enforcement measures taken, the overall condition of the buildings being monitored has improved significantly which has led to fewer buildings that are required to be demolished. Staff has also implemented new initiatives to see a higher percentage of buildings redeveloped as this is the ideal outcome for citizens and the community. Vacant buildings being repaired and reoccupied is the preferred outcome as it improves the property value which quickly contributes to growth of the tax base. However, in cases where a building becomes a hazard to public safety, City staff can pursue demolition. Demolition often becomes necessary when buildings are left to deteriorate to a point where they become a hazard to public safety. This can occur for a number or reasons including an owner's financial situation, time constraints or other forms of abandonment including intestacy or bankruptcy. In cases where a building is abandoned, demolition is often the only option to address the situation as there is no owner to repair and the building can only be sold through a lengthy tax sale process. The Demolition Process Staff work with property owners to achieve voluntary compliance wherever possible. However, when a building is a hazard to public safety, it may be necessary to issue a formal Notice to Comply. The Notice to Comply sets timelines for when the owner must repair or demolish their building. If the Notice is not complied with within the required timeframe, Common Council can authorize staff to demolish the building and send the owner an invoice for the costs incurred. At the end of the year, if the invoice remains unpaid, staff is able to send the amount owing to the Province and be reimbursed for the costs incurred. The outstanding amount would then be placed onto the property taxes for the subject property. Property Requiring Enforcement —110 Victoria Street 187 am The abandoned two -unit, two -storey apartment building located at 110 Victoria Street is a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of being vacant or unoccupied and by reason of dilapidation. The owner has been unresponsive despite extensive efforts from staff to contact the individual regarding the building. Staff first became aware of the building's vacancy in December of 2015 and began standard enforcement procedures. The property is located in a residential zone in the City's North End and is currently assessed at $69,300 as per Service New Brunswick's Land Registry. The building's interior has deteriorated significantly due to ongoing water infiltration. The water has caused a significant amount of mould and moss to grow throughout the building and sections of the floors have softened which could collapse under load. Loose and broken glass is present in multiple windows surrounding the building, some of which are located directly above a sidewalk. Multiple complaints were submitted to City staff describing criminal activity that occurred around the building, including instances of windows being broken and of individuals attempting to enter the building. A Notice to Comply was issued on June 17, 2021 and was posted to the building on June 18, 2021 as per section 132(3) of the Local Governance Act that outlines acceptable methods of service. The Certificate of Registered Ownership lists one individual as the owner of the building. The Notice provided the owner with 30 days to remedy the conditions at the property. The owner did not file a Notice of Appeal within the time frame provided. A compliance inspection was conducted on July 19, 2021 which revealed that the conditions have not changed since the Notice was issued. Attached for Council's reference is the Notice to Comply that was issued and the affidavit attesting to service. Also included are photos of the exterior of the building. The Local Governance Act indicates that where a building has become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation or by reason of unsoundness of structural strength, the municipality may cause the building to be demolished. As required in the Act a report from an engineer is attached, forming part of the issued Notice to Comply, and provides the evidence to the buildings' vacancy, dilapidation and resulting hazard to safety of the public. A copy of the letter advising of the Common Council Hearing date is attached. The letter was posted to the building on July 6, 2021. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Enforcement of the Saint John Unsightly Premises and Dangerous Buildings and Structures By-law aligns with Council's Vibrant, Safe City priority. um -4- SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES As is written in the Local Governance Act that a municipality must commence in the proceedings of remedial action, approval of Common Council is required prior to starting demolition activities at the property. Total cost of the demolition work is estimated at $20,000. Upon approval of the recommendation, staff will seek competitive bidding in accordance with the City's purchasing policy. The cost of the work will be billed to the property owner and if left unpaid, it will be submitted to the Province with the request for reimbursement. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS General Counsel provided ownership verification by obtaining the Certificate of Registered Ownership for the property. Additionally, General Counsel registered the Notice to Comply with Service New Brunswick's Land Registry. ATTACHMENTS Affidavit of Service — Notice to Comply Affidavit of Service — Notice of Common Council Hearing Photos CANADA PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK COUNTY OF SAINT JOHN CITY OF SAINT JOHN IN THE MATTER OF THE BUILDING THAT IS LOCATED AT 11 �r 66MMJ , Saint John, N.B. (PID number � 76517 ) AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I, Lr ,�;,�,.. , of the City of Saint John in the County of Saint John and the Province of New Brunswick MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS: 1. I am employed by the City of Saint John in its Growth and Community Services Department. I have personal knowledge of the matters herein deposed where otherwise stated. 2. On the IV day of 2021 at approximately . �0 ,•, , I posted the following documents: • a Notice to Comply, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" • and a NoticeofAppeal, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" to the building at 111 V +(. on'o , Saint John, N.B. Sworn To me at the City of Saint John, N.B. on the 1,2) day of 2021 CHRlST�oL COMMISSNER OF OATHS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DECEMBER 31 ST, 29`I`939 6 11� 190 FORM 4 NOTICE TO COMPLY — DANGEROUS OR UNSIGHLTY PREMISES (Local Governance Act, S.N.B., 2017, c.l 8, s 132(2)) Parcel identifier: PID # 00376517 Address: 110 Victoria Street, Saint John, NB Owner(s) or Occupier(s): Name: James Michael Kennedy Address: 133 Castlepark Grove, Halifax NS, B3M 4X8 FORMULE 4 AVIS DE CONFORMITY — LIEUX DANGEREUX OU INESTH9TIQUES (Loi sur la gouvernance locale, L.N.-B. 2017, ch. 18, par. 132(2)) Numkro d'identification de la parcelle : NID : 00376517 Adresse : 110 Victoria Street, Saint John, NB Proprietaire(s) ou occupant(s) : Nom : James Michael Kennedy Adresse : 133 Castlepark Grove, Halifax NS, B3M 4X8 Local government giving notice: The City of Saint Gouvernement local signiftant t'avis : The City of John. h1 F _' Saint John. AN 11 By-law contravened: Saint John nsight d mP&A, Nenfreint : Arrete relatif aux lieux inesthetiques and Dangerous Buildings and Struc r et constructions dangereux de Saint law Number M-30 and amendment Ln at twmgyWete nu 0, ainsi que ses modifications law"). Irentes {1'« Arrete »). Provision(s) contravened. Su 6(3) of the By-law. Conditions(s) that exist: The premise is unsightly by permitting junk, rubbish, refuse and a dilapidated building to remain on the premise. The building has become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of being vacant or unoccupied and has become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation. The conditions of the building and premise are described in Schedule "A", a true copy of the inspection report dated June 17, 2021 prepared by Benn Purinton, by-law enforcement officer, reviewed and concurred in by Christopher McKiel, P. Eng.,' by-law enforcement officer. What must be done to correct the condition: The owner is to remedy the conditions by complying with the required remedial actions of the aforementioned inspection report and bring the building and premises into compliance with the aforesaid By-law. In the event that the owner does not remedy the condition of the building and premises in the time prescribed by this Notice to Comply, the building may be demolished as the corrective action to address the hazard to the safety of the public and the premises may be cleaned up. In the event of demolition, all debris and items on the premises will be disposed of as the corrective action to address the hazard to the safety of the public. The aforementioned remedial actions relating to the demolition of the building and the disposal of debris and items on the premises do not include the carry -out clean- up, site rehabilitation, restoration of land, premises or personal property or other remedial action in order to enfreinte(s) : Les paragraphes 6(1), 6(2) Description de la (des) situation(s) : Les lieux sont inesthetiques en permettant la presence de ferraille, de detritus et le batiment delabre. Le batiment est devenu dangereuse pour la securite du public du fait de son inhabitation ou de son inoccupation et est devenu dangereuse pour la securite du public du fait de son delabrement. Les conditions du batiment et des lieux sont decrites a I'annexe a A » , une copie confortne du rapport d'inspection en date du 17 juin 2021 et prepare par Benn Purinton, une agente charge de 1'exdcution des arretes du gouvernement local, revise et en d'accorde avec par Christopher McKie[, ing., une agente charge de 1'execution des arretes du gouvernement local. Ce qu'il y a lieu de faire pour y remedier: La proprietaire doit restaurer les conditions en se conformant aux recommandations du rapport d'inspection susmentionne et d'amener le batiment et les lieux en conformites avec I'Arrete. Dans 1'eventualite que is proprietaire ne remedient pas le batiment et les lieux dans le temps prescrit par le present avis de conformite, le batiment pourront etre demolis comme mesure corrective compte tenu qu'il represente un danger pour la securite du public et les lieux pourront etre nettoyes. Dans 1'eventualite de demolition, tous les debris et autres items sur les lieux seront disposes comme mesure corrective dans le but de remedier le danger pour la securite du public. Les mesures correctives susmentionnees relativement a la demolition du batiment et la disposition des debris et autres items sur les lieux ne comprennent pas le nettoyage, la remise en etat des lieux, des terrains ou des biens personnels ou toute autre mesure corrective dans 191 control or reduce, eliminate the release, alter the manner of release or the release of any contaminant into or upon the environment or any part of the environment. Date before which the condition must be corrected:` a) The demolition of the building, clean-up of the property and related remedies must be complete, or plans and permit applications for repair related remedies, must be submitted: within 30 days of being served with the Notice to Comply. b) The repair related remedies must be complete within 60 days of being served with the Notice to Comply. le but de controler ou de reduire, d'eliminer It deversement, de modifier le mode de deversement ou le deversement d'un polluant dans ou sur 1'environnement ou toute partie de 1'environnement. Delai imparti pour y remedier : ' a) La demolition du batiment et le nettoyage des lieux doivent titre completees, ou a laquelle Its plans et demande de permis pour les mesures des reparations, doivent titre soumises, dans Its 30 jours qui suivent la signification de 1'avis de conformite. b) Les reparations reliees aux mesures doivent titre completees dans its 60 jours qui suivent la signification de I'avis de conformite. Date for giving notice of appeal: Within 14 days of Date limite pour donner Pavis d'appel: Dans its 14 being served with the Notice to Comply. jours qui suivent la notification de I'avis de conformite. Process to appeal: The owner may within 14 days after having been served with this Notice to Comply, send a Notice of Appeal by registered mail to the City Clerk of The City of Saint John, City Hall — 21 Floor, 15 Market Square, Saint John, New Brunswick, E2L 4L1. Potential penalty for not complying with notice within time set out in notice:'- Subsection I I( I) of the By-law states that a person who fails to comply with the terms of a Notice to Comply given under section 7 of the said By-law, commits an offence that is punishable under Part 2 of the Provincial Qjfences Procedure Act as a category F offence. Where an offence under subsection 1 l(l) continues for more than one day, the minimum fine that may be imposed is the minimum fine set by the Provincial Offences Procedure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the number of days during which the offence continues pursuant to subparagraph 11(3)(b)(i). Local government's authority to undertake repairs or remedy:' Paragraphs 12(1)(a), 12(1)(b) and 12(1)(c) of the By-law state that if an owner or occupier does not comply with a Notice to Comply given under section 7 within the time set out in the said Notice, the City may, cause the premises of that owner or occupier to be cleaned up or repaired, or cause the building or other structure of that owner or occupier to be repaired or demolished. Further, subsection 12(3) of the By-law states that the cost of carrying out such work, including any associated charge or fee, is chargeable to the owner or occupier and becomes a debt due to the City. Dated at Saint John on the _ � day of June, 2021 Processus d'appel : La proprietaire peux dans les 14 jours qui suivent la notification de Pavis de conformite, envoye un avis d'appel par courrier recommande i ]a greffiere de la municipalite, a The City of Saint John, Edifice de !'hotel de ville, 2e etage, 15 Market Square, Saint John, Nouveau -Brunswick, E2L 4LI. Peine possible en cas d'omission de se conformer aux exigences de 1'avis dans le Mai y imparti : '- Le paragraphe 11(1) de I'Arrete prevoit quiconque omet de se conformer aux exigences formulees daps un avis de conformite notifie aux termes de Particle 7 de ladite Arrete, commet une infraction qui est punissable en vertu de la partie 2 de la Loi sur la procedure applicable aux infractions provinciales a titre d'infraction de la classe F. Lorsqu' une infraction prevue au paragraphe 1 [(I) se poursuit pendant plus d'une journee, l'amende minimale qui peut titre imposee est I'amende minimale prevue par la Loi sur la procedure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour une infraction de la classe F multipliee par le nombre de jours pendant lesquels ('infraction se poursuit conformement i I'alinea I I (3)b)i). Pouvoir du gouvernement local d'entreprendre des reparations on de remedier a la situation : Conformement aux al ineas 12(1)a), 12(1)b) et 12(1)c) de I'Arrete, si un avis de conformite a etc signifie aux termes de I'article 7 de ladite Arrete et, que le proprietaire ou ('occupant ne se conforme pas i cet avis de conformite dans le delai imparti et tel qu'il est repute confirme ou tel qu'il est confirme ou modifie par un comite du conseil ou par un juge en vertu le paragraphe 12(3) de Iadite Arrete, la municipalite peut faire nettoyer ou reparer Its lieux de ce proprietaire ou de cet occupant ou de faire reparer ou demolir It batiment ou autre construction de ce proprietaire ou de cet occupant, et les touts afferents a 1'execution des ouvrages, y compris toute redevance ou tout droit connexe, sont mis i la charge du proprietaire ou de ('occupant et deviennent une creanee de la municipalite. Fait a Saint John le _ juin 2021. 192 Local government: The City of Saint John Signature of the officer of the local government: Gouvernement locale : The City of Saint John. Signature du fonctionnaire du gouvernement local: Contact information of the officer of the local Coordonnees du fonctionnaire du gouvernement government: local: Name: Benn Purinton Mailing address: Growth and Community Services The City of Saint John 15 Market Square City Hall Building, lu Floor P. O. Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L1 Telephone: (506) 658-2911 E-mail: benn.purinton@saintjohn.ca Fax: (506) 632-6199 Corporate seal of the l Nom : Benn Purinton Adresse postale: Service de la Croissance et du Communautaire The City of Saint John 15 Market Square Edifice de I'h6tel de ville, 11 etage Case postale 1971 Saint John (Nouveau -Brunswick) E2L 4L I Telephone : (506) 658-2911 Adresse 6lectronique: benn.purinton cr saintjohn.ca Te16copieur . (506) 632-6199 Sceau du gouvernement local Notes: Notes: 1. All appropriate permits must be obtained and all relevant 1. Tous les permis presents dowent 6trc obtenus et toule ]a legislation must be complied with in the course of carrying out the Idgislalion pertincnte doit sire respectce pendant I'exdcution des required remedial action. mcsures de remediation. 2. Payment of the fine does not alleviate the obligation to comply 2. Le paiement de I'amende n'a pas pour efTet d'annuler with the by-law. standard or notice. ]'obligation de se conformer a I'arrcti:. 3 la norme ou A I'avis. 3. Costs become a debt due to the local government and may be 3. Les touts deviennent une creance du gouvernement local et added to the joint local government and provincial Real Property pcuvent ctm ajoutds a I'avis commun devaluation ci d'impot Assessment and Tax Notice. foncier des gouvernements local et provincial. 193 INSPECTION REPORT Schedule "A" 110 Victoria Street Saint John, New Brunswick PID# 00376517 Inspection Date: May 14, 2021 Inspection Conducted By: Benn Purinton, EIT Introduction Inspection of the property, PID# 00376517, revealed that there is one building (the "Building") on the premises; a two -storey, wood -framed, two -unit apartment building. Staff first became aware of the vacancy of the Building in 2018 and began standard enforcement procedures. The property is located in the City's North End in a residential zone. The Building has become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of being vacant or unoccupied and by reason of dilapidation. Discussion The Building does not comply with the Saint John Unsightly Premises and Dangerous Buildings and Structures By-law, By-law Number M-30, and amendments thereto (the "By-law"). Unsightly Premise Conditions Subsection 6(1) of the By-law states: 11 No person shall permit premises owned or occupied by him or her to be unsightly by permitting to remain on any part of such premises. a) any ashes, junk, rubbish or refuse, b) an accumulation of wood shavings, paper, sawdust or other residue of production or construction, c) a derelict vehicle, equipment, machinery or the body of any part of a vehicle equipment or machinery, or d) a dilapidated building. I . The exterior of the Building is dilapidated. There are broken windows on all sides of the Building with loose glass remaining in the frame. The front door, rear doors and other windows throughout the Building are boarded with plywood. Some of the plywood boards have faded in colour due to continued exposure to the elements. The dilapidated condition of the Building is unsightly. Vacant and Unoccupied Subsection 6(2) of the By-law states: No person shall permit a building or other structure owned or occupied by the person to become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of being vacant or unoccupied. The Building is a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of being vacant or unoccupied for the following reasons: 1. Buildings in a dilapidated condition that are known to be vacant can attract vandalism, arson and criminal activity. The dilapidated conditions of the Building affect the quality of 194 life of neighboring properties and negatively impacts property value of real estate in the area due to negative perceptions of unsafe and deteriorating conditions. 2. There is an increased risk of a fire event occurring at the property since it is known that the Building is vacant. There is a concern for firefighter safety in the event of a fire. If firefighters suspect there may be people inside the Building, it would be reasonable to expect they may be required to enter it. The condition of the Building is not known to firefighters which poses a hazard to their safety in the event of a fire. There is a significant amount of water infiltration in the Building. The water has softened a section of the floors in the second -floor unit. This could cause this section of the floor to collapse under load. There was debris present on a rear staircase to the second -floor unit. The debris could limit the movement of emergency personnel and present a tripping hazard. Dilapidated Building Conditions Subsection 6(3) of the By-law states: No person shall permit a building or other structure owned or occupied by the person to become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation. The Building is a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation for the following reasons: 1. The exterior of the Building is dilapidated. Broken windows with loose glass remaining in the frame were present on all sides of the Building. Multiple broken windows are located directly above the sidewalk. The loose glass presents a hazard as it could fall and strike an individual. The likelihood of this occurring is increased due to multiple broken windows being located directly above the sidewalk. Brick is spalling from the Building. This presents a hazard as the spalled pieces of brick could fall and strike an individual. 2. The interior of the Building is dilapidated. There is a significant amount of water infiltration. The water infiltration has and will continue to accelerate the deterioration the Building. A significant amount of paint was peeling from the walls of the first -floor unit. Walls in the first -floor unit were discolored due to the extended exposure to moisture. Sections of plaster have fallen from the first -floor unit walls. The removed materials were saturated and dispersed throughout the first -floor unit. The paint throughout the second - floor unit was bubbling. This is likely a result of exposure to the moisture. In the second - floor unit, a section of the wood floor boards approximately 3-ft x 6-ft in size have become dark green in colour. This appears to be moss growing on the floorboards as a result of water infiltration. Small mushrooms are also growing from this section of the floor. The wood is soft and deflects under load which presents a hazard as the deteriorated floor could collapse under load. It is possible that the excessive water damage has caused damage to structural components of the Building although this could not be verified during inspection. A significant amount of mould was present within the first and second floor units. Mould presents a respiratory hazard to individuals within the Building. In a room on the second floor, there was feces present on the floor. The presence of feces presents a hazard to individuals in the Building as it could potentially spread disease. if animals are present in the Building, they could present a hazard to individuals required to be in the Building. There was debris present on the rear stairs to the second -floor unit. This debris presents a tripping hazard to anyone who traverses the stairs. Required Remedial Actions The owner must comply with one of the two options stated below: 195 Option 1: Remedy the conditions of the Building through all repair and remedial actions as follows: 1. The Building must be completely repaired to remedy the above -mentioned hazards to public safety while meeting the requirements of the National Building Code of Canada (2015) as well as all other applicable by-laws. 2. A detailed plan must be submitted to the Growth and Community Services Department of the City of Saint John (the "Department") for review and approval. The plan should also include a schedule for the work that is to be carried out. The repaired Building must meet the National Building Code of Canada (2015) as well as other applicable codes. 3. The detailed plan, including schedules and any engineering reports, must be approved by the Department prior to commencing repair work. 4. A building permit must be obtained any and all applicable work prior to commencing said work from the City of Saint John in order to comply with the Saint John Building By-law, By-law Number C.P. 103 and amendments thereto (the "Saint John Building By-law"). 5. The premise must be cleared of all debris found on the property including any and all rubbish that may be considered hazardous or unsightly. Any debris from the premise must be disposed of at an approved solid waste disposal site, in accordance with all applicable by-laws, acts and regulations, Documented proof, that clearly demonstrated an approved solid waste disposal site was used for disposal of the debris must be provided to the Department. The premise must comply with all applicable By-laws, Acts, Codes and Regulations. Option 2: Demolition of the Building and cleanup of all debris on the premise by complying with all remedial actions as follows: 1. The Building must be demolished to remove the hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation and by reason of unsoundness of structural strength. 2. A demolition permit must be obtained from the City of Saint John in order to comply with the Saint John Building By-law. 3. The premise must be cleared of the debris from the demolition and the lot must be reasonably level with grade so as to not create a tripping or falling hazard. All debris must be disposed of at an approved solid waste disposal site, and in accordance with all applicable By-laws, Acts and Regulations. 4. All debris that is currently on the premise must be removed and disposed of at an approved solid waste disposal site, and in accordance with all applicable By-laws, Acts and Regulations. Documented proof, that clearly demonstrates an approved solid waste disposal site was used for the disposal of debris, must be provided to the Department. 5. The property must be in compliance with all applicable By-laws, Acts and Regulations. 196 Prepared by: L'e:1 Benn Purinton, EIT Technical Services Officer Growth and Community Services Reviewed and concurred in by: �r t Christopher McKiel, P.Eng. Technical Services Engineer Growth and Community Services 17, Date Date 197 Schedule "B" FORM 1 NOTICE OF APPEAL File No.. BETWEEN: Appellant(s), and THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, Respondent. Parcel Identifier: PID # Annexe o B » FORM ULE 1 AVIS D'APPEL N° du dossier: ENTRE: Appelant(s), et - THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, Inti mde. Numdro d'identification de la parcelle : # NID Parcel Address: Adresse de la parcel le : Owner(s) or Occupier(s)- Name: Address: Telephone: Name: Address: Propridtaire(s) ou occupant(s) Nom : Adresse to in the Aftnv,.r wwrure Me .-at ' ,ivew day of rommtssioner ;,t 9 11 i 4 t,7 5- O Adresse Telephone: Telephone: The above named appellant(s) is (are) not satisfied L'appelant ou les appelants susnommd(s) n'accepte(nt) with the terms and conditions set out in: pas les modalitds ou les conditions qui sont enoncds dans : (a) a Notice that was given under section 7 of the (a) un Avis qui a dtd donne en vertu de Particle 7 de Saint John Unsightly Premises and Dangerous 1'Arrete relatif aux lieux inesthetiques et aux Buildings and Structures By -Law; or batiments et constructions dangereux daps The City of Saint Jahn; ou (b) an Order that was issued under section 25 of the (b) une ORDONNANCE qui a etc emise en vertu de Saint John Minimum Property Standards By- !'article 25 de l'Arrete concernant les normes Law; minimales regissant les residences de Saint John and therefore appeals to the Saint Jahn Substandard et fait ainsi appel devant le Comite des appels Sur les Properties Appeal Committee. residences non conformes aux normes de Saint John. The appellant's grounds for this appeal are as follows Les motifs d'appel de Pappelant(s) dans le prdsent (set out the grounds clearly but briefly): appel sont les suivants (enoncer les motifs de faVon HE IIPM Dated at , 20 Signature of owner or occupier claire et concise) : the . . day of Fait a The appellant(s) intends to proceed in the English [ ] or French [ ] language (Please check the appropriate box). Please forward your Notice of Appeal by registered mail to the City Clerk within fourteen (14) days after having been given the Notice or Order at the following address: City Clerk's Office 15 Market Square, City Hall Building, 2"d Floor P. O. Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L 1 Telephone: 506-65 8-2 862 Facsimile: 506-674-4214 Notes: 1. A Notice or Order that is not appealed within fourteen (14) days after having been given or issued shall be deemed to be confirmed. 2. On an appeal, the Saint John Substandard Properties Appeal Committee shall hold a hearing into the matter at which the owner(s) or occupier(s) bringing the appeal has (have) a right to be heard and may be represented by counsel. I On an appeal, the Saint John Substandard Properties Appeal Committee may confirm, modify or rescind the Notice or Order, or extend the time for complying with the Notice or Order. 4. The Saint John Substandard Properties Appeal Committee shall provide a copy of its decision to the owner(s) or occupier(s) of the premises, building or structure who brought the appeal within fourteen (14) days after making its decision. 20 Signature du propri6taire ou de l'occupant le L'appelant a ou les appelants ont 1'intention d'utiliser la langue francaise [ ] ou anglaise [ ] (Veuillez cocher la case appropriee). Veuillez faire parvenir votre A 1TV D .4PPF.L par courrier recommande au greff er municipal dons les quatorze (14) jours qui suivent la notification de 1 :4 vls ou de 1 ORDONN.4NCE 111 'adresse suivante : Bureau du greffier municipal 15 Market Square, Edifice de 1'h6tel de ville, 2' dtage Case postale 1971 Saint John (Nouveau -Brunswick) E2L 4L 1 T616phone : 506-658-2862 Facsimile: 506-674-4214 Notes : 1. Un AVIS ou une ORDONNANCE dont it West pas interjet6 appel dans les quatorze (14) jours qui suivent la notification de I'AVIS ou 1'6mission de l'ORDONNANCE est r6pute confirme. 2. Lors d'un appel, le Comite des appels sur les residences non conformes aux normes de Saint John doit tenir, sur le point en litige, une audience au tours de laquelle le(s) propridtaire(s) ou l'occupant ou les occupants qui interjette(nt) appel a (ont) le droit d'etre entendu(s) et peut (peuvent) sc faire representer par un avocat. 3. Lors d'un appel, le Comile des appels sur les residences non conformes aux normes de Saint John peut confirmer, modifier ou annuler 1'AVIS ou l'ORDONNANCE ou proroger le d61ai pour s'y conformer. 4. Le Comile des appels .sur les residences non conformes aux normes de Saint John doit fournir une copie de sa decision au(x) propri6taire(s) ou 4 l'occupant ou aux occupants des lieux, du batiment ou de la construction qui lui a (ont) interjete appel dans les quatorze (14) jours suivant la date a laquelle it a rendu 199 -3- 5. The owner(s) or occupier(s) who is provided with a copy of a decision from the Saint John Substandard Properties Appeal Committee regarding a Notice, may appeal the decision to a judge of The Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick within fourteen (14) days after the copy of the decision was provided to the owner(s) or occupier(s) on the grounds that (a) the procedure required to be followed by the by-law was not followed, or (b) the decision is unreasonable. sa decision. 5. Le(s) proprietaire(s) ou 1'occupant ou les occupants A qui une copie d'une decision a et6 fournie par le Comite des appels sur les residences non conformes aux normes de Saint John concernant un AVIS peat (peuvent), dans les quatorze (14) jours qui suivent, interjeter appel de la decision devant un juge de la Cour du Banc de la Reine du Nouveau -Brunswick au motif que (a) la d6marche a suivre en vertu de I'arret& n'a pas ete suivie, ou (b) la decision est deraisonnable. M CANADA PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK COUNTY OF SAINT JOHN CITY OF SAINT JOHN IN THE MATTER OF THE BUILDING THAT IS LOCATED AT 0 /,PWIT, Saint John, N.B. (PID number '365L AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of the City of Saint John in the County of Saint John and the Province of New Brunswick MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS: 1. I am employed by the City of Saint John in its Growth and Community Services Department. I have personal knowledge of the matters herein deposed where otherwise stated. 2. On the day of _.�� 2021 at approximately 2 •-� , I posted a copy of the Notice of Common Council Baring letter, annexed hereto marked Exhibit "A" to the building at Saint John, N.B. Sworn To me at the City of Saint John, N.B. on the I day of 2021 //W;w '-'' L D�- CHRISTOPH�R � OATHS L COMMISSION MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DECEMBER 31 ST, 2G4e"WZS C 201 Permitting & Inspection / Service des inspections et de Vapplication By-law Enforcement / Service d'Application des Arretes Municipaux Phone I Tel : (506) 658-2911 Fax / Telec : (506) 632-6199 'Ibe ary cf saau Sohn July 5, 2021 REGISTERED MAIL This Is ExhlbirA James Michael Kennedy Re to AffldavftOf 133 Castlepark Grove ,vim U Q� Halifax, NS Swom befotas'me at -the City of B3M 4X8 Saint4phn, New Bunswick the y of NOTICE OF COMMON I jb� Commissioner of Oaths Dear Sir/Madam: Re: 110 Victoria Street, PID #00376517 Dangerous and Vacant Building Program On June 17, 2021, a Notice to Comply was issued for the above -mentioned property which required remedial action to bring the building and premises into compliance with the Saint John Unsightly Premises and Dangerous Buildings and Structures By-law. The Notice to Comply was posted on said property on June 18, 2021. The fourteen (14) days appeal period has expired. A compliance inspection will be carried out on July 19, 2021. If the property is not in compliance with the aforesaid By-law at the time of the inspection, City Staff will be attending the Common Council meeting scheduled on July 26, 2021 at 6:00pm to recommend that the building be demolished because it has become a hazard to the safety of the public by reason of dilapidation or by reason of unsoundness of structural strength. Please be advised that at this meeting, you can present evidence that the building is not dilapidated or structurally unsound; however, note that this meeting will be your only opportunity to do so. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me at (506) 658-2911. Regards, Benn Purinton, EIT Technical Services Officer Growth & Community Services SAINT JOHN 202 _. 110 Victoria Street, Saint John New Brunswick PID #00376517 Photo 1 . I 110 Victoria Street, Saint John New Brunswick PID #00376517 Photo 2 N r . ew Bruns\ I� N :10 1 r' px WA ire . � 3 r r� 11Q et, Saint John -w Brunswick PID #00376517 Photo 8 jet- r, a- A' L r is r . _- � � •y �-'��'��n?';'��T i� �' � -±-.. � � ��-,sue' e � `Am, ' - - PW 110 Victoria_ Street, Saint John 'New Brunswick Photo 9 PI D #00376517 ' „` 41b 2• Qlh2 kid 4% Victoria Street Saint John New'Brunswick 'I PID #00376517 limp WON. w N-1 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-211 Report Date July 21, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Human Resources Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Management Job Evaluation AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Leah Robichaud Stephanie Hossack I John Collin RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that: 1. The City of Saint John engage Korn Ferry (CA) Ltd to conduct a Job Evaluation and Compensation Review of all Management/Professional positions as outlined in the Letter of Engagement attached to M&C 2021- 211; and 2. That Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documents. I�:���►j�PI�1►luluGli7 As per the council resolution dated June 1, 2015 to establish an ongoing process to maintain job evaluation and job grading going forward, the City's Human Resources Department engaged Korn Ferry (previously Hay Group) to conduct a full review of the Management Job Evaluation and Compensation review. This review included updates to all management job descriptions, review of current pay grouping and recommendation on the appropriate grouping if adjustment required, and a review of the overall management salary grid and recommendations for adjustments as needed. Korn Ferry provided the initial structure and review process in 2014/2015 for all management positions, and since that time has reviewed new positions to determine salary grouping. It is recommended that a full compensation review of all positions be completed following a significant organization restructure, reduction in overall establishment and implementation of shared services agreements with Transit and Police. This review will also include a benchmarking exercise with relevant organizations to ensure the salary remains competitive and appropriately positioned in the market. 213 sa PREVIOUS RESOLUTION December 9, 2013 RESOLVED that the Committee of the Whole recommends that Common Council direct the City Manager to; a) Retain qualified external advisory services through a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process to conduct an independent Job Evaluation for all Management/Professional staff at the City of Saint John, with the option of including majority -funded City Agencies, Boards and Commissions. b) Retain qualified external advisory services through a competitive RFP process to conduct an independent Compensation Review for all Management/Professional Staff at the City of Saint John, with the option of including majority funded City Agencies, Boards and Commissions. c) Based on the outcome of the Job Evaluation and Compensation Review process, the City Manager be directed to make recommendations to Common Council regarding (i) the Terms and Conditions of Employment for Management/Professional Personnel, (ii) possible changes in human resource management policies for Management/Professional Personnel, and (iii) a supporting implementation strategy recognizing key internal and external operational, financial and human resource -related considerations. Note: (a) and (b) may be separated into two RFP's if deemed operationally and financially prudent and beneficial for the City of Saint John. June 1, 2015 1.9 Employment Matter 10.2(4)0) - Job Evaluation and Compensation Review (Management/Professional Staff) RESOLVED that the Committee of the Whole recommends Common Council approve the recommendation in the submitted report entitled Job Evaluation and Compensation Review (Management/Professional Staff) as follows: 1. That Council approves a 1% economic increase for all Management/ Professional Staff retroactive to January 1, 2015. 2. That Council adopts the Hay recommendations, and replace the existing City of Saint John Management/Professional job classification system, salary grid and salary administration procedures with: a) A new salary ladder chart (as referenced in Slide 7, Attachment Q b) A new salary grid that reflects both the external market as well as internal changes in the job ranking system (as referenced in Slide 10, Attachment Q and, c) New City of Saint John Management/Professional salary administration guidelines (as referenced in Attachment B). 3. That Council directs the City Manager, in cooperation with the Human Resources Department and Senior Management, to: a) Advise each Management/Professional employee of his or her placement within the new salary administration structure; 214 am b) Move each employee whose salary is between steps in the recommended Hay salary structure to the next highest step in the new salary grid, effective July 1, 2015; c) Implement the appropriate salary administration guidelines and procedures required to introduce and maintain the new Hay Job Classification and Salary Administration systems for all City of Saint John Management and Professional Staff. d) Establish an ongoing process to maintain job evaluation and job grading going forward; and; e) Re -assess overall salary competitiveness on an annual basis. 4. As per the original December 9, 2013 resolution, Council requests the City Manager to return with any recommended changes to the Terms and Conditions of Employment for Management/Professional Personnel and related human resource management policies. REPORT The purposes of this compensation review are threefold: first, to ensure internal equity in light of the considerable external pressures our organization is facing due to COVID among other reasons, as well as of the organizational restructure recently completed; secondly, to ensure external equity relative to the employment market generally; and thirdly, to provide a compensation structure, including salary ranges and processes, which ensure that value is received commensurate with remuneration provided for every job as incumbents progress through the employment system. The City of Saint John conducted a full job evaluation and compensation review in 2014/2015 for all Management/Professional positions. Through an RFP process the Hay Group (now known as Korn Ferry), an international leader in job evaluation, was selected to conduct the evaluation. Based on the recommendations from the review, a new salary structure was implemented and all roles assigned to the appropriate grouping. A clear salary administration process was incorporated into the Management/Professional Terms of Reference and has been followed since 2015. In addition, any new roles or roles that changed have been reviewed and evaluated by Korn Ferry to ensure consistent application. The recommendation in June 2015 included an annual review of the salary administration process and overall salary competitiveness which has not been done on the full scale since that time. The consulting work to be completed in 2021 will include a full evaluation and analysis of sixty (60) positions within the Management/Professional establishment, list report, and job levelling matrix with description and rationale for every position. Phase Two includes job pricing and salary structure analysis to be completed in 2021. Key drivers of these dynamics are ever -changing internal capacity/demand relationships, the developing needs of our community, the effects of legislation 215 -4- and senior levels of government and technological advancement. All these factors are well represented in the 2020 corporate organizational restructure. It should be noted that the importance of using highly credible third -party consulting resources for the compensation review cannot be overstated. This approach eliminates various forms of bias inherent in other methodologies, resulting in higher levels of staff engagement with the process, higher quality inputs and information yield and an enhanced acceptance of the results by all stakeholders. The results of the comprehensive review will help inform future compensation considerations but will not, in and of themselves, require or demand changes to compensation. Changes to salaries will always be considered within the broader context of affordability and sustainability; while offering compensation that is aligned as best as possible with market conditions. Evaluation of all current Management/Professional roles, in combination with an overall compensation review to ensure market positioning aligns with the council priority to ensure fiscal responsibility. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES Completion of the compensation review and job evaluation for all Management/Professional positions within the City of Saint John is $49,695. This includes the evaluation of up to 60 individual roles. This project is expected to be completed in 2021 and has been fully budgeted for in the Human Resources budget for 2021. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Review of the contract has been completed by the General Counsel Department and Procurement. Input also received from the Finance Department and City Manager's office. Appendix A Letter of Engagement Korn Ferry dated July 12, 2021 216 C� I<ORN FERRY' LETTER OF ENGAGEMENT PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL July 12, 2021 Stephanie Hossack The City of Saint John 15 Market Square, PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E21- 41-1 RE: Consulting Assistance with Job Evaluation and Compensation Review Dear Stephanie: We appreciate the opportunity to assist The City of Saint John with reviewing its job evaluation, grading structure and compensation levels. This letter of engagement sets forth our understanding of your needs and the terms and conditions on which our services will be rendered. Korn Ferry (CA) Ltd., on behalf of itself and its affiliates and doing business as Korn Ferry, may be referred to as "Korn Ferry," "we," "our," or "us." The City of Saint John may be referred to as "the City," "Client," "you," or "your." Korn Ferry and Client are referred to individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." This letter of engagement, including Attachments 1, 2, and 3, forms the agreement (the "Agreement") under which we will work together. Korn Ferry will provide the professional services described in Attachment 1 (the "Services"). Melike Celikbas will lead the assignment. We may include other consultants, as needed, to assist in the provision of the Services. Services may be performed by one or more Korn Ferry affiliates. If this Agreement accurately describes the terms of our engagement, please have an authorized representative of the City sign and return the entire Agreement to me at Sophie.fleming@kornferry.com. Our receipt of this Agreement signed by you authorizes us to proceed with our Services. AdvisoryLOE_CA 30AUG2019 CO2Fi L ENTIAL Page 1 of 14 IC KORN FERRY Korn Ferry appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the City. If you have any questions now or during our engagement, please call me at (416) 358-0719. Sincerely, Korn Ferry (CA) Ltd. Sophie Fleming Accepted by: Korn Ferry (CA) Ltd. The City of Saint John By: By: Name: Sophie Fleming Name: Title: Senior Client Partner Title: Date: Date: Common Council Resolution: CONFIDENTIAL 218 Page 2 of 14 KORN FERRY' ATTACHMENT 1 SCOPE OF SERVICES Our Understanding of Your Needs Since a new City Manager took the role, The City of Saint John undertook some re -structuring. As a result, and given the length of time since you last evaluated all jobs at the City, you wish to conduct a review of your job evaluations for up to 60 positions (management roles). As a second phase of the project, you also want to review the City's market positioning as well as salary ranges, to ensure that you continue to align with your desired market position. You are currently compiling all job documentation, which you will aim to provide to KF when available. Our aim is to conduct the project starting in August 2021, with expected completion date of December 31, 2021. Outline of Project The City is currently collecting job documentation through the PDQ format that was used in 2014/2015, and will forward to Korn Ferry, along with revised org charts. Korn Ferry will review the documentation and will schedule interviews with a few key senior managers to gain a better understanding of the new organization, the functions and the different roles within the functions, with emphasis on the key changepoints since the roles were last evaluated. We expect 5 to 6 interviews. We will then proceed with evaluating the jobs. We will schedule a meeting with you to review our preliminary results, which we will provide to you in writing, and gather your feedback before finalizing the evaluations. We will provide you our recommendations in a list report format as well as job levelling matrix format. Evaluation results will be accompanied with brief rationales/descriptions. In the second phase of the project, we will conduct market analyses to compare your current salary structure and pay practices to the market, using market data from our Korn Ferry Pay Database. When accessing our database, you are also required to provide a full data submission for the City, and we will assist you with this process. Our data charge includes a one-year subscription to our KF Pay platform, which will enable you to conduct market analyses for 12 months on your own or with our assistance, without any additional data charges. We will extract market data for base salary and total cash compensation and will compare this to your pay levels before formulating recommendations for adjustments to pay for the City. We will compare the City's compensation practice to the Canada general market, as well as one additional cut of the market that will be tailored geographically and by industry to reflect your labour market more closely. We will prepare a report that we will present to management during a virtual meeting. We expect all meetings to occur virtually. Presentations to Council are excluded from the scope of this engagement. The City will be responsible for implementing and communicating all changes internally. Deliverables Up to 60 jobs evaluated with rationales; list report; job levelling matrix. Report on competitiveness of compensation and recommendations for adjustments. One-year subscription to KF Pay Premium. THIS AGREEMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE AN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LICENSE TO KORN FERRY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. USE OF KORN FERRY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REQUIRES THE EXECUTION OF A SEPARATE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LICENSE AGREEMENT. Term Start Date: August 1, 2021 End Date: December 31, 2021 CONFIDENTIAL 219 Page 3 of 14 KORN FERRY' Professional Fees and Expenses The professional fees for the Services are $34,500. There is an additional data charge (one- year subscription to KF Pay) of $11,055. Korn Ferry assesses an administrative charge equal to twelve percent (12%) of professional fees only ($4,140) for a total of $49,695. All professional fees are non -contingent, non -transferable, and non-refundable unless specifically stated otherwise in this Agreement. Professional fees will be invoiced 50% upon contract signature, and 50% at the commencement of Phase 2 (approximately on November 1, 2021). Invoices are due upon receipt. Unless otherwise required by law, Korn Ferry will assess a service charge of one and a half percent (1.5%) per month for past due amounts. Invoices not objected to in writing within sixty (60) days of receipt will be deemed approved. Korn Ferry will invoice direct out-of-pocket expenses (not expected for this project), including consultant travel, accommodation and meals, courier, shipping, reproduction, and video- conferencing, on a monthly basis as incurred. Rescheduling or Cancelling Korn Ferry reserves the right to charge Client for lost fees in the event of short notice cancellation as well as unrecoverable out of pocket costs. Invoicing Information Invoices will be sent to the following address: Company: The City of Saint John Address: PO Box 1971 Address: V floor, City Hall, Saint John, NB E2L 41_1 Attn (Name, Title): Stephanie Hossack, Commissioner, Human Resources Email, Phone: Stephanie. hossack(a)saintiohn.ca, (506) 658-2866 Accounts Payable Contact: Company: The City of Saint John Address: PO Box 1971 Address: 41h Floor, City Hall, Saint John, NB E2L 41_1 Attn (Name, Title): Craig Lavigne Email, Phone: [INSERT] Purchase Order: If Client's internal policies require that a Purchase Order number appear on invoices, Client must provide the Purchase Order Number with or immediately after signing the Agreement. Please indicate below if a Purchase Order Number is required on an invoice and if so, insert the Number. If Client has not provided a Purchase Order Number within 10 business days of signature, Client will accelerate payment of any invoices delayed by Client's failure to provide a Purchase Order Number by the same number of days as the delay. ❑ PO # [INSERT] CONFIDENTIAL 220 Page 4 of 14 KORN FERRY' SCHEDULE A Korn Ferry Pay Subscription. Your subscription has a term of one year starting on November 1, 2021 and ending on October 31, 2022 (the "Subscription Term"). This subscription is limited, non-exclusive, non -transferable, and for Client's internal use only. All offerings include unlimited access for unlimited users. Korn Ferry will provide a unique password to each user; these are Korn Ferry confidential information and may only be provided to Client Employees. Client is responsible for all activities that occur through the use of password(s) and must notify Korn Ferry of any unauthorized use of which it becomes aware or if any user is no longer employed by Client. Client Data. Submission of Client Data is required for all items purchased under this agreement. Delivery of some offerings are contingent on timely submission of Client Data to Korn Ferry. During the Subscription Term, Client must provide compensation and benefits data to Korn in Korn Ferry's required format at the level of use (e.g., if a Client subsidiary purchases data to be used throughout the entire company, Client must provide data for the entire company). "Client Data" means a full representation of salary and benefits data for all incumbents in Client's organization. Submission of Client Data will be in accordance with Korn Ferry's schedule as communicated to Client. Despite Korn Ferry's review, Client remains accountable for the accuracy, completeness, and adequacy of their data. Problems, omissions or errors relating to information quality and/or delays in providing such information may result in a delay in the project delivery date, and/or an increase in fees. Client Data will be treated in accordance with Korn Ferry's Global Privacy Policy, which is available on Korn Ferry's website and incorporated into the Agreement by reference. Korn Ferry may archive, manipulate, use and include Client Data in Korn Ferry's databases and use de -identified data for research, studies, development, benchmarking, statistics, analytics, and to develop, improve, enhance and provide Korn Ferry's products and services. Processed data is de -identified, aggregated, and published in databases used to create products and services. Client permits Korn Ferry to include Client's company name as a participant in products and services. Korn Ferry's use of Client Data as described herein is not prohibited by any confidentiality provisions of the Agreement, any non -disclosure or other agreement between the Parties. KF Pay consists of master pay database, Rewards Benchmark, Rewards Health Check, access to the country's standard and industry report (reports vary by country; reports are not updated during an annual subscription period), and access to the KF Pay. CONFIDENTIAL 221 Page 5 of 14 KORN FERRY' ATTACHMENT 2 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Korn Ferry's Responsibilities. Korn Ferry will perform the Services in a competent and professional manner and in accordance with generally acceptable industry standards. Korn Ferry may remove and replace any of its resources performing the Services, provided that Korn Ferry will not remove or replace a resource unless unavoidable due to resignation, illness or other unforeseen circumstance beyond the control of Korn Ferry; any resource removed will be replaced by a resource of comparable training and experience. 2. Client's Responsibilities. Client will timely provide Korn Ferry with the documentation, information, access to its personnel and the cooperation Korn Ferry reasonably requires to provide the Services. The Services are not intended as a substitute for professional judgment. Client will not use the Services, New Materials, or Korn Ferry Materials as the sole source for any decision relating to any of its employees or candidates, including reprimand, termination, compensation, employment status or work opportunities. 3. Taxes. a. Client will be responsible for all applicable taxes (excluding taxes imposed on Korn Ferry's net income) imposed by any taxing authority, whether designated as value-added (VAT), goods and services (GST), sales, use, or other similar taxes ("Transaction Taxes"), now in effect or hereafter imposed, resulting from the fees arising pursuant to this Agreement. If Client is exempt from Transaction Taxes, Client must inform Korn Ferry of its exemption and provide to Korn Ferry complete and proper documentation evidencing the exemption. b. If Client is required by applicable law to deduct or withhold taxes from any payment due to Korn Ferry, Client will: (i) withhold the legally required amount from payment; (ii) remit the withheld tax to the applicable taxing authority; and (iii) promptly deliver to Korn Ferry original documentation or a certified copy evidencing remittance of withheld tax. If Client does not provide evidence of payment of withheld taxes, Client will reimburse Korn Ferry for the tax withheld from payment to Korn Ferry. Client will comply with all applicable income tax treaties and protocols in determining the amount of tax to withhold. 4. Representations and Warranties. a. Each Party represents and warrants that: (i) it is duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the jurisdiction of its incorporation or organization, and has full power and authority to perform all of its obligations under this Agreement; and (ii) the person executing this Agreement on its behalf is duly authorized and empowered to bind the Party to this Agreement. b. Client further represents and warrants that: (i) it has provided the required notices and obtained all necessary rights and consents to provide to Korn Ferry, or to permit Korn Ferry to collect on Client's behalf, an individual's Personal Data, for the purposes stated in this Agreement; and (ii) the transfer to, collection of and use by Korn Ferry of Personal Data in accordance with this Agreement does not violate any applicable laws or any third party rights. "Personal Data" means any information that Korn Ferry has access to, obtains, uses, maintains or otherwise handles in connection with the performance of the Services that identifies an individual or relates to an identifiable individual. C. Korn Ferry further represents and warrants that it has all the necessary rights to the New Materials and Korn Ferry Materials and such materials will not infringe upon any third party intellectual property rights. d. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT, KORN FERRY DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 5. Intellectual Property. a. Client retains ownership of all materials, and the intellectual property rights in those materials, CONFIDENTIAL 222 Page 6 of 14 KORN FERRY' provided to Korn Ferry by or on behalf of Client ("Client Materials"). Subject to Section 5.b., Client will also own copies of reports and analyses Korn Ferry delivers to Client under this Agreement ("New Materials"). Client may use the New Materials in the form provided for its internal purposes only at no further charge to Client; Client may not use the New Materials for any other purpose or permit any other person, firm or entity to use the New Materials without the prior written consent of Korn Ferry, not to be unreasonably withheld. It is understood, acknowledged, and agreed that the internal purposes of Client include briefing Common Council regarding employment matters from time to time and that some or all of the New Materials will be used for that purpose, whether in the form provided and/or by way of extract or summary. Such briefing of Common Council may be in confidence or, in redacted form, in open session at the sole discretion of Client, provided that no confidential Korn Ferry Materials shall be disclosed to Common Council without consent. b. The performance of the Services and creation of the New Materials will require the use of Korn Ferry Materials. "Korn Ferry Materials" include methodologies, preexisting programs, instruments, models, proprietary information, patents, registered and unregistered trademarks, trade names, trade secrets, copyrights, prototypes, inventions, algorithms, designs, compilations, computer software programs, tools, databases, evaluation guides, report forms, scoring guides, scoring algorithms, scoring instructions, scoring software and norms. Korn Ferry may customize, modify, translate, or expand Korn Ferry Materials to apply to Client's unique requirements (collectively, a "Customization"). Any Customization will be Korn Ferry Materials exclusive of any Client Materials include therein. Korn Ferry owns Korn Ferry Materials at all times, and Korn Ferry reserves all rights not expressly granted under this Agreement. Licenses to Korn Ferry Materials must be procured through a separate license agreement. This Agreement will not be construed as a license to copy, modify, create derivative works from, publish, disclose or otherwise use Korn Ferry Materials. Client will not download, copy, publish, disclose, create derivative works of, disassemble, decompile or otherwise attempt to reverse engineer Korn Ferry Materials, nor will Client permit any other person to do so. Client will be liable for all violations of these restrictions by its employees, subcontractors, or agents. C. If a Customization includes Client Materials, Client grants to Korn Ferry a non-exclusive, limited, non -transferable license to use the Client Materials solely to provide the Services. Client represents and warrants that it has all the necessary rights to include the Client Materials in the Customization. 6. Confidential Information. a. One Party ("Discloser") may disclose Confidential Information to the other Party ("Recipient") in connection with this Agreement. "Confidential Information" means all oral or written information concerning the Discloser, including the Discloser's business and business activities (past, present and future), financial information, technical information, customer information, intellectual property, methodologies, strategies, plans, documents, drawings, designs, tools, models, inventions, and patent disclosures, whether or not marked or identified as "confidential," that may be obtained from any source as a result of this Agreement. Confidential Information does not include information, technical data, or know-how that: (i) is or becomes a matter of public knowledge through no fault of Recipient; (ii) was lawfully in Recipient's possession or known by it prior to its receipt from Discloser; (iii) was rightfully disclosed to Recipient by another person without restriction; (iv) Recipient independently develops without use of Discloser's Confidential Information; or (v) Discloser approves in writing for release. b. Recipient will not use any Discloser Confidential Information for any purpose other than to perform its obligations under this Agreement. Recipient will not disclose any Discloser Confidential Information to third parties or to its employees, other than employees or third parties who are required to have the Confidential Information to perform obligations under this Agreement and who are bound by confidentiality terms substantially similar to those in this Section. Recipient and Discloser will each be responsible for any breach of this Agreement by its representatives. Recipient will protect Confidential Information from disclosure to others using the same degree of care it uses to protect its own confidential information, but in any case no less than a commercially reasonable degree of care. If Recipient is required by law, regulations, or court order to disclose any of Discloser's Confidential Information, Recipient, where legally allowed, will promptly notify Discloser in writing prior to making any disclosure. Discloser may, at its sole expense, seek a protective order or other appropriate remedy from the proper authority. It is understood, acknowledged, and agreed that the City is subject to the Right to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, S.N.B. 2009, c. R-10.6. CONFIDENTIAL 223 Page 7 of 14 KORN FERRY' C. Services may include coaching services ("Coaching Services") for specific individual(s)(each a "Coachee"). Korn Ferry and the Coachee must have open and frank communications for the Coaching Services to be effective. Communications between Korn Ferry and a Coachee will be, so far as is reasonably possible, confidential. Korn Ferry will not be asked or allowed to disclose information provided to Korn Ferry in confidence by a Coachee, except information which Korn Ferry in good faith believes is in one of the following categories: (i) information that the Coachee or some other person is, has, or may become engaged in illegal activity; (ii) information that the Coachee or some other person is, has, or may become a danger or health & safety risk to himself or herself or third persons; (iii) information that the Coachee authorizes Korn Ferry to release; (iv) information that generally informs Client of the scope, nature and timing of any activity, the goals in the development and coaching plan for the Coaching Services, orthe progress being made in attaining the established goals or as otherwise required in connection with the engagement; or (v) information that may have a material or adverse effect on Client, the Korn Ferry coach or Korn Ferry. Korn Ferry and the Korn Ferry coach may obtain information from the Coachee's supervisors, co-workers and other persons concerning the Coachee's work performance. This information, including the identity of any person providing the information, is and will remain so far as is reasonably possible confidential and neither Client nor the Coachee will have access to this information. The Coachee will be advised of these coaching rules prior to participating in the coaching assignment. If any information arising from the Coaching Services is required to be disclosed by any subpoena or other court order, under any applicable law or regulation, Korn Ferry will be entitled to make any required disclosure. Korn Ferry will undertake to notify Client or the Coachee prior to disclosing the Confidential Information, unless prohibited by the terms of the order or legal requirement. d. Nothing in this Agreement prohibits, or is intended in any manner to prohibit, Recipient from reporting possible violations of federal law or regulations to any governmental agency or entity, including the Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, Congress, and any agency Inspector General, or making other disclosures that are protected under the whistleblower provisions of federal law or regulations. Recipient does not need Discloser's prior authorization to make any protected reports or disclosures; nor is Recipient required to notify Discloser that protected reports or disclosures have been made. Without limiting the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement is intended to interfere with or restrain the immunity provided under 18 U.S.C. Section 1833(b) for confidential disclosures of trade secrets to government officials or lawyers, solely to report or investigate a suspected violation of law or included in a sealed filing in court or other proceeding. e. Upon request, Recipient will destroy Discloser's Confidential Information in its possession, but Recipient may: (i) retain copies of Confidential Information that it is required to retain by law or regulation; (ii) retain copies of its work product that contain Confidential Information for archival purposes or to defend its work product; and (iii) store copies made as part of routine back up of its information technology systems but the Confidential Information must continue to be handled in accordance with this Section 6. 7. Personal Data. a. Korn Ferry will not disclose to Client an individual's item level responses to assessments and surveys or composite components and intermediate data points (e.g., intermediate numeric scores, ratings, evaluation guides, integration grids, or interview/simulation notes), including Personal Data, that Korn Ferry collects in providing the Services, and upon which the New Materials will be based (the "Raw Data"). Korn Ferry will use Raw Data to provide the Services as specified in this Agreement or as otherwise instructed and permitted by Client. The Parties agree that the Services include archiving the Raw Data and using de -identified and aggregated Raw Data for research, studies, development, benchmarking, statistics, analytics, and to develop, improve, and enhance Korn Ferry's products and services. Any published end product will not identify, or include any results attributable to, Client or a specific individual. Raw Data will be treated in accordance with Korn Ferry's Global Privacy Policy, which is available on Korn Ferry's website and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Where legally allowed, Korn Ferry will promptly notify Client of any legally binding request from a law enforcement authority for disclosure of Personal Data before making any disclosure and will reject all non -legally binding requests. b. Where Korn Ferry processes Personal Data as a data processor, or equivalent under applicable data protection law, on Client's behalf in its performance of the Services, the Privacy and CONFIDENTIAL 224 Page 8 of 14 KORN FERRY' Data Protection Attachment 3 ("DPE") will apply. Where the Parties process Personal Data as independent data controllers, or equivalent under applicable data protection law, the Parties will comply with applicable law and maintain adequate security controls relevant to the Personal Data processed. 8. Security. Having regard to the available technology, cost of its implementation, the nature, scope, context and purposes of the Personal Data processing, and taking into account the harm that might result from accidental loss, destruction, disclosure or damage of Personal Data, Korn Ferry will implement appropriate technical and organizational measures designed to prevent any accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure of, or access to Personal Data. 9. Indemnification. a. By Client. Client will indemnify and defend Korn Ferry, its parent, affiliates, and their respective directors, officers, partners, employees, shareholders and agents and their respective successors and permitted assigns, from and against all third party suits, claims, actions, and proceedings and all related liabilities, losses, judgments, damages, costs and expenses (including interest, penalties, fines, legal fees and other litigation expenses) that are or are alleged to arise from: (i) Client's decision to take any employment action with regard to any individual identified, evaluated, assessed, or coached by Korn Ferry; (ii) Korn Ferry's use of Client Materials in accordance with this Agreement; or (iii) Client's breach of its representations and warranties. b. By Korn Ferry. Korn Ferry will indemnify and defend Client, its councillors, its agencies, commissions, affiliates, and their respective directors, officers, partners, employees, shareholders and agents and their respective successors and permitted assigns, from and against all third party suits, claims, actions, and proceedings and all related liabilities, losses, judgments, damages, costs and expenses (including interest, penalties, fines, legal fees and other litigation expenses) that are or are alleged to arise from: (i) Korn Ferry's gross negligence, willful misconduct, or fraud; (ii) Korn Ferry's breach of its representations and warranties; or (iii) intellectual property infringement. Korn Ferry has no obligation regarding any infringement claim based upon services or materials which are modified, combined, operated, or used with any product, data, apparatus, software, or program not provided by Korn Ferry or authorized by Korn Ferry in writing, or which are a result of Client's design specifications. If an infringement claim is made relating to the New Materials, Korn Ferry Materials, or Services (the "Infringing Content"), Korn Ferry will: (w) procure for Client the right to continue to use the Infringing Content; (x) replace the Infringing Content with non -infringing materials; (y) modify the Infringing Content to make it non -infringing; or (z) terminate this Agreement and refund all pre -paid amounts paid by Client for which Client has not received Services. 10. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY WILL BE LIABLE TO ANY PARTY FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE, INCLUDING LOST PROFITS OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT. EXCEPT FOR BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY, KORN FERRY'S MAXIMUM TOTAL LIABILITY FOR ANY CLAIMS RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT IS LIMITED TO THE FEES PAID BY CLIENT TO KORN FERRY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. THIS SECTION 10 APPLIES REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY ASSERTED AND EVEN IF THE PARTY KNOWS THAT THESE DAMAGES MIGHT OCCUR. 11. Relationship of the Parties. Korn Ferry is at all times an independent contractor. Korn Ferry Employees remain in Korn Ferry's employ and will not be deemed Client's agents or employees. Neither Party is authorized to bind or commit the other Party in any respect or to accept legal process on the other Party's behalf. Neither Party will be liable to any agent, subcontractor, supplier, employee, or customer of the other Party for any commission, compensation, remuneration, or similar benefit of any nature whatsoever. This Agreement is not intended to, and does not, create or impose any fiduciary relationship between the Parties. 12. Subprocessing. Client grants Korn Ferry a general authorization to use subprocessors, including Korn Ferry affiliates, in connection with the provision of the Services. Processing activities may include accessing, storing, handling or otherwise using Personal Data. Korn Ferry remains responsible for the work and activities of its subprocessors to the same extent Korn Ferry would be liable if performing the Services. Korn Ferry is responsible for all payments to its subprocessors. Korn Ferry has entered into a written agreement with subprocessors containing equivalent data protection obligations as in this Agreement. An inclusive list of Korn Ferry's current subprocessors is available on CONFIDENTIAL 225 Page 9 of 14 KORN FERRY' its corporate website at https:Hcdn.kornferry.com/privacy/subprocessor.pdf. The published list is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Client may subscribe for notifications of changes to subprocessors through Korn Ferry's corporate website at https://www.kornferry.com/privacy/security. Client will be deemed to have approved changes to subprocessors where Korn Ferry notifies Client via the subscription service and no written objection is received from Client within fifteen (15) days of written notification. If Client objects (on commercially reasonable grounds) in writing within fifteen (15) days of written notification, Korn Ferry may cease to provide or Client may agree not to use, on a temporary or on -going basis, the particular Service that would involve the use of the new subprocessor. Suspension of Services or partial termination by either Party subject to this Section 16 will not be deemed a breach of the Agreement. If the Standard Contractual Clauses, as defined in Attachment 3, apply, this Section 12 constitutes Client's prior written consent pursuant to Clause 5(h) of the Standard Contractual Clauses. 13. Assignment, Subcontracting. Neither Party may sell, assign, or transfer this Agreement, without the other Party's written consent, but no consent is required if the assignment: (a) results from the assignor's merger, consolidation, spin-off, split -off or acquisition, but the assignment must be limited to the assignor's survivor, subsidiary or successor; or (b) is to an affiliate capable of performing the assignor's duties and obligations under this Agreement. Subject to the foregoing, this Agreement will inure to the benefit of and will be binding upon Korn Ferry, Client and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Korn Ferry will not subcontract Services without Client's prior consent. This provision applies to subcontractors engaged specifically to provide Services for Client. 14. Governing Law. This Agreement will in all respects be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario, Canada, excluding any choice of law provisions and without effect to principles of conflicts of law, regardless of the place of making or performance. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, nothing in this Agreement requires Korn Ferry to do any act or refrain from doing any act which would result in Korn Ferry violating (or becoming subject to any penalty under) any laws to which it is subject. The Parties disclaim the applicability of the United Nations' Convention on the International Sale of Goods. 15. Non Waiver. A Party's failure at any time to enforce any of the provisions of, or any right or remedy available to it under, this Agreement or at law or in equity, or to exercise any option provided, will not constitute a waiver of that provision, right, remedy or option or in any way affect the validity of this Agreement. A Party's waiver of any default by either Party will not be deemed a continuing waiver, but will apply solely to the instance to which that waiver is directed. 16. Severability; Interpretation. Every provision of this Agreement will be construed, to the extent possible, to be valid and enforceable. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or otherwise unenforceable, that provision will be deemed severed from this Agreement, and all other provisions will remain in full force and effect. 17. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights. This Agreement is not intended to be for the benefit of any person other than Client and Korn Ferry. No other person, including any candidates or prospective candidates, will be considered a third party beneficiary of or otherwise entitled to any rights or benefits arising in connection with this Agreement. 18. Force Majeure. Neither Party will be considered in default as a result of its delay or failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement when the delay or failure arises out of causes beyond that Party's reasonable control. Causes may include acts of God or a public enemy, acts of the state or the government in its sovereign or contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, strikes, and unusually severe weather; in every case, delay or failure to perform must be beyond the reasonable control of and without the fault or negligence of the Party claiming a force majeure event to excuse its performance. 19. Jury Trial Waiver. Each Party irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any right it may have to a trial by jury in respect to any dispute related to this Agreement. 20. Entire Agreement; Conflicts. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties regarding the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior representations, advertisements, statements, proposals, negotiations, discussions, understandings, or agreements regarding the same CONFIDENTIAL 226 Page 10 of 14 KORN FERRY' subject matter. The Parties will not be bound by any representation, promise, or condition not expressly set forth in this Agreement. Preprinted terms and conditions on any purchase order issued by Client, or terms and conditions included in Client's vendor set up process, under this Agreement are superseded in their entirety by this Agreement and without force or effect, even if Korn Ferry signs the purchase order or acknowledges such terms to be set up as a vendor in Client's systems and whether such signature or acknowledgement occurs prior to or after the execution of this Agreement. Under no circumstances will Korn Ferry's acknowledgement of any such terms be considered an amendment to this Agreement. All purchase orders must include a reference to this Agreement. Neither Party has been induced to enter into this Agreement by any representations or statements, oral or written, not expressly contained in this Agreement. This Agreement may only be modified by the written agreement of both Parties. 21. Compliance with Legal and Regulatory Requirements. a. Each Party represents and warrants that it: i. will comply with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements in connection with this Agreement, which include: (a) information privacy and data protection laws and regulations relating to the protection, disclosure and use of individuals' personal data including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other laws and regulations that mandate the protection of personal data; and (b) anti -bribery, anti -corruption, anti -money laundering, and international trade laws and regulations ("Sanctions") of the US, EU, UK, UN and any other governmental or supranational body with jurisdiction over this Agreement or either party; is not a subject of Sanctions; iii. is not owned or controlled by any person or entity subject to Sanctions; and iv. is not located or organized in, or owned or controlled by persons or entities in a jurisdiction subject to Sanctions (including Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Crimea Region of the Ukraine). b. Client further represents and warrants that it will not transfer, provide access, or use the Services or work product (including tools and intellectual property): to or for the benefit of any Specially Designated National (as designated by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control), to or in any jurisdiction subject to Sanctions, or to any other party if such transfer, access, or use would constitute a violation of Sanctions. C. Any breach of this Section 21 is a material breach of this Agreement and grounds for immediate termination by the non -breaching Party. 22. Miscellaneous. No provision of this Agreement will be construed against or interpreted to the disadvantage of any Party because that Party has or is deemed to have drafted the provision. All section headings and captions are for the Parties' convenience only, are not part of the text, and will not be deemed in any way to limit or affect the meaning of this Agreement. When used in this Agreement, "including" means "including without limitation." Client permits Korn Ferry to include Client's company name as a participant in products and services. The Parties may execute this Agreement in any number of counterpart copies, which may be delivered by PDF or other electronic means, each of which will be deemed an original, but which taken together constitute a single instrument. Either Party may terminate this Agreement immediately if: (i) a Party is in breach, the non - breaching Party has provided the breaching Party with a written notice and the breaching Party has failed to cure the breach within thirty (30) days of its receipt of notice; or (ii) the other Party enters into bankruptcy proceedings, becomes insolvent, or there is an appointment of a receiver for the benefit of creditors, or cessation of business. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, all remedies available to either Party for breach of this Agreement or at law or in equity are cumulative and may be exercised concurrently or separately. Those sections of this Agreement that are intended by their nature to survive termination or expiration of this Agreement will survive. The Parties hereto have agreed that this Agreement and all attachments thereto, as applicable, will be drawn in English. Les parties aux presentes ont accepte que cette convention ainsi que tous les documents qui s'y rattachent, le cas echeant, soient rediges en anglais. CONFIDENTIAL 227 Page 11 of 14 KORN FERRY' Attachment 3 Privacy and Data Protection Exhibit This Attachment 3 is governed by and subject to the Letter of Engagement between the parties. INTERPRETATION 1.1 Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Exhibit have the meanings given to them in the Agreement unless the context requires otherwise. 1.2 In this Exhibit: Agreement means the Letter of Engagement to which this Exhibit is attached; Approved Subprocessors means the subprocessors that have been approved by Client in accordance with Section 12 of the Agreement; Data Protection Legislation means any law, enactment, regulation, regulatory policy, by law, ordinance or subordinate legislation relating to the processing of Personal Data, as applicable to Client, Korn Ferry and/or the Services, including, but not limited to the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of Personal Data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (GDPR), and any corresponding or equivalent national laws or regulations, in each case, as in force and applicable, and as may be amended, supplemented or replaced from time to time; Data Subject means any person in respect of whom Personal Data is processed; Personnel means officers, employees, workers or independent contractors. Standard Contractual Clauses means the standard contractual clauses issued pursuant to the European Commission Decision 2010/87/EU of 5 February 2010 (notified under document C(2010)593), pre -signed by Korn Ferry as the data importer available on Korn Ferry's corporate website at https://www.kornferry.com/privacy/security. 1.3 Any conflicts between Attachment 2 and this Exhibit will be resolved in favor of Attachment 2. 2. SCOPE AND PURPOSE 2.1 Where Korn Ferry processes Personal Data on Client's behalf as a data processor or equivalent under applicable data protection law, Korn Ferry will process Personal Data: (i) in the manner and for the purposes set out in this Exhibit and as documented in the Agreement; (ii) upon other specific reasonable documented instruction of Client; or (iii) as needed to comply with law. The foregoing constitutes Client's written instructions for purposes of Clause 5(a) of the Standard Contractual Clauses, if applicable. Korn Ferry certifies its understanding that it is restricted from selling, or disclosing in exchange for consideration, Personal Data to a third party. This Attachment does not apply where the Parties process Personal Data as independent data controllers, or equivalent, under applicable data protection law. 2.2 The types of Personal Data that may be processed by Korn Ferry are those provided by Client through its use of the Services, including Personal Data comprising business contact information of Client employees and contact information, survey responses and assessment evaluation data of Client -nominated assessment participants, including information on race, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability and veteran status, if requested by Client. Personal Data will be processed for the purposes of communication, assessment, analysis and generating reports in the course of providing the Services. The duration of the processing will be until the deletion of the Personal Data in accordance with Section 9 of this Exhibit. 2.3 Client hereby: 2.3.1 instructs Korn Ferry to take such steps in the processing of Personal Data on behalf of Client as are reasonably necessary for the provision of the Services; 2.3.2 ensures that all fair processing notices have been given (and/or, where necessary, valid consents have been obtained and not withdrawn) and are sufficient in scope and CONFIDENTIAL 228 Page 12 of 14 KORN FERRY' kept up-to-date in order to enable Korn Ferry to process the Personal Data in accordance with the Data Protection Legislation; and 2.3.3 authorises Korn Ferry to provide to the Approved Subprocessors and on behalf of Client instructions that are equivalent to the instructions set out in Section 2.3.1. 2.4 Where either party is responsible for collecting and transferring Personal Data for the purposes of the provision of the Services, it shall use its reasonable endeavours to ensure that it is not subject to any prohibition or restriction which would prevent the other party from processing that Personal Data in the manner reasonably necessary for Korn Ferry to perform, or Client to benefit from, the Services. 2.5 Korn Ferry will inform Client if it believes that any Client instructions regarding Personal Data processing would violate the GDPR. 3. CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY 3.1 Korn Ferry undertakes to treat all Personal Data as confidential. Korn Ferry will ensure that persons authorised to process Personal Data are bound by obligations of confidentiality consistent with those imposed upon Korn Ferry under this Exhibit and under the Agreement. 3.2 Where legally allowed, Korn Ferry will promptly notify Client of any legally binding request from a law enforcement authority or others for disclosure of Personal Data before making any disclosure and will reject any non -legally binding requests. 3.3 Refer to Sections 7 and 8 of the Agreement for further security requirements. 4. SECURITY BREACH Korn Ferry will provide Client with written notice as soon as reasonably possible upon becoming aware of any actual breach of security that leads to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure of, or access to, any Personal Data processed by Korn Ferry (a Security Breach). Korn Ferry shall assist or support Client at Client's request in complying with Client's notification obligations regarding a Security Breach. 5. SUBPROCESSING. Refer to Section 12 of the Agreement. 6. CROSS -BORDER TRANSFERS OF PERSONAL DATA Korn Ferry may transfer Personal Data to various locations, which may include locations both inside and outside of the European Economic Area. Korn Ferry will ensure that any cross - border transfers of Personal Data comply with applicable Data Protection Legislation. At Client's request, Korn Ferry and any relevant Korn Ferry affiliate will enter into an appropriate data processing agreement or the standard contractual clauses with the Client to allow Client to transfer Personal Data to Korn Ferry and any Korn Ferry affiliate. The Standard Contractual Clauses are incorporated by reference and apply to Personal Data that is transferred outside of the European Union, European Economic Area (EEA), and Switzerland, either directly or via onward transfer, to any country not recognized by the European Commission as providing an adequate level of protection for Personal Data. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Standard Contractual Clauses will not apply if Korn Ferry has adopted an alternative recognized compliance standard for the lawful transfer of Personal Data outside the EEA. For the purpose of the Standard Contractual Clauses and this Attachment 3, Client and its affiliates established in the European Union, EEA, and Switzerland are deemed "data exporters." Korn Ferry and its affiliates established outside of the European Union, EEA, and Switzerland are deemed "data importers." 7. AUDIT 7.1 General Audit Terms. Client may conduct audits as described in this Section 7. Permitted audits will be completed in a professional and ethical manner which does not, in Korn Ferry's reasonable judgment, compromise the integrity of Korn Ferry's (or its other customers') data, system security, or operational performance. Client will notify Korn Ferry in writing at least twenty (20) business days prior to any audit taking place. Audits will be conducted during Korn Ferry's normal business hours. Client will bear all costs and expenses relating to each audit. CONFIDENTIAL 229 Page 13 of 14 KORN FERRY' Client and its agents must keep confidential all information learned during any audit. Korn Ferry may require outside auditors to sign an appropriate confidentiality agreement. Korn Ferry will not provide Client or its agents with access to proprietary or confidential information concerning its other customers. All information learned or acquired by Client during any audit is Korn Ferry Confidential Information. 7.2 Security and Compliance Audit. Client may conduct one security and compliance audit in any rolling 12-month period. Client may perform an assessment, audit, inspection, examination, or review of relevant security controls and processing activity in Korn Ferry's physical and technical environment in relation to Client's Personal Data processed by Korn Ferry pursuant to this Agreement and as is reasonably necessary to demonstrate Korn Ferry's compliance with the Agreement. Requests to conduct security and compliance audits must be made in writing to Security@kornferry.com. Korn Ferry will provide access, at Korn Ferry's discretion, to relevant documentation, knowledgeable personnel, physical premises, summary audit reports, ISO 27001 and 27018 annual certifications, and infrastructure and application software that process Client's Personal Data. Client may not perform or disclose any of the following security testing of the system environment or associated infrastructure without first signing Korn Ferry's Audit Compliance Agreement: network discovery, port and service identification, vulnerability scanning, password cracking, remote access testing, penetration testing, service denial attack or other testing which by its application may cause impact to Korn Ferry's data, its customers' data, its operations or security. If security testing is permitted, Client assumes sole and total responsibility and risk for any damages or liabilities arising directly or indirectly as a result of the testing. 7.3 Security Questionnaire. Upon Client's written request but no more than once in any rolling 12-month period, Korn Ferry will complete Client's written information security questionnaire regarding Korn Ferry's processing of Client's Personal Data. 8. KORN FERRY ASSISTANCE Taking into account the nature of the Personal Data processing and the information available to Korn Ferry will assist Client with Client's obligation to respond to Data Subjects' requests to exercise their rights under the GDPR; and, at Client's request, using appropriate technical and organization measures, assist Client in meeting its compliance obligations regarding carrying out privacy and data protection impact assessments and related consultations of data protection authorities. Korn Ferry may charge a reasonable fee to Client for such requested assistance, to the extent permitted by applicable law and as agreed to by the Parties. 9. DESTRUCTION OF PERSONAL DATA Upon request from Client, Korn Ferry will destroy all Personal Data processed by Korn Ferry on behalf of Client that is in the possession or under the control of Korn Ferry. In the event that the Client does not make such request, Korn Ferry will destroy all Personal Data in accordance with its business practices. Korn Ferry shall be entitled to retain such back-ups of Personal Data to the extent is not technologically feasible to delete such Personal Data provided that if it becomes technologically feasible, Korn Ferry will delete such information. Korn Ferry will provide certification of deletion of Personal Data as described in Clause 12(1) of the Standard Contractual Clauses to Client only upon Client's written request. For the avoidance of doubt, the foregoing specifically excludes information provided by Korn Ferry to Client regarding candidates in connection with an executive or professional search. CONFIDENTIAL 230 Page 14 of 14 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-218 Report Date July 19, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Public Works and Transportation Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Dominion Park Master Plan Phase 1 Implementation AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Tim O'Reilly Michael Hugenholtz I John Collin RECOMMENDATIONS Your City Manager recommends that Common Council endorse the Dominion Park Phase 1 Implementation Plan as detailed in M&C 2021-218 contingent on approval of the 2022 General Fund Capital Program. This report updates Common Council on progress of a new Master Plan for Dominion Park, the hard work of the community association that has partnered with the City in development of this plan, and recommends a path forward for implementation of a Phase 1 of this Master Plan. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION On May 25, 2020 Common Council endorsed the following City staff recommendations: 1. Increase the 2021 General Fund Capital Program by up to $135,000 for investment in Dominion Park, 2. Authorize up to $150,000 insurance proceeds from the claim for damage due to 2018 and 2019 flooding at Dominion Park be placed into the General Fund Capital Reserve for use only at Dominion Park for a period of time not longer than December 31, 2021, 3. Endorse the City of Saint John in partnership with the Dominion Park Community Association make application to the Provincial Community Investment Fund, the Provincial Family and Youth Capital Assistance Program, and seek private sponsorship opportunities to supplement City investment in Dominion Park, and 231 -2- 4. Uphold Common Council's 2017 resolutions as reiterated in M&C 2020- 131, except that, nothwithstanding focus on Rockwood Park would follow completion of the Rainbow Park Master Plan, focus on Dominion Park shall supercede or occur concurrently with improvements to Rockwood Park as a result of the damages caused by the flooding in 2018 and 2019. REPORT The attached M&C 2020-131 provides substantial background and contextual information, and therefore readers are encouraged to review this report in its entirety. A fundamental component of the vision for Dominion Park, as detailed in M&C 2020-131, is that the combined Capital and insurance funding available (up to $285,000), current City funding available for ongoing operations & maintenance (O&M), and any additional confirmed external funds (Capital or operating) would be used to construct a stand-alone Phase 1 of the developed Master Plan in 2021. The Dominion Park Community Association would use the subsequent months to develop a new Master Plan for the park and seek additional funding sources. City staff cautioned the creation of another Master Plan that was too expensive to implement. The Association has worked hard to develop an updated Master Plan for the park with the community and has attempted to secure external funding sources. The Master Plan is attached to this report, with an overview shown to the right. The "backbone" of the plan is a building to replace the former washroom/ changeroom/ lifeguard/ canteen facility. The Capital cost to implement this plan is estimated at $3.46 Million, with the building construction and associated seawall estimated to cost $1.25 Million of that $3.46 Million total. Unfortunately, and despite hard work, the association has been unable to secure the remaining approximately $1 Million in Capital funds needed for construction of the building nor operating/maintenance costs and provision for capital renewal for the life of the asset. Ahead of the 2021 "beach season" at Dominion Park, which occurs when school is out for the summer, City staff secured temporary rental units to replace the missing washroom, change room, and lifeguard facilities. Some of these facilities were placed in May to honour the City's contractual obligations to TimberTop Adventures. These temporary facilities are expected to cost approximately $20,000 for 2021 and may need to be offset by some of the available $285,000 232 am as these costs were not budgeted in the 2021 General Fund Operating Budget. A similar yet condensed (due to COVID-19) plan with use of temporary facilities was implemented in 2020. To their credit, the Association seeks offsetting funding sources for these funds. The lack of "permanency" with the 2020 and 2021 plans have been noticed by many in the community. The City of Saint John and the community are again at a crossroads; either (1) continue to wait for partners to close the Capital and O&M funding gap, or (2) implement a Phase 1 of the Master Plan with available funds for completion by the beginning of the 2022 "beach season". City staff are recommending the latter option (2) given the experiences, costs, and community feedback received in 2020 and 2021. In addition to the insurance proceeds and previously approved capital funds, staff will be proposing additional funding in the 2022 General Capital Budget as well as the additional gas tax funding available which is proposed for 'Quality of Life' investments. These investments will be brought to Finance Committee and Common Council for information in the coming days. To be conservative, City staff are estimating $865,000 would be available for Phase 1 implementation and the bulk of this investment would be used for a replaced facility. City staff intend to honour as much as possible the new Master Plan developed for Dominion Park. It was developed in a way such that further phases (beyond the facility) may be implemented if/as funding becomes available. However, to reduce the cost of Phase 1 from the $1.25 M estimate to the available $865,000, City staff intend to pursue a few variations from the Master Plan, which are detailed in the subsequent paragraphs. The developed Master Plan intended to construct the replaced facility at a higher elevation, above the 2019 spring freshet levels (shown in blue in the aerial photo to the right) at a cost of approximately $110,000. Instead, City staff intend to pursue facilities that can be moved annually outside the 2019 spring freshet level that would significantly reduce or eliminate this approximately $110,000 investment to raise the building elevation. The developed Master Plan envisions canteen provisions be included in the constructed facility. However, City staff have experienced varying levels of interest from third parties to operate canteen services at City parks. Instead of investing in added capacity and infrastructure within the on -site constructed facilities, that may not be in constant use, City staff propose to explore partnerships with food truck vendors that are primarily self-contained operations while investigating options to provide utilities for said trucks as part of Phase 1. 233 -4- Other costly features, such as a two -storey building, will be scaled back to meet available budget while retaining the functional and high -demand indoor spaces such as washrooms, change rooms, and lifeguard spaces. Pursuing pre -fabricated facilities will also reduce costs and allow construction over the winter and spring with an aim of having Phase 1 complete by 2022 "beach season". STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Dominion Park is one of the City's District Parks identified in PIaySJ. Concentrated investment in the City's Regional and District Parks, including Dominion Park, aligns with the priorities of PIaySJ. Being mindful of affordability at all phases of infrastructure's lifecycle aligns with the City's Asset Management philosophy and policies. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES As described in this report, the proposed Phase 1 of the Dominion Park Master Plan is intended to meet the functional needs of the community while doing so in a fiscally responsible way. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS City staff will keep the Dominion Park Community Association apprised of progress through detailed design and construction of Phase 1 of the Master Plan while maintaining as much as possible opportunities to pursue subsequent phases of the Master Plan that were envisioned with community input. ATTACHMENTS City Staff Presentation Dominion Park Master Plan M&C 2020-131 234 gip:. I _ , y �:.'• 1%w ; F :. �.'. r Dominion Park Master Plan Phase 1 Implementation Presentation to Common Council July 26, 2021 SAINT JOHN 235 • Priority park identified in P I aySJ • 1 of 7 District Parks • 1 of 6 District Playgrounds • Lifeguarded beach • Change/washroom facilities • Basketball nets, picnic/bbq areas, hiking trails • Sunshine Program Site • Treetop aerial park 236 Q-0-1 SAINT JOHN 2014 Master Planning exercise • $600,000 implementation cost 2017 TimberTop Adventures license 2017 renewed community interest, focus on the "facility" 2018 capital funds set aside, flooding, work started to repair and upgrade facility 2019 flooding, facility becomes structurally unsound and uninsurable 2019 additional capital funds, community meeting, organized community association 2020 insurance funds confirmed ($150,000) 2020-2021 community association led updated Master Plan 237 66-1 SAINT JOHN • Historic Master Plans have generally stayed "on the shelf" • At least $50 Million in unfinished work • Recent work to move plans from "the shelf" to enabling tangible investments in City parks • Prioritization of plans • Rightsizing recreation assets (quality over quantity) • Update plans for affordability • Asset Management policies • Embracing community partnerships • 2022 Quality of Life investment plan • ...including at Dominion Park (May 2020 report) 238 46-1 SAINT JOHN Current Dominion Park Master Plan a ND CANTEEN �wt WASHROOM LOCATION f BUSINESS PARICI G K�—r � � * � ; � , i ` ! � _ ��_ � � -CAMPUS a Y } •a �.� . . ■ fir. -•''+� •�i rri ar i. .�r+� r rz RAISED ■.� � PIUllilN6�`_ ISLAND .r! *ii�i i fir■ !�!r• �k `� r BASKETBALL ENTRY SIG COURT 416 TRAFFIC CIKLF �5rr SeawaII and Building Cimstruttion # 1,250,0N RWt Launch $ 1r;5.000 Parking K+ odifMcation: $ 450.000 Beach Access Improvemerns (TI- e a u n c) & 5 h acle S S5( 000 Playground & Lookout Area S S50,0B0 Flex Spare, Business -Campus & Reloca ted 11askethall Courts S Sb0,000 Tral`i'IC Circle & Entrance NIr, • Gap in Phase 1 Capital requirements 7hase 1 Capital Cost $ I.,250,0D13 Capital Funds Available Insurance Funds 150,000 Less 2021Temp Facilities - 20,00.0 Prior Capital Funds 135,000 Proposed 2022 Quality of Life Funds 600,000 Total 865,000 (Capital Fund Gap -$ 385,000 • Gap in Phase 1 O&M requirements • Community association have worked very hard to try and close gaps • Delay in implementing tangible park improvements Detailed design needs to start now for improvements in 2022 240 SAINT JOHN • Option 1 Continue to wait for closing funding gap to implement phase 1 as currently planned Temporary facilities and associated costs likely again for 2022 • Option 2 Rightsize phase 1 design now to meet available funding Tangible outcome for 2022 season, temp facility cost avoidance • City staff recommend Council endorse Option 2 241 Q-0- I SAINT JOHN • Movable, high -quality facilities Reduces or eliminates $110,000 seawall/raising of land cost • Pursue license(s) with food truck(s) Eliminates capacity/infrastructure capital facility cost Inconsistent canteen service demand at City parks • Pursue pre -fabricated facilities • Longer construction window • Improves chance facility ready for 2022 "beach" season 242 46- 1 SAINT JOHN • Hard-working, organized community association • City staff to continue to support association's funding plans • Opportunities to fund future Master Plan phases remain • City staff to keep association engaged during Phase 1 design and construction plans 243 46-' SAINT JOHN • Endorse "rightsized" Phase 1 Implementation Plan • Up to $150,.000 in insurance funds remain in Reserve for another year(2022) • Existing funds topped up with funding approved in 2022 Capital Budget 244 Q-0- I SAINT JOHN 0 D ffill D. OWN oll to GLENN 0 R 0 u P L A N D S C A P E ARCHITECTS & PARK PLANNERS 246 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN CONTENTS MISSION................................................................................................................................... 4 HISTORICALCONTEXT............................................................................................................ 4 PUBLICENGAGEMENT........................................................................................................... 5 DESIGNPROCESS....................................................................................................................6 CANTEENDESIGN................................................................................................................... 8 MASTER PLAN - SITE RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................10 MATERIAL SELECTION & PROJECT LIFE CYCLE...................................................................18 PHASING& COST..................................................................................................................19 APPENDIXA........................................................................................................................... 21 Cost Estimate APPENDIXB........................................................................................................................... 27 Design Charrette APPENDIXC........................................................................................................................... 35 Master Plan Renders 247 3 MISSION Dominion Park is one of Saint John's premier beaches, attracting large crowds all year round for its stunning sunsets, warm waters in summer, and an abundance of ice fishing opportunities in winter. One of the largest parks in the City of Saint John, Dominion Park has the untapped potential to be a top -rated tourism destination. The City of Saint John and the Dominion Park Community Association asked Glenn Group to participate in a community design charrette in late 2019, which sought to address the extreme flooding that the park experiences every year, and to find a permanent solution to replace the washroom building that was demolished in the spring of 2019. The community highlighted the challenges of the site, the general state of deterioration including many site features reaching their maximum lifespan. They then identified a series of physical and programmatic improvements and design considerations that they would like to see carried forward in the future planning of the park. The City of Saint John suggested the formation of the Dominion Park Community Association to champion the revitalization of Dominion Park. Soon after formation, the association recommended the creation of a Master Plan to identify a strategic phased approach to the revitalization and a clear design directive for the entire park. ir x�- �Y - 4 # 4 DOMINION MASTER PLAN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT The City of Saint John and the Dominion Park CommunityAssociation led a public engagement process in the winter of 2019 to begin to address the community wants, concerns, and needs within the park. The leaders then generated a "wish list" for the community and began to work with the consulting team to develop the working framework for the project. Appendix B summarizes the design charrette session. The following priorities were identified by the community at large: - New Washrooms & Canteen Facility - Flood Resistant Design - Boat Launch - Safety / Traffic Protection - Accessibility - Upgraded Playground - Sheltered Picnic Areas Reference Appendix B �Ci iv i� EVerr�s �es�het;� A�maspher� ies � �z y •�� �[ceiu{ -..� � �JBAu M�Rlrti. �'^"{�./ V(u! vu _ SETFR [vcw ut '�� 'IPMWK vm.(.wt ss F y S cwAIncE ,• � � an Kp ��k i. PAP " Bnn�a E.ks �^• Aacx �� � qo;-249 B� �r~u/t1 LL6T � pp /rcK -- 1 5�fiw: M,a 5 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN DESIGN PROCESS The existing infrastructure was assessed and historic flood levels were reviewed to understand what limitations could be placed on the site. Input from stakeholders formulated a wish list of enhancements. Ultimately, the design rationale was driven by the building loction. The design team in conjunction with the Dominion Park Community Association felt it necessary to develop three potential conceptual designs based on three potential building locations. This approach allowed all participants to weigh the pro's and con's of each feature being placed in each location, as determined by their specific needs for proximity to the building and other functional requirements. The park can be zones into seven (7) use areas, as identified on the Use Zone Map. Inventory73 Assessment I Engagement73 Options Use Zone Map ■ 250 O THE LOOKOUT 80ATLAUNCH PLAYGROUND LOOKOUT ^ DECK I HANDICAP PARKING CANTEEN BUILDING VOLLEYBALL COURTS �' © THE DECLOOK UT DECK HANDICAP S U N CATC H E R PARKING SMALL CRAFT & FISHING DOCK BOATLAUNCH GATED -_ SERVICE yfj I I I'� �` _1 ROAD /// BUILDING 1 r VOLLEYBALL COURTS GATED LO-CW SERVICE © THE DECK - ROAD MARKETPLACE HANDICAP PARKING BOATLAUNCH BENCH & LOUNGE SEATING STAGE GATED SERVICE ROAD SHADED WELCOME:- PLAYGROUND .1 PLAZA - DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN CANTELN DESIGN The proposed new building replaces the temporary washroom structures which have been used in the interim. To help the community visualize the spatial impact and building cost, a conceptual illustration was prepared. Further in-depth study will be required to inform the actual building design. Base Building Program 2 male, 2 female accessible washrooms and 1 family or gender -neutral washroom. The capability of a commercial kitchen primarily focused on a takeout approach to service the beach. The necessity for covered patio space. The following figures can be used for estimating approximate cost for the construction of this facility. 252 First Floor Plan Second Floor Plan DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Additional Programming Conversations with the Dominion Park community group revealed that the building may need to house additional programming, potentially located on the second floor of the establishment. Potential services: - Retail Rental Space - Commercial Business Rentals - Restaurant in-house seating experience - City Operations A small commercial kitchen with a public washroom would require approximately 1050ft2. This does not include interior floor space for a restaurant. The Addition of a Second Floor The second floor originally envisioned as the best view in Saint John was imagined as a rental, restaurant or gathering space. Regarding pricing, a second floor can increase square footage at an economical cost when compared to the expansion of the first floor. This size of building provides a maximum occupancy of 58 people according to the NAtional Building Code. This is assuming a stairwell and potential elevator (closets, storage etc) will reduce the usable square footage to about 600sf. The following figures can be used for estimating approximate cost for the second floor on this facility: Assumptions - Access to the second floor may require a significant ramp or elevator. - The second -floor usage may have code implications that may require additional considerations not taken into account in this cost estimate. 253 I BOAT LAUN BOAT PARKI%�!...,�o:: 4a OD fw aff-11 Mel arm TX no 'S" Iwo rill I awl rum 1w SE oil MID w-W ff-M 1192 0" -.1 oDDD "1101 we #M a" CUM RAISED// 04 - .!. PARKING ISLAND ENTRY SIGN �PLAYGROUND CANTEEN 0( N WWASHROOM LOCATION BUSINESS CAMPUS kSKETBALL COURT TRAFFIC CIRCL E DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Seawall & Building Construction The building location is set atop a concrete seawall to ensure this investment is protected from potential flood damage where it will offer expansive views of the bay and incredible sunsets. This location provides a strong presence on site being highly visible from all areas of Dominion Park. Customers will want to sit on the patio for a refreshment, relax in a shaded area or read a book while overlooking the water. The suggested building design, although conceptual, has an open plan, utilizing the sun for natural lighting. This central location is easy to find and serves all users of the park, acting as a quick access point between the parking, the beach, the playground, and other destinations on site. Preliminary grading has been completed, confirming that this space can be accessible to all users in the park. The face of the seawall has the potential to serve as an opportunity for unique branding, community art, and even advertising space. Additionally, the building is situated to be easily seen on two sides, providing an excellent signage and advertising opportunity for the park. The plaza space between the seawall and building will be a resilient material, currently priced and rendered as stamped concrete to allow for a robust platform that serves a multitude of functions. This flexible space can accomodate a stage for beach onlookers, an outdoor yoga studio, star gazing, outdoor seating and dining, and of course extended rental space for a potential investor or vendor. 11 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Beach Access Improvements (The Dune) & Shade The existing beach access (or Dune Zone as the design team has coined it) has reached the end of its life cycle. The separation between the parking area and pedestrian space has lost its definition and is quickly becoming a safety issue. Although it is a prominent zone in the park, there is very little value that users get out of this space. It is a key access pointto the beach and should be celebrated as a grand entrance that welcomes visitors while showcasing the aesthetic of Dominion Park, creating a sense of place, and areas for gathering and relaxation. Designed as five community hubs, each hub features long communal benches with architectural trellises that provide shade and frame the water and sunset views. Each space is accessible for those with limited mobility, allowing everyone to enjoy the beach environment from the concrete plazas and walkways, perfect for wheelchairs, walkers, and strollers. The half-moon shape of each bench and mini - plaza in the Dune Zone facilitates discussion between strangers, and works to strengthen the bonds of community in a shared and open environment. 12 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Boat Launch & Parking Modifications The suggestion of a boat launch was one of the most talked about points by the community. It was identified early on that there is a vital opportunity at Dominion Park to fill a gap in the market for a local boat launch, and that the addition of such infrastructure would be critical to drawing more visitors to the site in the future. The segregated boat launch and parking area replaces the existing basketball court without seriously reducing the overall parking supply. It separates the boat users from the standard parking area with a raised planting bed to increase safety. To accommodate this, a second entry is required exclusively for the boat launch parking. This generous entrance also ensures boaters/drivers do not have to navigate the intersection at the main entry to the park. The landscape at this end of the park requires very little alteration to accomodate a boat launch, making this feature a perfect fit in this location. Although the water depth has not been confirmed, locals familiar with the water are confident that the proposed location will allow boat launching with ease. Rip rap banks will protect the reinforced concrete deck from flood and ie damage. Wr 'qWW- 13 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Playground & Lookout Area The lookout is situated in a secluded nook atop a signature SaintJohn rock outcropping. This area coastal promenade, has been underutilized for many years. The first step to re-claim ownership of this space is to image a completely different use and function, unlocking its potential. A one -of -a -kind playground with adjoining lookout will draw children and adults alike. Theming of the playground pays homage to the history of the Saint John area by creating play structures that emulate forts, ships, and creatures of the deep. A nearby beach features fossils that add an incredible realism to this treasure hunting, sea -faring, historical adventure -course. The lookout deck, shaped to represent a ships bow, is to be functionally linked with the playground so parents have a beautifully designed space where they can watch their kids, and equally keep another eye on the beautiful views. This space helps to foster a sense of community by bringing user groups together in an environment of exploration, excitement, and fascination. This will be a playground like no other in the Saint John area. The playground is intended to be an engaging, challenging design, utilizing natural features to improve hand -eye coordination, balance, endurance, and socialization. The playground is intended to feel far removed from city life, providing that much needed escape and immersion into the natural landscape. 14 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN 15 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Flex Space, Business Campus & Relocated Basketball Courts The flex space, south of the proposed canteen, is an area where the community has the option to create an open area for sports, introduce picnic tables or blankets, seating to watch a basketball game, etc., as programed events at Dominion Park dictate. The feature closest to the main entry is a relocated basketball court. This more appropriate location for this commonly used feature will include a partially fenced enclosure tucked into the sloping landscape, new lighting alongthe trail, and cast in place concrete seating to serve fans and players alike. The flexible parking area is finished with a coloured and stamped concrete to set it apart from the rest of the parking area. It serves as beach access for service vehicles as well as parking for food trucks and other large tourism related vehicles. Each space is fully serviced for water and power to avoid the noise of a generator interfering with the serene atmosphere of the park. The trail system leads pedestrians into Dominion Park from the surrounding community, and safetly directs users to spaces in an organized manner. The main route located through the centre of the entry space is oversized to allow service vehicles to access the businesses adjacent to the seawall. The Canteen building was designed to front three sides of activity. The "backside" is primarily used for public washroom access and operational functions. 16 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Traffic Circle & Entrance Concerns have been raised about the speed with which vehicle traffic enters the park. The existing roadway creates a straight, unimpeded route of travel into the park which encourages high speeds. A spatial investigation determined that a full-sized traffic circle may fit into the available space. With minimal re -working of the existing entry location, and the addition of the traffic circle, traffic can be effectively slowed and a once confusing intersection can be clarified and made safer for both vehicles and pedestrians. A much needed cross -walk is located adjacent to the main park entry. A new Dominion Park welcome sign will be placed and oriented to be highly visible to vehicles and pedestrians when approaching the main entry to the park. Clear wayfinding is another effective way of increasing safety for all users. 261 17 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN MATERIAL SELECTION & PROJECT LIFE CYCLE A major concern of the City is the product selection and life cycle analysis of the materials selected atthe park. As such the Glenn Group having intimate knowledge of working on coastal environments and communities made the following assumptions: - All products subjectto flood impact have been designed (priced) to withstand natures forces, including wind, water, and ice. - All critical infrastructure is placed above the high-water mark of 5.5 meters. - All buildings and seawalls are designed 1 meter above the high- water mark as an added measure of safety. - All materials selected are rot resistant and or priced to use long lasting materials or finishes to minimize maintenance. - All surfacing material iscastin place, resistanttothe environment, vandalism and vehicle traffic. 262 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN PHASING & COST The projected capital cost was developed using recent data and high level architectural industry standard cost estimating standards to set a realistic budget number for future design. These numbers include design contingency, contractor markup and architectural fees, excluding taxes. An itemized cost breakdown can be found in Appendix A. Cost Estimate Notes Phasing requirements may require a more in-depth review of the associated infrastructure work completed from phase to phase. It is understood that by phasing work over construction years overlap may occur between phases increasing the cost of the project. The estimates were compiled without a survey, geotechnical or bathymetry data. The accuracy of the numbers is an estimate of information obtained on site. Initial funding is approximately $250,000. In order for the project to gain momentum, build on improvements and make noticeable changes to the park, the beach access improvements should be the first project that is undertaken. The next highest priority would be the construction of the seawall and eventual canteen building. This is a significant undertaking that would need to see construction start in the spring and finalized in the fall. This may be a realistic target for a 2022 completion. This gives the team a full year to engage architectural and consulting firms, conduct proper survey, geotechnical investigations and tender the project accordingly. This also gives the team a healthy timeline to secure funding and possible investors/future leases. A Master Plan is a fluid document that provides a strategic vision but is also flexible to adapt to changing conditions. The Master Plan should be reviewed every 5-10 years. 263 19 264 20 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Appendix A Cost Estimate 265 21 I o Ln Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m M m m m o n n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In - . o (i CD 0o 0 0 0 0 CDLO 0 0 0 CD CD 0 0 0 0 �: CDpp N p r: rl� y 65 O 11 t--i 0 0 0 0 O CY O Ln O O Q 0 0 0 0 [Yi G9 r-1 09 O qT q Lr7 m 4D G9 O Lr7 C� CO .--i Lr7 O Q O Lr7 O C 11} O 40 N Ln V tl Q CD -A CVV C CD Lrj m -A m -A CD Ln t O Ln 4p' r, CVS � CT m m m� : 0 KI Ln a ro {f} {}} if} VI if} in. if} if} V.I. if} if} {}} {f} W — {f} — — {f} if} Yf} 1-114. O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O Q 0 0 0 0 Co o m o m o m O O O Q O Q O O 0 0 0 O O Q Q Q Q O p Ln p rq 4 Ti 4 O Ln L Ln L CD CD o CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y f� f� m CDm dl LLnm N m O O CD 0 0 CD O -0 .-1 •--i C 1-4Lry O Q O Lry C O Ln O o iJ fi D fi a fi C rN CD Lrj (V CD Ln C 1 a� co Ch ii} if} ii} if} if} ii} if} if} if} -C } if} if} if} if} if} if} if} if} 0co U 4J L 0 0 O 7 J J J Qi O Ln O LnV m Ln l.O CD V 09 .-i Ln O O CDQl .-i .-1 r-I m -A Ln Ln f� tV 1* M M Ch C 3 H ` a+ O p� s 11] } m a Ln to c O L E 'U v U [ll N CO Ln O al Qj CN a N ) 3 @ y N 7 T T N [s — c a E c� E m E c� E u uo ° oC E a E o ea N E o� °1 •� m m as Y ' E ' p cj ' p O _ m a+ i+ E +`� i+ E +--� a3-� U w {gyp b4 C -0 Ql o Lr] p o aj c G ti6 p aJ 3 w ( u] ti6 pl W- J a-� J a-� Ln �[) J _ Lry '@ ti0 i ti6 O dO � [0 UO SA `� N pp _ d a N L } @ co C t c S as al C S pl N fp s. J2 al e, 0- N -0 L CL L" {p a-' W y� C Ln < m �.} < m 'l d0 m a C m a [f7 J rp d U) J) J d W � v a � 22 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-q� n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N lD DO N r 1 O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 N N O O O O O O O O 0 x 0 0 0 O O O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 00 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0t 0 1l� 1� 00 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 w O O O Ln O Ln O O N 0 CD O O O O 0 Ln m e w lD Rr r-I LD 0 0 0 0 C o o n r. N rn 1n r. 0 0 -1 Ln 1n Ln 0 1� Ln 00 0 0 0 0 0 r+m m� 1. Ln m o m O ri O N 0 Ln W 1- LA LD r-I cD C O ci cD O N Ln cr Lr O O O N O Lfl � m 00 f LD N r-I r-I ci r-I r-I m r-I In r-I w r-I c-I c-I �t N N �-I LD m r-I i -I r-I �t lD Ln r-I lD r-I r-1 r-I r-I m m RT RT — — — 0 0 o O o 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M o o. o m O O O O O O O Ln O N O r1 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Lr7 O Ln O H O O O O O O O +' ri +' ri ,� 4' ri +' O O O N m Ln O O O O O O O O N O+ w ri +' ri +' ri +' o N lD o O o O O O o-0 Ln � -0 3 a .0 3 .0 3 N O 0 r-I r-I O Ln N ri m Ln m O O O O O O 0 O r-I C) = —.0 >- 3 —.0 D_ 3 —.0 0 3 N O N O N Y O O Lr O Lr O C y� ci ri i LL ri r-I N r-I ri m LL b.0 bD Crc C L {/} {%} t!} i!} t!} y/} t!} {/} t/} t!} y/} t!} tfF t!? iIF i^ C crb C L C L a=' C a=' O O U � U uuo L +O' s L +O' 9F +' u u o Q O Q E E V N E C Cc Ill N E N E M r C� E N E E E E E V N N JJ � � a� N D O O Ln O O O r- o CDLD CDLD — — — (D o r-Ii r N N 0 V co LO � V 0 co co N LO r r- N 3 u 3 L V Vf —_ Gl � L r0 m i u 0A ry � {n E �0 OLn _ � J rb C (n +' O LA LA N LL 3 C bA U i✓IG N '6 VI Q O n • r -6LE m N E ,LA =Hw _HL 'V6)o E0C "O !m uN 7C O O r m ` yLL N G1 r ( •• •� 0A Y r; by O u f6 N O U — rev rev rLb p,� ++ C V) N bA y U w C L. S u C " L N - 7 7 7 — '0 Cap vv s bA f9 c 4' y O o 3 0 'L +' N 3 i Ln ° +� a ++ a +� a +� a C c 0 u W ro a u bA c c a L 3 o s bA O Q y U U U ++ i i U N J O u L) O 3 J U Ln D- LL = 0 {n W U d vi Ln vi vi H U r6 r0 O Gl 00 I I I I I I m 267 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O m m I,- m O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O-tt Rr m m n 0 O O N O 6 6 O O O O O O O O O O 4 6 6 6 6 O O O LD 00 qf 00 m 6 q O O r-I O O O O Ln O O O O O O O O �t O Ln O O O O O Ln ri I� t.0 R:r r-I l fj O O M O O Ln I- Ln O Ln O O O O O m� m O O cV 0 0� CD O Ln w w Q O Ln Ln Ln N m N 00 m � Ln Ln O N' m Ln C 6O O I- O 00 lD Z r- N O N N ri N -i lV CD N N ri ri r-I (V Ln co -* ch � co ri m m ch co t/} 1^ t!? V} i^ A^ i^ V} 1^ V> 1^ V> t/} O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O - m \ m \ m O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p �,n O O m Ln O O N m Ln O O N O O O O O O Ln O O O O O +' v= ++ O r-I r-I O O r-I Rt m -1 O O O N lD � m 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 O O O O O ri ri Ln N 0 0 T Q 0 Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln O' O c ; a�i Ln O' ri (V r-I N N L LL c-I biD tcc0 V} V t!F Ln V} V} t!} to V'F t!} V'F V} Q1 t!} to t/} 'Ln Vl- {/} A^ t!} V} t!} CL 4� O O U U * ro a C. C u L N EEE N N E 0 N EEE N M N E N E N E a w a) E C M E MC E QJ E E N N 0 V `' a a J J o J J O O O O OO O O NN Ln O ri H —1 O n� 00 rnr-I" r r IN c I Lr)N ri c-I r-I 1-1 N Ln r-I r-I f6 Y FA f6 CO Gl 4-1 f6 u O N � m 3 QCL r0 f6 C A E V 3 bD t E Ur E +L+ t C 0 ra 7 C LA +J � E E aj z a a. C L o 7 aU 1 L 0 r � ro a p E o m —_ a m o L L o �° •y C ' LJ V' L L I� — O UJ r0 = U N O aJ O +' N +, > L CD C7 C O V) bD c *' f6 4J Ln �+ m bA rp :t O +, L m r0 , L U bLp L L 'Q +�+ \ bA S V 0y 7 r0 r-1 G1 C C M Lo O�j +' U E Q N N O C— `^ C u 0 y ry 7 r0 N � O E 0 ,urc wQ vi U �' D_ a_., d' ii I - -c L C CL r0 GJ J U Q m vi m LL !n c!i O QJ U ++ 0 vi R U o U o H D- = LL W m m 0 in V) OO N � li a no 24 a a a a a a a o a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a 0 a 0 00 w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� v •� �n 0 0 0 0 o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N m w o w O O O OR O o o O O O O O o O o o O O o O O O O O o oo OR w O co Lr, ri LD a cn a oo a N a in a in in a in in a in N a a a in (D 00 00 CM oo Lr) m Ln o —I —I r-I r-I r-I N r-I r-I a —I rl ri Lf1 r-I N Q] Lf1 Lfl Lf1 .--I Ln X ro Ln Ln th V), 44 t!} 4,4 t4 tn- 4.4 tr} tr} trh th An. 4.4 An. th 4.4 44 t!} 44 th th th A/ An. 4, 4, V} tr} id"id"d 4^ 0 0 0 0 0 cc Coco o O o o O O O O O O O cc ;r, o ro o ra o ra O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M 41 O N O O N m a 0 0 a o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 CD a a CDm in m u, a s a a a a a a a a a a a � ,� � O O t,} o Ln o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T � n� CD O a O Lr Lr O ui Lr7 O Lr N Lr1 O O iri c Y N .--I .-i rl N .--I rl .--I N .--I N N L LL pp fcc6 V V)- iJ)- '[h t4 ir} 4 rk iJ} '[h t4 j)- Vr - ir} Vr - ir} ir} iJ} '[h iJ} i )- 1-4 iJ} iJ} Vr - C L � � v a * �c L N N N C N m m N N CO N C Q E E v E a m y a v m 0 w w 0 N N 0 N O O J a s a a d d a s O O O O r-i M .--I O 0 0 r r r r r r r r r N r r r O Or O N N N r N f0 L CJ Q L L (n QJ v LL � v T L � d O •ya +' U , + co Co co O L o c a, y Q% N = - T LL 40 00 a _ i O J [p o 7 v N o U 40 - H 0J Y O at Q + 2 06 m v alla _ L m c Q a 0 N X pp cL U c0 C7 l7 — _ +� L cn U L O �] E O � L.L u QJ a Q U Q- O to Q m Q- O 4J 4J O J L F -C u c d " E- c 3 a� o o? �+ c m w w� m - o c[ .� LL U cn U L u a m T 10 L H m c[ c w m o F- cn d o-- H in U Q cn o H co J U cn cn w U a a a 269 25 o a a 0 0 0 0 0 o O p�t RT Ln M o a a o a u, Ln m p i ri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 of of Sri ui Li o o Ln O O O O o 0 00 �,, v n 00 Ln N cn O m oo n N N N1 N O U) O I, Lr1 0 N N —4 M 00 N ul N N CO N lD 00 M ri N M N W .--� Lr, r-I ri ri N O O O O O O O O O f�0 0 o o O O O O O O O O O Q N C N, C ra O O O O Ln N O O O O 00 r-i > 7 Q 7 <n 7 V) IJ N H N N p lf1 ri Y Ln fV fV QJ L LL r-I Lrl q0 ih ih ih ih ih ih ih ih ih � cm C � L y Q � U V 9F ro as C L Q Q Q a J J un Ln O — — — O N N V1 co co LLO �av c v V — L V C L Of Q u C U c by L N N= CL C 01 M f6 J Ln Off O _ Oro co N y Ir M (A } m f0 Q7 H u, cn u, ri 00 L6 C1 M en 26 270 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Appendix B Design Charrette 271 27 Ir -� Jww '-' 'a 4 7 -. I 272 il 273 29 w w rC DC Q 2 U z 0 0 z 0 v 06 J W � Z J ❑ [� D LD O Z Z J } L¢L 3 d CL O 0 Ln W 0-1m LU c V] LD Z Ln H J m W LU Z w W LJ Z H m J D > LU w w' W J C _ w L.L Z ❑ 0 F- LJ � Ln 4 V Z� to d ❑ W� V Z Z J Z W 0 =❑ O D w~❑ Q w ❑ O m ❑ W w W W w LJ O J= d J LL LL uq Z Z= w W W ❑ Z H� Z❑ w H Y F— w L7 w Lo � w F_❑ Z =W O O w' w Q< J< X V u O 3: m ❑0 ❑ ❑ u J w m W —w - / S i aoy.P8 3N1 'vo -rIsn , 3n[7 I fta k ��, mQQ} ►ic��� � D Z H W ull ul Z W 2 LLJ u= O w D O } W W } V"� J Ln m Uq uq Z LL W LJ V� W O J Q Z m Ln H W W L Z= O Q l/ I lw L > Q' H W W W L� O Q La J 0O } m ❑ Uw � _ ❑ 3 w d❑ oo _ O w W � O Z 2 U w Qin O Of z w~ Jp¢ Z W�}_ nVz Lj Q ww 3 w O —U u . . 30 274 u iA44 C f:. LL W =Ln ❑ � _ w W ° < [iS ❑ J < LLJ U W U'] W cl� Ln cl� < WLLJ m CL w m J oC � m C < = ❑ < _ Ln Cc)a C V)<�L E 0w ❑ 7) �L 7 J L) W �_ W ❑ CL W C < � OC EL < Q � W � � J C) C) ❑ W U V] CL ❑ ❑ LLJ z LL W LL ❑ D J 7) W < V] Z V] V) W W U z �' W 11 �] W ❑U) O< m w x �I s V : Y � L �� � s J, w < < = u m w w Q � J z z ❑ V) L.L W J ❑ ° azS < _ Q J ❑ V] < W —1 d 02LLJ m W in Ln L Ln W Ln VL-Li ) U C)LU Ln U, to z d La w LL W w < 0 W � � W ❑Ln � J W 77 ❑ _ Ln L U u Z 0< ❑ �' pZf CL w LU ❑ LLJ d m= Z W J C L ❑ >-U ❑ < < d �7 i— LU LnU W W CDOC W W z U �- W_ ❑ u W U ccC)LnW < W 7D c Ln W C W LU W W W J Q C2 =< W LLJ > IL t z ❑ U U IL 0 J N W W W w 275 31 :4254 1Y t Ok 32 276 .091, 277 33 278 34 DOMINION PARK MASTER PLAN Appendix C Master Plan Renders 279 35 y jw, ,,: fiil r; IONIC Nip �[ y, ml, ..0 ' ^ r i d c i' Y Ilk ?,lump I a ow ►11 a Ito ,i MAR K .r An Aov\ ` �,3` � :� as �,� •, � �•-: ' "i . ,.,� _ - A, •� • -fir r� . gal ...,. I j�;iz � s.,�- ,.. � r- .. � L .�. •.��z t �•�SF � D � � � - :b� � �"' � . �;�r �.:�.'` y.�a, ,��-. � ..ram x FFFFFF 4'': my COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. M&C 2020-131 Report Date May 21, 2020 Meeting Date May 25, 2020 Service Area Transportation and Environment Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Dominion Park Revitalization OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Tim O'Reilly Michael Hugenholtz I John Collin I;7��r•1uIu7�►�►�7- rrr•�►��� Your City Manager recommends that Common Council: 1. Notwithstanding the City's Capital Budget Policy, authorize up to $135,000 in General Fund Capital Program funding for Dominion Park in 2018 and 2019 be deferred to 2021, 2. Authorize up to $150,000 insurance proceeds from the claim for damage due to 2018 and 2019 flooding at Dominion Park be placed into the General Fund Capital Reserve for use only at Dominion Park for a period of time not longer than December 31, 2021, 3. Endorse the City of Saint John in partnership with the Dominion Park Community Association make application to the Provincial Community Investment Fund, the Provincial Family and Youth Capital Assistance Program, and seek private sponsorship opportunities to supplement City investment in Dominion Park, and 4. Uphold Common Council's 2017 resolutions as reiterated in M&C 2020- 131, except that, nothwithstanding focus on Rockwood Park would follow completion of the Rainbow Park Master Plan, focus on Dominion Park shall supercede or occur concurrently with improvements to Rockwood Park as a result of the damages caused by the flooding in 2018 and 2019. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Dominion Park is identified in PlaySJ as a District Park and thus maintaining this park to a higher standard is supported by policy. A newly formed Dominion Park Community Association is providing community leadership that will help guide improvements in Dominion Park. The association would like an opportunity to develop an overall master plan for the park that accurately reflects the data collected from recent community engagement workshops. As well, the 290 IrAN association will seek permission to raise additional external funds in order to support a phased revitalization of the park. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION In September 2017, Common Council resolved: 1. The lifecycle costs of new assets proposed as part of Recreation Facility Master Plans shall be budgeted in the General Fund Operating budget before a decision is made to install those assets, 2. Nothwithstanding minor renewal projects at other District and Regional Parks, the Rainbow Park Master Plan shall be the priority recreation master plan to receive future investment commitments until completion of that plan, 3. Revisit remaining recreation facility master plans (other than Rainbow Park) for overall affordability, and 4. A revisited Rockwood Park Master Plan shall be the focus of investment following investment in Rainbow Park. On October 19, 2018, Common Council resolved that the letter from Dominion Park Community be refered to the Finance Committee for 2018 budget consideration. On October 22, 2019 Common Council resolved that a Request for Public Session to Update Residents on the status of Dominion Park be refered to the City Manager. REPORT Interest in revitalization of Dominion Park by the community and the City of Saint John has been discussed since at least 2014 when initial master planning conceptual designs were prepared with proposed upgrades. The conceptual design from this prior work is attached to this report. In 2017, the City entered into an agreement with TimberTop Adventures Inc. to access a portion of an undeveloped part of the park. Their addition would need to be considered in an overall master plan for the park. Also in 2017, the community requested to revive discussion surrounding updates to Dominion Park and resolution was made to refer to the Finance Committee for 2018 budget consideration. Funding for updates to the park were approved in the 2018 General Fund Capital Program. Focus of this funding was to make improvements to the existing canteen/change/washroom facility, referred further in this report as the "facility". The record spring freshet in 2018 flooded a portion of Dominion Park, being on the Saint John River. The facility in particular was impacted. A combination of 291 am restoration work, via insurance funding, and improvements to the facility with approved Capital funds took place in 2018. Flooding occurred again in 2019, this time with extensive damage to the facility. The facility was deemed uninsurable and was tore down earlier in 2020 before another flooding event could have occurred. A portable replacement or permanent facility constructed in a different location is recommended by staff to mitigate against future flooding. Renewed community interest in the park began in 2019, including and particularly as a result of the two years of improvement delays due to the flooding. The City's Parks and Recreation Service hosted a community meeting in December 2019 to provide the community with information for plans to move forward with revitalization work at Dominion Park to respond to Council's October 2019 resolution. Funds available, preliminary ideas for replacement of infrastructure that would be feasible with budget, and the establishment of a community association to directly engage with staff on project development were discussed. The Parks and Recreation Service subsequently assisted with the formation of the Dominion Park Community Association. Staff plans for continued engagement with the elected group of community members for all work planned in the park. The Association, in partnership with staff, held a community workshop on January 18, 2020 with approximately 45 community members. The workshop allowed staff to collect ideas and input for consideration when developing a master plan for Dominion Park. Additional engagement through Beaconsfield and Barnhill schools and the YMCA Newcomer Connections group has taken place for student and newcomer input. The Association has asked for a new park master plan and costing to guide revitalization of Dominion Park. The Association also would like to be provided opportunity for extensive fundraising through grant applications with the provincial and federal governments, private corporations and grassroots efforts. An updated master plan would assist the Association in the leveraging of additional funds for the park. City staff will monitor private and government funding sources being sought in an effort to not interfere with funding opportunities for City priority projects. The Parks and Recreation Service, after consultation with the Community Association, plans to move forward with Procurement processes for the creation of a master plan for Dominion Park. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its resulting impact on City finances, staff resources, and ability to consult in traditional ways, plans for advancing improvements in the park have been stalled. However, staff will 292 -4- continue to work with the community association as we progress toward our "new normal". Toward Balancing Community Passion with Managing Expectations City staff is encouraged to witness and collaborate with a new community association for Dominion Park. It will be important that expectations are managed so that an updated master plan is doable and affordable. In the past, master plans developed for various City District and Regional Parks have been so expensive to implement, they have, with some exceptions, remained "on the shelf" despite best intentions by the City and the community. This approach has not benefited the community. In keeping with the City's Asset Management approach, the 2017 resolution adopted by Council described earlier in this report, and the City's need for fiscal constraint in 2021 and 2022, City staff intend to be particularly diligent with any new infrastructure proposed as part of the master planning exercise. The community management model, through partnership with the Association, will be explored to secure some operational and maintenance (O&M) responsibilities for the enhanced park. Minimal additional O&M responsibilities can be placed on Parks and Recreation Service budgets until the City's Sustainability and Fiscal Sustainability plans become more clear. For more clarity, City staff intend to approach the master plan development generally as follows: 1. Use the available $285,000 (combined insurance and capital funding), together with confirmed external funds, to develop a phase of the master plan that could be a "stand alone" park improvement to be completed in 2021 that is not contigent on future phases. The Operating and Maintenance (O&M) costs of improvements using these funds that would be the responsibility of the City would also need to remain within projected 2021 Operating Budget limits. 2. Future phases can be explored as part of the master plan but would be considered "value added" additional options with Capital and 0&M funding sources clearly defined before proceeding. In other words, let's use the funding currently available to leverage other funding opportunities available today to make concrete improvements in the park in 2021 while exploring an aspirational but realistic multi -phase master plan. City staff are requesting Common Council re -affirm its 2017 resolutions on master planning, with exception of promoting priority being given to Dominion Park ahead of or concurrent with Rockwood Park provided the community interest and the damage and insurance funding perpetuated by the 2018 and 2019 flooding. 293 SIE STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This report aligns with Council's priorities of creating a vibrant, safe city with greenspace and park investments that align with PIaySJ, and fiscal responsibility by leveraging opportunities to generate alternative revenue sources and considering the lifecycle costs of any new infrastructure. The project is also fully aligned with recommendations in PIaySJ, including (1) embracing enhanced community involvement with Dominion Park residents, and (2) focusing investment in the City's District and Regional parks, such as Dominion Park. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The strategies recommended in this report should result in opportunity for enhanced community engagement with residents, opportunity for enhanced infrastructure at Dominion Park through fundraising by the Dominion Park Community Association, and collaborative, focused decision making on phased work within the park. The strategic planning process for Dominion Park will ensure financial responsibility and generational sustainability remains a priority. It remains unclear when or if Dominion Park can become fully functioning in 2020 given the pandemic. If funding is required for temporary washroom/change facilities, it will come from a portion of the $285,000 and that portion of the funding would not be deferred to 2021. Although the Community Association is seeking other funding sources, some City funding is likely required to help offset costs of the master plan. Again, that portion of the funding used for the master plan would not be deferred to 2021. The possible need for funding toward the temporarily facilities and/or master plan funding is why the resolution reads to defer "up to" the amounts of the Capital and insurance funding. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS • Dominion Park Community Association • City of Saint John Risk Management, Procurement, and Finance Departments • Neighbouring Schools/Community Partners ATTACHMENT 2014 Conceptual Plan with approximate area of Timertop Adventures in 2017 and the facility that was flooded in 2018 and 2019 (below) Staff and Community Association Presentation to Council N Area with . y.n. -.'_ .. .. Ilk Timbertop e ' ;" • Adventures In Facility flooded wl" r•-`•v .�.n,�� �.jl+i_. ,�' -JV •�- .�t� .,{`p�-'�N'��' 'i`S � "��'-'>ti: ���e/,�f��J 4L' Pedestrian T # asm widih yy e• Playground • -�� Gofun' y 8uildn9 Bike Rocks 17*1 oY -strop Canopy Treea ing j8fi . � �� .i' i 1 W�: mcept Plan �# dominion Park Saint John, N8 xsns• vna �. I, ,\ 1 i JF �� r C Ufa COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-198 Report Date July 05, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Strategic Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Terms of Reference — Finance Committee AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. City Manager Chair of the Head Finance Committee Jodie Forgie Kevin Fudge John Collin Councillor Gary Sullivan RECOMMENDATION Be it resolved that Common Council approves the attached amended Terms of Reference for the Finance Committee. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on a review of the existing two Committees (Finance and Growth) by the City Manager it was determined that an additional Committee would be created (Public Safety) and a reallocation of members would be made. The Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Finance Committee has been updated to reflect the revised membership as well as to include the oversight of the internal audit function as part of the Finance Committee's mandate. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION July 18, 2016 it was resolved that Council: "Directs the City Manager to establish two Committees (Finance and Growth) as a 6 month pilot project, commencing September 2016" And; "Directs the City Manager to schedule a review of the Committee structure in March 2017 following six months of assessment". Finance Committee- July 22, 2021- "Finance Committee recommends the approval of the attached amended Terms of Reference to Common Council". REPORT 296 -2- Common Council established a Finance Committee and had given the Committee the administrative powers and duties set out within the Terms of Reference. The mandate of the Finance Committee includes review of financial reporting, audit, accounting systems, internal controls budget development, forecasting, fiscal management, resource allocation, open data, information management and continuous improvement for purposes of making recommendations. The Committee does not have decision making authority; recommendations are submitted to Common Council for consideration. The attached amended Terms of Reference include the following changes: 1. Pilot Protect - The word pilot has been removed from the Terms of Reference given the Finance Committee is considered no longer a pilot project. 2. Membership - Section 2a has been amended to reduce the Finance Committee membership from 6 voting members to 5 voting members. 3. Meetings — Section 3b has been amended to reference subsection 68 of the Local Governance Act which has replaced subsection 10.2 of the Municipalities Act. 4. Administrative Power and Duties -Section 4 has been amended to include the Finance Committee oversight of the internal audit function including recommendation for the approval of the internal audit plan and review of internal audit services results. The recommendation is in alignment with following a strong governance process and to continue to provide strategic leadership. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES N/A INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Input received from members of Finance Committee. ATTACHMENTS Appendix A- Terms of Reference for the City of Saint John Finance Committee 297 City of Saint John Finance Committee Terms of Reference 1. MANDATE Common Council has established a Finance Committee and has given the Committee the administrative powers and duties set out herein. The mandate of the Finance Committee includes review of financial reporting, audit, accounting systems, internal controls budget development, forecasting, fiscal management, resource allocation, open data, information management and continuous improvement for purposes of making recommendations. 2. MEMBERSHIP a. The Finance Committee shall consist of a total of 5 voting members of Council, one of which is the Mayor; b. The Chair and the Finance Committee shall be selected by the Nominating Committee; c. Where a member of the Finance Committee fails to attend three consecutive meetings of the Finance Committee without approval of the Committee, the member can be struck from the Committee membership and replaced by an appointment of Council; d. In the event that any member ceases to be a member of the Finance Committee before the expiration of their term, Council may appoint another person to be a member for the un-expired portion of the term; e. In all other respects, the rules of procedure for the Committee shall be governed by the City's Council Procedures Bylaw insofar as it may be applicable; and f. The Chairperson will act as a liaison between the Committee and City Council. 3. MEETINGS a. The Finance Committee shall meet monthly and/or as required at the call of the Committee Chair; b. Finance Committee meetings will be open to the public in accordance with the requirements of Section 68 of the Local Governance Act. The public may be excluded only in the circumstances identified therein; c. Meetings shall be set for 1 to 2 hours in duration, but can extend beyond 2 hours at the discretion of the Committee; UOU d. All decisions of the Committee shall be in the form of resolutions duly passed by a majority of its members present. The Committee shall strive to reach consensus on issues, and shall forward recommendations in the form of Finance Committee resolutions to the Council; e. Quorum for any meeting will be at least fifty (50) percent of the number of members of the Committee; f. Finance Committee meetings shall be attended by the City Manager, the Chief Financial Officer and as required a representative from the External Auditors. In the event of the Chief Financial Officer's inability to attend, a person designated by him or her for that purpose shall do so; g. The Chief Financial Officer or the City Manager may have other employees attend with them provided the Committee consents; and h. The External Auditors shall have free and confidential access to the Finance Committee. 4. ADMINISTRATIVE POWER AND DUTIES It will be the work of the Committee to review the financial information respecting the City's activities, monitor the audit process, make budget recommendations to Common Council, monitor continuous improvement initiatives, and assess the existence and adequacy of systems of corporate control and management of business risk. As a consequence of performing that work the Committee will report in writing to Council and/or provide written policy recommendations to Council with respect to: a. The independence, professional qualifications and audit scope and approach used by auditors; b. The planned activity and results of the external audit; c. Assessment of business risk and internal controls; d. The results of the annual financial audit and recommendation of approval of the financial statements; e. The planned activities and results of the internal audit services and recommendation of approval of the internal audit plan; f. The General Operating and Capital Budgets; g. The Utility Operating and Capital Budgets; h. Property Tax Rates and Utility rates; i. Proposals for tendering for External Audit services; j. Long Term Financial Plans; k. Continuous Improvement initiatives; and 1. Other matters as the Committee believes are relevant to the financial management of the City's affairs or as referred to them by Common Council. 299 5. REPORTING a. The Finance Committee will be provided with secretarial support by the Common Clerk's Office; b. The Common Clerk will ensure that as soon as practicable after each meeting, minutes of that meeting including the names and titles of all persons present and a record of all decisions reached, are prepared and distributed to all Members; and c. The Committee Chair shall report to Common Council at least annually on the activities of the Committee and a copy of the minutes of each meeting of the Committee will be made available to members of Common Council. Me COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-220 Report Date July 21, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Strategic Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. Internal Audit Services AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. City Manager Chair of the Head Finance Committee Jodie Forgie Kevin Fudge John Collin Councillor Gary Sullivan RECOMMENDATION Be it resolved that Common Council approves the attached Internal Audit Charter and approves the addition of the Internal Audit Charter to the Procedural By -Law. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to introduce the internal audit services and to seek approval of the Internal Audit Charter which will outline the purpose, authority and responsibility of the services. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION Finance Committee — July 22, 2021 — "Finance Committee recommends the approval of the Internal Audit Charter to Common Council and Finance Committee recommends the approval of the addition of the Internal Audit Charter to the Procedural By -Law." REPORT Internal audit is guided by the philosophy of adding value to improve the operations of the City. Implementing the internal audit services will support the strategic goals of the City, the ongoing projects and plans that the City is executing on and providing good governance and monitoring of internal controls. Internal auditing will commence within the City in August and be performed on a continuous basis which will be driven by a risk based audit plan, budget and resource availability. In order to ensure integrity and project discipline, the Internal Audit Charter will help identify the function of the service with particular emphasis on the scope of 301 -2- work, roles, responsibilities and authorities. All of this has been based on the International Professional Practices Framework provided by the Institute of Internal Auditors and is the highest and most recognized standard for internal auditors. The internal audit services will govern itself by adherence to the mandatory elements of this framework. The internal audit services will report administratively to the Chief Financial Officer and functionally through the Finance Committee to Common Council. Depending on the particular project being performed will impact who the stakeholders will be with the opportunity to provide benefit to diverse needs within the City. The internal audit services will have two primary roles, acting as an auditor reporting to the Finance Committee on the audit plan and acting as a trusted advisor reporting and working with executive management. The audits performed can fall into three categories: performance audits, financial audits and compliance/regulatory audits. The assessment performed by internal audit will dictate the category of the audit being performed. The consulting and advisory services will be identified and brought forward by executive management and the level of service provided will be identified by coordination with management. Internal audit will provide updates to the Finance Committee on a regular basis on status of work, at minimum the internal audit plan, the summary of audit results and follow up on recommendations will be presented. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The recommendations are in alignment with following a strong governance process, providing accountability, Financial Stewards and operational improvements. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES Both Service and Financial outcomes are expected from the implementation of internal audit services at the City, the amount of the benefit will be determined at the individual audit level. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Input received from all service areas and members of Finance Committee. ATTACHMENTS Internal Audit Charter and Presentation- Internal Audit Services 302 Qb ;a� Inman A"a M 0000 ,goo Presentation to Finance Committee July 22, 2021 303 Internal Audit SAINT JOHN • What is Internal Audit • Governance • Internal Audit Charter • Risk Based Approach • Internal Audit Plan • Next Steps • Questions 2 304 �r SAINT ►OHN The Institute of Internal Auditors "Internal auditing is an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organization's operations. It helps an organization accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes." (The Institute of Internal Audit) 305 �%-- SAINT ►OHN Internal audit will govern itself by adherence to the mandatory elements of The Institute of Internal Auditors' International Professional Practices Framework, including the Core Principles for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, the Code of Ethics, the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, and the Definition of Internal Auditing. International Professional Practices Framewa; k 0 ore Princ i p Ies fmPlomentation GuldamrV suppic MenUll fiuidancg! LAVxrv000 4 306 SAINT ►OHN • Finance Committee/Common Council • City Manager I • CFO • Other commissioners or members of executive team • Other members of management • External auditors and regulators • Citizens and L xpayers • Employees and reti rees • Potentially, the general public 5 307 SAINT ►OHN i Risk based audits within the Common Council approved Audit Plan i Detail report to senior management and summary report to Finance Committee i Management action plans with follow up from internal audit i Nature and scope agreed upon with the area of review and workplan approved by the City Manager Detail report to management of the area and summary report to senior management of the area r Full responsibility of follow up and management action performed by area of review 6 308 SAINT ►OHN Types of Audits Effectiveness—ensurethatobjectives are Perform anceAudits (also known as Val uefor met and results achieved /! Money/Operational): Evaluates operational Efficiency -make the best use ofavaiIable processes to provide assurance that resources objectives are met and whether Economy -requires minimal amountof improvements can be made based on: resources to achieve the bestvaluefor money ✓ — Financial Audits: Assesses accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of financial ✓ reporting Compliance/Regulatory Audits: Ensures adherence to established regulatory requirements and policies nternal Audits Impact Performance Audits (also known as Value for Money/Operational): �— This can be a large array of audits such as a review of key actions ' taken in order to meet strategic objectives and identify areas of opportunity or concern Financial Audits: Assessment of internal controls over financial reporting Compliance/Regulatory Audits: In the City we have instituted many policies in recent years, a review to ensure thatthe policies have been implemented in practice will help to identify where gaps still exist • Administratively to the Chief Financial Officer • Functionally through the Finance Committee to Common Council • The Chair of the Finance Committee will provide introductions and high level information to Common Council • Internal audit will have unrestricted access to, and communicate and interact directly with, the Finance Committee and Senior Management • Internal Audit will have in private meetings with Finance Committee without management present on a case by case basis and will occur if the subject matter indicates a potential fraud or misconduct that involves management or by request from Finance Committee under the same limits 9 311 lr SAINT ►OHN • The Finance Committee Role: • Recommend to Common Council to approve the internal audit charter • Recommend to Common Council to approve the risk -based internal audit plan, including as required any special tasks or projects requested by executive management • Receive communications from the senior manager on internal audit's performance relative to its plan and other matters • Receive information and decisions regarding the appointment and removal of the senior manager • Make appropriate inquiries of management and the senior manager of internal audit to determine whether there is inappropriate scope or resource limitations • The Internal Audit Charter helps guide us to ensure we adhere to all International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF) mandatory guidance. • Very important to stay in line with the Scope of Internal Audit Activities 10 312 SAINT ►OHN • Federal Government- The Internal Audit Sector of the Office of the Comptroller General of Canada and the Auditor General of Canada (Auditor General Act and the Financial Administration Act) • Provincial Government- Auditor General of New Brunswick (Auditor General Act and the Financial Administration Act) • Municipal Government- A specific internal audit model is not prescribed in the legislation • Publicly Traded Companies- SOX Compliance (52-109 Certification) 11 313 �r SAINT ►OHN "risks represent the barriers to successfully achieving objectives as well as the opportunities that may help achieve those objectives" "risks may relate to preventing bad things from happening(risk mitigation) or failing to ensure good things happen (that is, exploitingor pursuing opportunities") Urton LAnderson et al. Internal Auditing: Ass uranceand Advisory Services m Risk is the possibility of an event occurring that could impact the achievement of the City's objectives Risk -based planning enables the 0@9internal audit activity to properly align * and focus its limited resources to produce insightful, proactive, and future -focus assurance and advice �— The risk assessment process is �= performed by the internal audit team 12 314 1.-_.. SAINT ►OHN • Strategic: Risks that may prevent the achievement of business outcomes and objectives. Exposure to loss resulting from a lack of response to the changing business environment, adverse business decisions, and/or improper implementation of decisions. • Operational: Risk of loss from people, systems, internal procedures or events which have the potential for the organization to deviate from its objectives and outcomes. Day-to-day risks typically managed by mid -level management and staff. • Reputational: Risk associated with negative publicity, perceived or real, regarding Regional business practices, actions or inactions which could cause a decline in the public's trust and confidence. • Compliance: The risks associated with non-compliance with laws, legislation, regulation or policy. Non-compliance may be due to the complexity of the legislation and various requirements across multiple departments. • Financial: Risk that the organization may not have adequate cash flow to sustain financial obligations. 13 315 �r SAINT ►OHN • For the remainder of the current year we will focus on 2 audits • The audit plan will be presented to Finance Committee in August for recommendation of approval to Common Council • Focus is on highest risk and greatest opportunity to provide value with consideration of our limited resources available 14 316 SAINT ►OHN • Finance Committee recommend to Common Council to approve the Internal Audit Charter • Finance Committee recommend to Common Council the addition of the Internal Audit Charter to the Procedural By -Law 15 317 SAINT ►OHN Questions? A PESSIMIST SEES THE DIFFICULTY IN EVERY OPPORTUNITY_ AN OPTIMIST SEES THE OPPORTUNITY IN EVERY DIFFICULTY. aN TON CHUB HILL City of Saint John Internal Audit Charter July 22, 2021 1. Purpose and Mission The purpose of the City of Saint John's internal audit service is to provide independent, objective assurance and consulting services designed to add value and improve the City of Saint John's operations. The mission of interna audit is to enhance and protect organizational value by providing risk -based and objective assurance, advice, and insight. The internal audit service helps the City of Saint John accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of governance, risk management, and control processes. 2. Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing The internal audit service will govern itself by adherence to the mandatory elements of The Institute of Internal Auditors' International Professional Practices Framework, including the Core Principles for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, the Code of Ethics, the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, and the Definition of Internal Auditing. The senior manager of internal audit will report periodically to senior management and the finance committee regarding internal audit department's conformance to the Code of Ethics and the Standards. 3. Authority The senior manager of internal audit will report functionally to Council through the Finance Committee and administratively (i.e., day-to-day operations) to the Chief Financial Officer. To establish, maintain, and assure that the City of Saint John's internal audit service has sufficient authority to fulfill its duties, the Finance Committee will: a) Recommend to Common Council to approve the internal audit department's charter. b) Recommend to Common Council to approve the risk -based internal audit plan, including as appropriate any special tasks or projects requested by Management and Council with the understanding that a portion of internal audit's capacity will be to provide consulting services to management at their request. c) Receive communications from the senior manager on internal audit's performance relative to its plan and other matters. d) Receive information and decisions regarding the appointment and removal of the senior manager. e) Make appropriate inquiries of management and the senior manager of internal audit to determine whether there is inappropriate scope or resource limitations. Internal audit will have unrestricted access to, and communicate and interact directly with, the Finance Committee, including in private meetings without management present. The determination of a necessity for in private meetings will be limited to fraud investigations or other matters of misconduct that could potentially include management or by request from the Finance Committee under the same limits. It should be noted that it is not the responsibility of internal audit to prevent or detect fraud. The internal auditors' responsibility is to consider fraud when conducting their audit work in areas susceptible to fraud or misconduct. If notification is made to the internal audit team of a potential fraud or misconduct the following steps by internal audit must be made: - A determination by internal audit in relation to how reliable the source is and if internal audit observed or detected the misconduct directly. 319 - A consideration by internal audit about what additional audit procedures or validation should be conducted by internal audit. Internal audit to identify their role in the investigation and if an investigation is warranted. If the information provided to internal audit implies that the behaviour by management could contravene the City's Code of Conduct and could have the potential to be significant then the decision to bypass management to the finance committee should be made by internal audit senior manager. The Finance Committee authorizes internal audit to: f) Have full, free, and unrestricted access to all functions, records, property, and personnel pertinent to carrying out any engagement, subject to accountability for confidentiality and safeguarding of records and information. g) Allocate resources, set frequencies, select subjects, determine scopes of work, apply techniques required to accomplish audit objectives, and issue reports. h) Obtain assistance from the necessary personnel of the City of Saint John as well as other specialized services from within or outside the City of Saint John, to complete the engagement. i) Perform special engagements with management where internal audit has the appropriate skill set. 4. Independence and Objectivity The senior manager will ensure that the internal audit service remains free from all conditions that threaten the ability of internal auditors to carry out their responsibilities in an unbiased manner, including matters of audit selection, scope, procedures, frequency, timing, and report content. If the senior manager determines that independence or objectivity may be impaired in fact or appearance, the details of impairment will be disclosed to appropriate parties. Internal auditors will maintain an unbiased mental attitude that allows them to perform engagements objectively and in such a manner that they believe in their work product, that no quality compromises are made, and that they do not subordinate their judgment on audit matters to others. Internal auditors will have no direct operational responsibility or authority over any of the activities audited. Where the senior manager of internal audit has or is expected to have roles and/or responsibilities that fall outside of internal auditing, safeguards will be established to limit impairments to independence or objectivity. Internal auditors will: a) Disclose any impairment of independence or objectivity, in fact or appearance, to appropriate parties. b) Exhibit professional objectivity in gathering, evaluating, and communicating information about the activity or process being examined. c) Make balanced assessments of all available and relevant facts and circumstances. d) Take necessary precautions to avoid being unduly influenced by their own interests or by others in forming judgments. e) If necessary have the audit work performed by individuals who are independent. Internal audit will confirm to the Finance Committee, at least annually, the organizational independence of the internal audit department. Internal audit will disclose to the finance committee any interference and related implications in determining the scope of internal auditing, performing work, and/or communicating results. In case of a City emergency, to the extent that redeployment of staff may be necessary to support critical functions, internal audit staff may be required to perform otherwise non -authorized duties. 2 320 5. Scope of Internal Audit Activities The scope of internal audit activities encompasses, but is not limited to, objective examinations of evidence for the purpose of providing independent assessments to Finance Committee, management, and outside parties on the adequacy and effectiveness of governance, risk management, and control processes for the City of Saint John. All activities of the City of Saint John and their Boards, Authorities and Agencies may be subject to audit where legislatively permissible. If a decision is made to review activities of Boards, Authorities and Agencies that are not legislatively permissible a letter of confirmation must be obtained by the appropriate representative of the auditee party agreeing to the audit, specifically the scope, timing, and reporting process. Internal audit can perform a wide range of audit services for the City. In order to understand the various scopes of work internal audit will categorize the work in two broad categories as follows: Audit services- Audit services will provide an independent evaluation of key processes and controls of the City. Audit services will be comprised of risk based audits that have been included in the approved audit plan. These services will be reported in detail to senior management and a summary report will be provided to the Finance Committee. For the audits performed within this category management action plans will be created and reporting of status will be provided to senior management and the Finance Committee. Consulting and Advisory services- Special requests from management can be accommodated covering various areas affecting operations. The nature and scope of each request will be agreed upon with the area of review and the reporting will be provided to the management of the area. Reporting on status of projects will be provided to senior management. Consideration to support these services will be secondary to the audit services and made based on a City Manager approved work plan that considers the technical expertise requirements, resource and budget availability and collaboration with continuous improvement. If issues are identified that are determined to be beyond the scope of authority of the City Manager this information is to be provided to the Finance Committee. Opportunities for improving the efficiency of governance, risk management, and control processes may be identified during engagements. These opportunities will be communicated to the appropriate level of management. Internal audit assessments include evaluating whether: a) Risks relating to the achievement of the City of Saint John's strategic objectives are appropriately identified and managed. b) The actions of the City of Saint John's officers, directors, employees, and contractors are in compliance with the City of Saint John's policies, procedures, and applicable laws, regulations, and governance standards. c) The results of operations or programs are consistent with established goals and objectives. d) Operations or programs are being carried out effectively and efficiently. e) Established processes and systems enable compliance with the policies, procedures, laws, and regulations that could significantly impact the City of Saint John. f) Information and the means used to identify, measure, analyze, classify, and report such information are reliable and have integrity. g) Resources and assets are acquired economically, used efficiently, and protected adequately. The senior manager of internal audit will report periodically to senior management and the Finance Committee regarding: a) Internal audit's purpose, authority, and responsibility. b) Internal audit's plan and performance relative to its plan. c) Internal audit's conformance with The IIA's Code of Ethics and Standards, and action plans to address any significant conformance issues. 3 321 d) Significant risk exposures and control issues, including fraud risks, governance issues, and other matters requiring the attention of, or requested by, the finance committee. e) High level summary of results of audit engagements or other activities. f) Resource requirements. g) Any response to risk by management that may be unacceptable to the City of Saint John. The senior manager of internal audit also coordinates activities, where possible, and considers relying upon the work of other internal and external assurance and consulting service providers as needed. 6. Responsibility The senior manager of internal audit has the responsibility to: a) Submit, at least annually, to senior management and the Finance Committee a risk -based internal audit plan for review and recommendation for approval to Common Council. b) Communicate to senior management and the Finance Committee the impact of resource limitations on the internal audit plan. c) Review and adjust the internal audit plan, as necessary, in response to changes in the City of Saint John's business, risks, operations, programs, systems, and controls. d) Communicate to senior management and the Finance Committee any significant interim changes to the internal audit plan. e) Ensure each engagement of the internal audit plan is executed, including the establishment of objectives and scope, the assignment of appropriate and adequately supervised resources, the documentation of work programs and testing results, the understanding of the capabilities of the City to action on observations and the communication of engagement results with applicable conclusions and recommendations to appropriate parties. f) Follow up on engagement findings and corrective actions, and report periodically to senior management and the Finance Committee any corrective actions not effectively implemented. g) Ensure the principles of integrity, objectivity, confidentiality, and competency are applied and upheld. h) Ensure internal audit collectively possesses or obtains the knowledge, skills, and other competencies needed to meet the requirements of the internal audit charter. i) Ensure trends and emerging issues that could impact the City of Saint John are considered and communicated to senior management and the Finance Committee as appropriate. j) Ensure emerging trends and successful practices in internal auditing are considered. k) Establish and ensure adherence to policies and procedures designed to guide the internal audit activities. 1) Ensure adherence to the City of Saint John's relevant policies and procedures, unless such policies and procedures conflict with the internal audit charter. Any such conflicts will be resolved or otherwise communicated to senior management and the Finance Committee. m) Ensure conformance of the internal audit activities with the Standards, with the following qualifications: o If the internal audit activities is prohibited by law or regulation from conformance with certain parts of the Standards, the senior manager of internal audit will ensure appropriate disclosures and will ensure conformance with all other parts of the Standards. o If the Standards are used in conjunction with requirements issued by other authoritative bodies, the senior manager of internal audit will ensure that the internal audit department conforms with the Standards, even if the internal audit department also conforms with the more restrictive requirements of other authoritative bodies. 7. Quality Assurance and Improvement Program Internal audit will maintain a quality assurance and improvement program that covers all aspects of the activities performed. The program will include an evaluation of the internal audit's conformance with the Standards and an 4 322 evaluation of whether internal auditors apply The IIA's Code of Ethics. The program will also assess the efficiency and effectiveness of internal audit and identify opportunities for improvement. Internal audit will communicate to senior management and the finance committee on the internal audit's quality assurance and improvement program, including results of internal assessments (both ongoing and periodic) and external assessments conducted at least once every five years by a qualified, independent assessor or assessment team from outside the City of Saint John. 5 323 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-226 Report Date June 21, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Strategic Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. ABC Reporting Policy FAS-022 AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. City Manager Chair of the Finance Head Committee Tiffany Fawcett Kevin Fudge John Collin Councillor Gary Sullivan RECOMMENDATION Be it resolved that Finance Committee recommends that Common Council approve the ABC Reporting Policy FAS-022. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is recommended that Common Council approve the ABC Reporting Policy for the City of Saint John. The ABC Reporting Policy provides a standard and consistent reporting structure to all city funded agencies, boards, and commissions that operate very diverse entities. The policy will provide an opportunity for communication, promote transparency, build upon mutual understanding, demonstrate taxpayer value for money and highlight performance of public benefit all while keeping the City and ABC's focused on the Long -Term Financial Plan. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION February 8th, 2016 (M&C No. 2016-025) it was resolved that Council: "Direct the Saint John Common Clerk to schedule and implement the 2016 ABC reporting program." Finance Committee- July 22, 2021- "Finance Committee recommends that Common Council approve the ABC Reporting Policy". REPORT The concept of an ABC reporting program was adopted by Council on January 5tn, 2015, followed by a reporting framework presented in early 2016 and implemented by the common clerk. The was the foundation for roll out of the 324 -2- ABC Reporting Policy, Standard Operating Procedure, and Standardized Template. Building off the foundation, a standard approach was designed that will be managed by the respective Committees of the City and seamlessly released to Common Council for each ABC's unique key performance indicators around Growth, Finance, and Operations to be highlighted. Bi-annual reporting will be required of the standard template and yearly audited financial statements for all ABCs receiving funding of $1 up to $250,000. The same reporting structure will be followed by ABCs receiving over $250,000 of funding with the addition of an annual report and a presentation to the respective committee. ABCs not receiving funding will not be required to adopt the policy. Six ABCs affected by this policy are TD Station, Canada Games Aquatic Center, Transit Commission, Police Commission, Lord Beaverbrook Rink, and Saint John Trade and Convention Center. A two -stage review process will occur. The Chief of Staff reviews for policy compliance and completeness and respective City Committee reviews for alignment of results with the City's Long Term Financial Plan and previously approved policies such as Budget Monitoring Policy. Further to the approval of the ABC Reporting Policy by Common Council, Staff is committed to provide an orientation with the ABCs adopting the policy and follow through on any feedback received. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The recommendation is in alignment The City of Saint John's Long Term Financial Plan and Budget Monitoring Policy and will provide accountability for results and transparency. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The City of Saint John's 2021 annual operating budget to the ABC's was $36.3 million, which comprises 23.1% of the City's total operating expenditures. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Deloitte was engaged to assist with the design of a "best in class" standard reporting structure used by subsidiaries. Positive input also received from the ABC's that will be required to adopt this policy through a stakeholder engagement session held early July 2021. 325 -3- ATTACHMENTS Appendix A - ABC Reporting Policy Appendix B - Standard Operating Procedure Appendix C - Standard Reporting Template 326 Q-)- SAINT JOHN Title: ABC Reporting Policy Subject: City of Saint John ABC Reporting Policy Category: Finance and Administrative Services (Agencies, Boards, and Commissions) Policy No.: FAS -022 M&C Report No.: 2021-226 Effective Date: 01 August 2021 Next Review Date: 01 January 2026 Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Finance and Administrative Services Related Instruments: Policy Sponsors: M&C No 2016-25 Chief of Staff FAS-021 Budget Monitoring Policy Document Pages: This document consists of 3 pages. Revision History: Common Clerk's Annotation for Official Record Date of Passage of Current Framework:_ I certify that this Policy was adopted by Common Council as indicated above. Common Clerk Date Date Created: Common Council Approval Date: Contact: 31.06.21 Finance and Administrative Services 327 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. POLICY STATEMENT...................................................................................................... 2 2. PURPOSE OF ABC REPORTING POLICY........................................................................... 2 3. TIMELINES AND REPORTING STRUCTURE...................................................................... 2 4. REPORTING TEMPLATE.................................................................................................. 2 5. ABC POLICY REVIEW....................................................................................................... 3 6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES....................................................................................... 3 7. APPENDICES................................................................................................................... 3 C City of Saint John ABC Policy SAINT JOHN 1. POLICY STATEMENT 2 0 4. 1.1 This Agencies, Boards, and Commissions (ABC) policy sets out a standardized reporting template and guidelines to assist with reporting to the City of Saint John. 1.2 The City of Saint John (City) established this policy to address an opportunity of communication and to build upon the mutual understanding between ABCs and the City to promote transparency. Additional reporting may be requested for ABCs that fall outside of the reporting criteria within the standard operating procedures. 1.3 Key Performance Indicators, Financial Results, Growth, and Operations will be among the standard reporting requirements. PURPOSE OF AGENCY, BOARDS, AND COMMISSION REPORTING 2.1 Provide a standard reporting template, requirements, and consistent timeline for each ABC receiving municipal funding. 2.2 Allow Finance Committee, Growth Committee, and /or Public Safety Committee to review reporting prior to submission to Council consent agenda. 2.3 Demonstrate taxpayer value for money and performance of public benefits of all ABCs to which is supported through municipal funding and to which the City supports. TIMELINES AND REPORTING STRUCTURE 3.1 All reporting requirements and documentation is outlined in the Standard Operating Procedure and compliance is required. 3.2 Any ABC that does not receive funding from the City of Saint John is not subject to the requirements of the Standard Operating Procedure or this policy. 3.3 This policy does not exempt Council or its standing Committees from requesting additional information. STANDARD REPORTING TEMPLATE 4.1 The reporting template is a standardized form and must not be altered. 4.2 Template focuses on three key performance business indicators; Growth, Financial, and Operations. 329 2 City of Saint John ABC Policy SAINT JOHN 4.3 Chief of Staff will deem if report is filed in entirety and either rejected for resubmission or approved to go to respective Committee. 5. ABC POLICY REVIEW 5.1 The ABC Policy shall be reviewed no later than every 5 years or as required and the Grant or ABC Matrix updated yearly. 6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 6.1 Agency, Board, and Commissions shall: 6.1.1 Complete all reporting requirements and supply documents to Common Clerk. 6.2 Common Council shall: 6.2.1 Approve the ABC Policy and any amendments to the policy. 6.3 The Finance Committee, Growth Committee, and / or Public Safety Committee shall: 6.3.1 Review the reporting templates to ensure alignment with City's Financial Policies and City's Long Term Financial Plan. 6.4 The Chief of Staff shall: 6.4.1 Review the policy every five years or as required and submit required changes to the Finance Committee for recommendation to Common Council for consideration and approval. 6.4.2 Ensure compliance and mandatory requirements contained in this policy and standard operating procedure are met, which could include internal audit review of policy compliance. 7. APPENDICES Appendix A: Standard Operating Procedure Appendix B: Standard Reporting Template Appendix C: Grant or ABC Matrix 330 3 Q)­ SAINT JOHN Standard Operating Procedure City of Saint John Agencies, Boards, and Commissions (ABCs) Reporting 1.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is to detail the reporting requirements for Agencies, Boards, and Commissions (ABCs) who receive municipal funding. Each ABC will be required to complete a Standard Reporting Template (Appendix B) on a bi- annual basis and submit annual audited financial statements with approved budget. If the City provides a subsidy that exceeds $250,000, an annual report and presentation will also be required. 2.0 ANNUAL REPORT The annual report shall include: 1. Opening letter from the Chairperson providing a snapshot of the significant developments in the past year, company initiatives and a brief summary of the financials. Key elements included in this section are the challenges that the business faced, its successes and insight into the growth of the company. 2. Business Profile which includes the vision and mission statement of the ABC, identifying the board of directors, key executive staff, and highlights of the primary accomplishments and the impact of these accomplishments. 3. Management Discussion & Analysis which includes an overview of the ABC performance over the past 3 years, discussion of current year financial results, changes in full time 1 331 equivalents of workforce and 5 year forecast. A review of the governance of the organization including all significant policies that have been adopted by the Board. Key Performance Indicators, both targets, previous year results should be profiled in this section with commentary respecting performance. Significant changes in service delivery should be included in this section and any other operational information that would be beneficial for stakeholders. 4. Audited Financial Statements are the most important part of the annual report that allows the reader to determine how well the ABC has performed in past, its ability to pay off its debts and its plans for growth and alignment with approved yearly budget. The Standard Reporting Template combined with an Annual Report will promote transparency and communicate the ABCs financial and operational performance. 3.0 ADHERENCE TO CITY FINANCIAL POLICIES ABCs that receive funding from the City are expected to adopt the City's suite of financial policies. The Budget Monitoring Policy (FAS-021) is incorporated into the standardized reporting template. 4.0 DEFINITIONS Key Performance Indictators (KPI's): A measurable value that demonstrates how effectively a company is achieving its mission and if successful in reaching targets. Standardized Reporting Template: A consistent and uniform report for all ABCs to present financial and operating results. Agency, Board, and Commission: Are separate legal entities that are controlled by the City of Saint John and carry out a range of functions and services to the community. Control is the power to govern the financial and operating policies of another organization with the expected benefits or risk of loss to the City from the other organization's activities. Indicators of control include: 1. Power to unilaterally appoint or remove a majority of the members of the governing body of the organization 2. Access to the assets of the organization and has the ability to direct the ongoing use of those assets or has responsibility for the losses of the organization 3. Holds majority of the voting rights that confers power to govern the financial and operating policies of the organization 4. Has unilateral power to dissolve the organization and thereby access its assets and become responsible for its obligations F6 332 5. Provide significant input into the appointment of members of the governing body of the organization by appointing a majority of those members from a list of nominees provided by others or being otherwise involved in the removal of a significant number of members 6. Ability to direct or establish or amend the mission or mandate of the organization 7. Approve the business plans or budgets for the organization and require amendments, either on a net or line by line basis 8. Establish borrowing or investment limits or restrict the organizations investments 9. Restrict the revenue generating capacity of the organization, notably the sources of revenue 10. Establish or amend the policies that the organization uses to manage, such as those relating to accounting, personnel, compensation, collective bargaining or deployment of resources 5.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Agency. Board, and Commssion: Each agency, board, or commission shall direct its General Manager to complete the reporting template and other required documentation based on the timelines within this policy for submission to Common Clerk at the City of Saint John. 2. Common Clerk: Is responsible to receive the required documents based on timeline and compile package for Committee meetings. 3. Chief of Staff: Will review package prior to being placed on Committee Agenda. If submissions do not comply with the ABC Reporting Policy, are incomplete, or are deemed poor quality, they will be rejected with the expectation of resubmission. The Committee will be notified by the Chief of Staff of a rejected submission. 4. Finance Committee. Growth Committee. and / or Public Safetv Committee: Will review reporting documents and receive presentations and make any and all recommendations to Common Council. 5. Common Council: Will review Committee recommendations and make any and all required policy decisions. c 333 6.0 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND TIMELINE Funding Level Standard Template Completion Audited Financial Statements Annual Report with Presentation Due to Common Clerk 1. Standard Template period ending June 30th and December 3151 due within 45 days followed by a 15 day review period by the Chief of Staff. $1 $250,000 Bi-Annually Yes No 2. Audited Financial Statements for fiscal period December 315t due within 90 days. 3. No presentation or annual report required unless requested. 1. Standard Template period ending June 30th and December 315t due Over $250,000 Bi-Annually Yes Yes within 45 days followed by a 15 day review period by Chief of Staff. 2. Audited Financial Statements for fiscal period December 315t due within 90 days. 3. Annual Report for year end December 315t due within 120 days. 4. Presentation of annual report to Finance Committee for year end December 31st within 160 days. 7.0 STANDARD REPORTING TEMPLATE Standard reporting template consists of three main themes (Growth, Finance, and Operations). The template shall be completed as follows: 1. Name: Reporting Organzations Name 4 334 2. Reporting Period: Follows above Reporting Timelines (Example: Year to Date — June 30th, 2021) 3. Mission / Mandate: A brief description of the company's overall goal, products/services delivered, primary customers, and reason for existence. (why you are here, what you are doing, and where you are going). 4. Growth Strategy — These key performance indicators are measures of increasing, developing, and maturing that are standard to each agency, board and commission. Number of employees are full time employees. 5. Financial Strategy — These key performance indicators are measures of financial health and long term viability that can be aligned with the City's metrics. A healthy financial position will drive the company's mission / mandate. 6. Operations Strategy — These key performance indicators will detail service performance, risks the company is facing, and key operating performance measurements. This template shall not to be altered and must be entirely completed each reporting period. Any agency, board or commission that fails to comply shall be subject to a review by the Committee of the City's funding support. 8.0 APPROVAL RECOMMENDED TITLE SIGNATURE DATE 9.0 APPENDICES Appendix A: City of Saint John ABC Reporting Policy Appendix B: Standard Reporting Template Appendix C: Grant or ABC Matrix 5 335 Name Reporting Period Me Mission/ Mandate Growth KPI Target # Employees Current Year # Customers or Events Current Year Growth Objectives Activities Undertaken to Achieve Growth Objectives Financial KPI Target City of Saint John Annual Subsidy Current Year Actual Year -to -Date Results Wages & Benefits Goods & Services # employees Total Revenues Total Expenses Surplus/Deficit Variance Explanations KPI Actual # Employees Prior Year # Customers or Events Prior Year KPI Actual City of Saint John Annual Subsidy Prior Year Budget Year -to - Date Results Prior Year -to -Date Results Agencies, Boards, and Commissions Policy - Standard Reporting Template 337 e + f COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-215 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Utilities and Infrastructure Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Council SUBJECT: Asset Management Policy Updates AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Samir Yammine J. Brent McGovern John Collin RECOMMENDATION Finance Committee recommends that Council approve the following changes to the Asset Management Policy: • Update the City's asset management principles: o Combine "Risk" and "Climate Change" considerations as a single principle. o Adjust the "Level of Service" principle to include "Quality of Life" infrastructure and align with strategic plans. • Remove section 9 "Strategies". EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to update the Asset Management (AM) Policy to address the following: • Allow for the consideration of infrastructure investment to improve the public's quality of life and opportunities to decommission assets. • Improve decision -making and risk management processes by continuously considering the vulnerability of City assets to the effects of climate change. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION M&C 2018-68. Council approved the City of Saint John Updated Asset Management Policy Statement. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The proposed adjustments to the 2021 Utility and General Fund Capital Budgets are aligned with Council's priorities, Debt Management Policy, Financial Principles, Capital Budget Policy, Asset Management Policy, Central Peninsula Neighborhood 338 sa Plan, PlaySJ, MoveSJ, PlanSJ with a focus on asset management and leveraging every City Share dollar. REPORT Background Since 2016 the City of Saint John has made significant improvements to its asset management program, this has resulted in the following benefits and outcomes: • Reduce the General Fund Infrastructure Deficit by over $46 Million or 39% as of 2019 compared to 2016. • Improve staff's ability to make evidence -based decisions and prepare reliable financial forecasts. • Increase capacity building and knowledge among staff on asset management practices. • Improve staff's ability to secure external infrastructure funding from various level of governments and FCM. • Increase collaboration among departments on asset management practices, budget process, infrastructure investments, data sharing, etc. • Understand the current state of the City's infrastructure and the costs to maintain a defined Level of Service (LOS) and the cost implications to decrease/increase the LOS. • Reduce maintenance and operating costs. • Develop policies, strategies and plans to address challenges facing the City's infrastructure such as climate change. Analysis Until now the City has primarily used Risk and Lifecycle Cost considerations to prioritize infrastructure investments. Previous financial challenges necessitated the allocation of capital funding to essential services based primarily on Risk and Lifecycle Costs considerations. Moreover, the City's AM program was still in its infancy and had limited ability to effectively use Levels of Service in decision - making. These decisions resulted in reductions in investments to improve the community's Quality of Life and overall Levels of Service, instead Risk and Lifecycle Costs were the main drivers in decision -making. However, as our asset management program matures, and the City's infrastructure deficit improves, decision -making and the allocation of capital budgets should be based on all three key principles of asset management: 1. Risk — Do we own assets which pose a significant risk to the community? How can we mitigate these risks? 2. Lifecycle Cost — How do we manage our infrastructure at the lowest lifecycle cost while still providing an acceptable level of service? 339 am 3. Levels of Service — What assets / investments are required to provide a Level of Service that is acceptable to the community? Given the significant progress made to date advancing the City's AM program, staff are now ready to begin using Levels of Service as a key component in capital decision -making. This will improve the City's ability to develop short and long-term capital plans which mitigate Risk, minimize total Lifecycle Cost, and achieve a financially sustainable Level of Service acceptable to the community. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The recommendations will improve staff's ability to consider and justify investments in Quality -of -Life infrastructure which align with Council's priorities and strategic plans, ensuring all relevant planning documents and policies are considered when investing in infrastructure. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The City of Saint John is taking a collaborative approach to the asset management. Staff from the various departments and service areas were consulted and engaged throughout the development of the AM Policy Updates. ATTACHMENTS Asset Management Policy 340 SAINT JOHN ASSET MANAGEMENT CITY OF SAINT JOHN POLICY STATEMENT POLICY SECTION: ASSET AND ENERGY DIVISION OF UTILITIES & INFRASTRUCTURE 1. POLICY STATEMENT To confirm the City of Saint John's (City's) support for implementing asset management practices to ensure sustainable delivery of services, the City adopts the following statement. The City of Saint John shall adopt and apply recognized asset management practices in support of delivering services to its customers reflecting the vision presented in the City's Municipal Plan, PlanSJ, and related strategic plans. Specific objectives of the Asset Management (AM) policy are to: • Improve the reliability of customer service by maintaining clearly defined levels of service. • Improve the decisions related to the management of the City's assets. • Improve the transparency and accountability of community investments in the management of the City's assets. • Improve the management of the City's exposure to risks of reduced service delivery. • Facilitate the leveraging of partnerships and infrastructure funding from external sources. The City shall maintain a strategy for the implementation of asset management practices across the organization. The strategy will incorporate the following asset management principles: • Incorporating industry recognized asset management protocols. • Defining levels of service to support quality of life objectives defined in strategic plans. • Evaluating risks of asset failure, including the threat of climate change. • Utilizing lifecycle costing principles. • Incorporating continuous improvement practices. Asset management will be considered and integrated in the development of all other organizational plans, including capital and operating budgets. 2. SCOPE This policy applies to all City of Saint John activities related to all assets of the City. 341 3. LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS Province of New Brunswick Local Governance Act 4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES Refer to the Governance Structure outlined in the AM strategy (Appendix A - 3.1) for a hierarchical representation of the following roles. 4.1 City Council • Adopt AM policy. • Ensure sufficient resources are available to manage the City's assets. • Revise and update the AM policy as required. 4.2 Finance Committee • Coordinate interaction between Council and the Senior Leadership Team 4.3 Senior Leadership Team • Establish and maintain an AM strategy to implement the AM policy. • Report to Council on the progress of meeting the AM policy objectives. • Direct the AM Steering Group to develop and maintain an AM work plan to complete the AM strategies. 4.4 AM Coordination Team (part of AM Steering Group) • Prepare annual asset management plan (AMP). • Submit AMP to the provincial government to satisfy regulatory and funding requirements. • Establish and direct AM Support Groups as required. • Report to the Senior Leadership Team on the implementation of the of the AM strategy. 4.5 AM Steering Group • Establish and maintain an AM work plan to implement the AM strategy. • Coordinate AM activities across the organization. • Coordinate with AM Support Groups to develop the AM work plan. 4.6 AM Operation Teams • Execute the AM work plan. • Report to the AM Steering Group on the results of AM work plan. 342 • Coordinate with AM Support Groups to execute the AM work plan. 4.7 AM Support Groups • Provide specialized expertise to support AM Steering Group to establish and maintain the AM work plan. • Provide specialized expertise to support the AM Operation Teams to execute the AM work plan. S. MONITOR AND REVIEW This Policy will be reviewed every 3 years, and as determined by the City Manager. 6. IMPLEMENTATION This Policy will be implemented under the authority of the City Manager by the Asset & Energy Management Division of Finance and Administrative Services. 7. AUTHORIZATION This Policy shall be authorized by the City Manager pursuant to a resolution of Common Council approving the associated "Asset Management" Policy Statement. 8. RESOURCES The City recognizes that a successful asset management program depends upon the employees of the City of Saint John along with Common Council. 9. GLOSSARY None. 10. INQUIRIES Inquiries regarding this Policy can be addressed to the City of Saint John's Asset & Energy Management Infrastructure & Utilities. 11. APPENDICES Appendix A - City of Saint John Asset Management Strategy 343 Q�T= �i -1 COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-221 Report Date July 20, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Utilities and Infrastructure Services His Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Council SUBJECT: Utility and General Fund — 2021 Capital Programs Revision 111 OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Michael Baker J. Brent McGovern I John Collin RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council: • Approve revision III of the 2021 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Budget in the amount of $12,036,000 (gross) with contributions from other sources of $5,790,000 yielding a net capital budget in the amount of $6,246,000 to be funded by pay as you go (net) as set in Appendix A, and • Approve revision III of the 2021 General Fund Capital Budget in the amount of $45,309,783 (gross) with contributions from other sources of $29,442,183, yielding a net Capital budget in the amount of $15,867,600 to be funded by debt issue (net) as set in Appendix B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to further revise the 2021 Utility Fund and General Fund Capital budgets as several priority projects (Dever Road Intermodal Terminal in West Saint John, Utility SCADA Upgrades, and an emergency renewal of a failed sewer) have come to light that require City funding to be reallocated to allow each project to proceed in a timely fashion. Utility Fund The overall revised 2021 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Budget envelope is proposed to decrease by $572,934 with the decrease coming from Other Share funding primarily because it is recommended this work be done next year. The City Share for the revised 2021 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital 344 Budget remains unchanged from Council's previous Utility Fund Capital Program approvals in February 2021 and May 2021. l;anaral Flinn The overall revised 2021 General Fund Capital Budget envelope (City and Other Share) remains unchanged from Council's previous General Fund Capital Program approvals in February 2021 and May 2021. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION M&C 2021-135 (May 3, 2021) — Utility and General Fund — 2021 Capital Programs Revision III approved. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The proposed adjustments to the 2021 Utility and General Fund Capital Budgets are aligned with Council's priorities, Debt Management Policy, Financial Principles, Capital Budget Policy, Asset Management Policy, Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan, PlaySJ, MoveSJ, PlanSJ with a focus on asset management and leveraging every City share dollar. REPORT The following priority projects have recently come to light that require the relocation of Capital funding for them to proceed in a timely manner. As a result of these new projects, adjustments need to be made to the 2021 Capital Programs. Dever Road Intermodal Terminal As detailed to Common Council at the June 28, 2021, Council meeting there is a substantial amount of City infrastructure (corrugated steel combined sewer) currently located within the Dever Road Intermodal Terminal upgrade site. As a result of this upgrade project to fully separate the storm and sanitary flows that currently run through the proposed site two new separated piped systems will need to be installed. As detailed in M&C 2021-186 and at the June 28, 2021, Council meeting, under the proposed agreement with the developer of the Dever Road Intermodal Terminal upgrade site, the city would contribute the costs to cover the purchase of materials and infrastructure inspection services costs associated solely with the separation of the existing City infrastructure. No reallocated funds would be spent from this budget until third reading for the Dever Road Intermodal Terminal upgrade project is approved by Council. As a result of this proposed agreement, funds within the Utility and General Fund budgets need to be reallocated to fund the sewer separation work. 345 QDS'am2T lam SCADA Upgrades Several upgrades need to be made to Saint John Water's (SJW) existing SCADA communication network to further enhance protection. These upgrades include the segmentation of the SCADA network. As a result of the required upgrades, funds within the Utility Fund budget need to be reallocated to fund this project. Emergency Sewer Replacement SJW's existing 300mm sewer located off Visart Street within one of the Centennial School's driveways has substantial structural defects which have resulted in several sink holes forming. Recently the area was barricaded off to ensure the public's safety, however, the sewer needs to be replaced. Lining the existing sewer was investigated by City staff but was determined to not be a viable option. Since there is approximately 110 m of existing sewer that needs to be replaced, the work needed to be designed and tendered. The design is currently in the process of being completed with the expectation of tendering the work shortly after a Council approval of the Capital Budget modifications. As a result of the required emergency renewal, funds within the Utility and General Fund budgets need to be reallocated to fund this project. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The revised Utility and General Fund programs are provided in Appendix A & B attached. Items highlighted in blue within the programs illustrate the projects changed as part of revision III to the Capital Programs. Utility Fund Program Changes Due to the above additional projects that require Utility Fund funding, the following changes are proposed to the Utility program. 1) Deletion of the SJW Roof Replacement project from the 2021 Utility Fund Program and relict the project in the 2022 program. The SJW Roof Replacement project is currently funded 80% from the COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Funding program. Delaying this work is being done because roofing costs have increased due to the increased construction activity and the city is better served doing this work next year. The city has until December 31St, 2023, to complete this work. 346 Qm,'um2T lom Project Description Other Share Current Utility Share Recommended Utility Share Revision III Roof replacements at several Saint John Water (SJW) facilities including the Spruce Various Lake Pump Station, Millidgeville SJW Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF), $522,934.00 $175,000.00 $0.00 Water Facilities Lancaster Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) and Eastern Wastewater Treatment Facility (EWWTF). 2) Deletion of the development of a Solid Waste Diversion Action Plan project from the 2021 Utility Fund Program and relist the project in the 2022 program. This can be done as the City was not successful in obtaining the noted funding for this project under the Environmental Trust Fund (ETF) program. As a result of not obtaining the ETF funding, this project will not be undertaken in 2021. Other Current Utility Recommended Project Description Share Share Utility Share Revision III Wastewater Develop a Solid Waste Diversion Action Treatment Plan to detail the preferred septage Plant Solid receiving system to be installed at one of $50,000.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 Waste the City's wastewater treatment facilities. Diversion Subject to successful funding under the Action Plan Environmental Trust Fund. 3) Deletion of the Lakewood Heights mitigation measures project from the 2021 Utility Fund Program as detailed investigations (i.e., video, smoke testing, flow monitoring, etc.) of the existing sanitary sewer system are currently underway. Recommended Capital Improvements projects will be identified once the current work is completed. Current Utility Recommended Project Description Other Share Share Utility Share Revision III Lakewood Mitigation measures to reduce inflow / Heights infiltration in the sanitary sewer system, $250,000.00 $0.00 Sanitary including construction management System services. 4) Reallocation of $90,000 of the originally budgeted $150,000 from the Removal of cross -connections on Potable Water and Raw Water Transmission mains project to fund the Utility Share of proposed new 347 projects. This can be done as there was savings available for this project from the tendering process. Project Description Other Share Utility Share Recommended Utility Share Revision III Removal of two cross - Removal cross connections on Potable Water connections on and Raw Water Transmission Potable Water and $150,000 $60,000 mains, including construction Raw Water management services (Ocean Transmission mains Westway / Route 7 Overpass). The total for the deletions and reallocation is $525,000 of Utility Share funding. The following are the recommended additions to the Utility Fund Capital Program to fund the various priority projects. The total additions to the Utility Fund Capital Program are $525,000. Recommended Project Description Other Share Utility Share Revision III Emergency renewal of approximately 110m of Visart Street existing concrete sewer that has failed in various $200,000.00 locations causing sinkholes, including design and construction management services. Material costs to install a new CSO chamber and Dever Road renew approximately 160 m of 200mm sanitary $125,000.00 sewer including construction management services. SCADA Upgrading SJW's existing SCADA network which will $200,000.00 Upgrades include segmenting the current network. General Fund Program Changes Due to the above additional priority projects that require General Fund funding, the following changes are proposed to the 2021 General program. 1) Deletion of the Charlotte Street (Trinity Church to Princess Street) Reconstruction Project and relist the project in the 2022 program. This project requires the city to work closely with Saint John Energy (SJE) to relocate the above ground electrical wiring to below ground infrastructure via duct banks. Completing this work in 2022 will allow necessary time for City and SJE staff to work together to complete the design work. Based on the current time of year it is not expected that any construction would be completed in 2021 if the project went out to tender in August 2021. In addition, as Charlotte Street is a key corridor within the Central Peninsula and will have multiple blocks reconstructed over the next 5 years, moving the reconstruction work until 2022 will provide staff the opportunity to bring to Council for review the cross sections for Charlotte Street from Union Street to Lower Cove Loop. Project Description Other Share Current City Share Recommended General Fund Share Revision III Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, Charlotte landscaping, and paving), including design Street (Trinity and construction management services. Saint Church to John Energy proposed to be participating in $360,000 $0.00 Princess the project by providing their services, Street) estimated at $200,000, to convert the overhead high voltage lines to underground. Asphalt pavements $41,000 / 0.27 LK. The following are the required priority project additions to the General Fund Capital Program. Project Description Other Share Recommended General Fund Share Revision III Install approx. SOm of new storm sewer to separate combined sewer flows during the Visart Street emergency renewal of the failed existing $220,000 concrete sewer, including design and construction management services. Material costs to install approximately 220m of Dever Road 900 mm storm sewer including construction $140,000.00 management services. Overall deletions and additions noted above amount to no change to the total amount of City funding previously approved by Council in February and May of 2021. These changes will allow three critical projects to promptly proceed. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The enclosed revised capital budget changes were coordinated and received input from: Strategic Services (i.e., Finance), all divisions within Utility and Infrastructure Services and Transportation and Public Works. ATTACHMENTS Appendix — A — 2021 W&S Utility Fund Capital Program Revision III Appendix — B — 2021 General Fund Capital Program Revision III Presentation 349 t Utility & General Fund - 2021 Capital Programs Revision III �._-., Council Meeting July 26, 2021 SAINT JOHN 350 • 2021 Utility & General Fund Capital Programs Revision III Primary Reason • Three priority projects require funding to be completed in a timely fashion: 1. Dever Road Intermodal Terminal in West Saint John 2. Utility SCADA Upgrades 3. Renewal of a failed sewer SAINT JOHN • Dever Road Intermodal Terminal • As detailed at the June 28, 2021 Council meeting there is a substantial amount of City infrastructure (corrugated steel combined sewer) that is at the end of the asset life and it is located within the planned redevelopment site. To fully separate the storm and sanitary flows, two new separated piped systems will need to be installed. • SCADA Upgrades • Several upgrades need to be made to SJW's existing SCADA communication network to provide further protection. These upgrades include the segmentation of the SCADA network. • Emergency Sewer Replacement • SJW's existing sewer located off Visart Street within one of the Centennial School's driveways has substantial structural defects which have resulted in several sink holes forming. The existing sewer needs to be replaced in 2021. 352 SAINT JOHN • Revised 2021 Capital budget $12,036,000 • Utility Funding for Capital budget — Capital from Operating Remains Unchanged at $6,246,000 • Reduction of funding from other sources - Now at $5,790,000 (Previously at $6,362,934) • A decrease of $572,934 from Other Share NeWA Nouveau • Brunswik $50,000 due to SJ W not obtaining Your Environmental Trust Fund at Work Environmental Trust Fund money • $522,934 due to SJW delaying the COVID-19 funded roof replacement project to 2022 to bring greater value 353 P SAINT JOHN is Revision III of the General Fund Capital Budget-$45,309,783 • City Share remains unchanged at $15,867,600 (City debt issuance) • City Share remains unchanged at $29,442,183 (other sources) • Postpone to 2022 the Charlotte Street (Trinity Church to Princess Street) Reconstruction project and reallocate the City Share Funding. 4, w Potential Auto Port 354 lr_ . SAINT JOHN It is recommended that Council: • Approve Revision III of the 2021 Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Budget in the amount of $12,036,000 (gross) with contributions from other sources of $5,790,000 yielding a net capital budget in the amount of $6,246,000 to be funded by pay as you go (net) as set in Appendix A, and • Approve Revision III of the 2021 General Fund Capital Budget in the amount of $45,309,783 (gross) with contributions from other sources of $29,442,183, yielding a net Capital budget in the amount of $15,867,600 to be funded by debt issue (net) as set in Appendix B. 355 P SAINT JOHN Project(s) adjusted as a result of changes to the COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Funding Program and the Community Development Funding Program. Fundy Quay Project Description Other Share City Share Fundy Quay Soil Remediation - Develop and implement strategy to effectively manage $ 2,486,000.00 existing soil contamination on the site. Infill - Re -grading the site while incorporating the seawall refurbishment to Fundy Quay facilitate future development. Project to be partially funded by the Province $ 625,000.00 $ 1,875,000.00 of New Brunswick. Harbour Passage & Pedway - Obtaining public access to waterfront property Fundy Quay which will be key to improving active transportation in the uptown area. $ 7,996,000.00 $ 1,999,000.00 Project to be partially funded by the COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Fund Loyalist Plaza - Re -development of the highly utilized public space which will Fundy Quay allow for the integration of the plaza design with the design of the surrounding $ 2,452,750.00 $ 222,250.00 development. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding and by the Province of New Brunswick. Fundy Quay Additional Fundy Quay funding for Soil Remediation, Infill, Harbour Passage & $ 1,635,000.00 $ 825,000.00 Pedway and Loyalist Plaza. - Pay as you go funding for the Other Share Total $ 12,708,750.00 $ 7,407,250.00 Corporate Performance Information Technology IT Infrastructure Replacement / Upgrades / ERP System $ 835,000.00 $ 1,500,000.00 Total $ 835,000.00 $ 1,500,000.00 Finance and Administration Services Project Description Other Share City Share Fleet Fleet Replacement $ 2,065,000.00 Total $ 2,065,000.00 $ - Saint John Parking Parking Replacement of 17 Parking Meters $ 113,000.00 Parking Bus Shelter - Market Square $ 10,000.00 Total $ - $ 123,000.00 Asset and Facility Management Project Description Other Share City Share Fundy Quay Fundy Quay - Seawall Refurbishment - Project to be partially funded by the $ 3,240,000.00 Province of New Brunswick. Fundy Quay Fundy Quay - Seawall Refurbishment - Project to be partially funded under $ 2,180,000.00 $ 1,530,000.00 DMAF. Municipal Buildings Deep Municipal Energy Retrofit. Subject to Federal Funding. $ 553,333.00 $ 575,000.00 Market Square District Energy Phase 1. Subject to Federal Funding. $ 488,000.00 $ 732,000.00 Lord Beaverbrook Main Electrical Services Upgrade $ 100,000.00 Replacement of the existing roofs (i.e. plywood, shingles and insulation) at fire Municipal Buildings stations #5 & #7. Subject to successful funding under the COVID-19 Resilience $ 200,000.00 $ 240,500.00 Infrastructure Fund Charles Gorman Arena /Stewart Replacement of an existing chiller at the Charles Gorman Arena as well as Hurley Arena/ Lord Beaverbrook replacing three existing condensers at the Stewart Hurley Arena, Charles $ 95,000.00 $ 95,000.00 Gorman Arena and Lord Beaverbrook Arena. Subject to successful funding Arena under the Community Development Fund. Replacing the existing dasher boards and glass with new boards and glass that TD Station meet QMJHL Requirements. Subject to successful funding under the $ 225,000.00 $ 225,000.00 Community Development Fund. Replacement of the existing metal siding that is in poor condition as well as replacing the existing facility sign at the Municipal Operations Complex. Work Municipal Buildings also includes the replacement of several leaking windows. (175 Rothesay $ 418,600.00 $ 105,000.00 Avenue). Subject to successful funding under the COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Fund Various Municipal & Water Complete preliminary investigation into setting up the City's Asset $ 50,000.00 Facilities Management Information System (AMIS). Repairs to the existing building foundation and completing necessary water Carleton Community Centre proofing as Community Center has a foundation leak. Subject to successful $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 funding under the Community Development Fund. Replacement of an existing air handling unit at the Municipal Operations Municipal Buildings building (175 Rothesay Avenue) including the control system. Subject to $ 84,000.00 $ 21,000.00 successful funding under the COVID-19 ResilienStfrastructure Fund St Patrick Street Pedway - Roof repair due to existing leak including the Municipal Buildings replacement of the existing air handling unit. Subject to successful funding $ 24,000.00 $ 6,000.00 under the COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Fund Municipal Buildings City Market Pedway HVAC Upgrade. Subject to successful funding under the $ 24,000.00 $ 6,000.00 COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Fund Renovation of upper City Market Lobby Entrance as well as Elevator Entrance City Market to City Market Tower. Subject to successful funding under the Community $ 37,500.00 $ 37,500.00 Development Fund. TD Station Heat Pump Replacement $ 50,000.00 Trade and Convention Center Replacement Equipment (Banquet Equipment, Tables & Walk-in Fridge). $ 80,000.00 Trade and Convention Center Replace Flooring and Staging Equipment. $ 30,000.00 Trade and Convention Center Security Upgrades. $ 15,000.00 Total $ 7,644,433.00 $ 3,973,000.00 Parks & Recreation Services Project Description Other Share City Share Supply and installation of a new score clock at the Shamrock Park artificial turf field as well as other improvements to the Shamrock Park Facility. Facility Renewal Fund Replacement of an existing wooden structure at the City's Market Place West $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 Playground. The current structure has reached the end of its useful life. Subject to successful funding under the Community Development Fund. Total $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 Storm Water Project Description Other Share City Share Install approx. 50 m of new storm sewer in order to separate combined sewer Visart Street flows during the emergency renewal of the failed existing concrete sewer, $ 220,000.00 including design and construction management services. Renew approx. 85 m of new 375mm storm sewer for separation, remove two Catherwood Street (Ready Street CB's on Greystone Terrace, and redirect two CB's at the top of Catherwood $ 134,350.00 to Greystone Terrace) Street into the storm sewer, including design and construction management services. Germain Street (St James Street to Renew 125 m of 600mm storm sewer for separation, including design and Lower Cove Loop) construction management services. Project to be partially funded under $ 115,000.00 $ 40,000.00 Bilateral Funding. Water Street Outfall Install approx. 70 m of new 1800mm storm sewer and outfall for separation, $ 840,000.00 including design and construction management services. Wentworth Street (Elliott Row to Install approx. 190 m of 375mm storm sewer for separation , including design Orange Street) and construction management services. Project to be partially funded under $ 140,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Bilateral Funding. Broadview Avenue (Charlotte Install approx.. 275 m of 375 mm and 450mm storm sewer for separation, Street to Carmarthen Street) including design and construction management services. Project to be $ 200,000.00 $ 75,000.00 partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Rodney Street (Market Place to Install approx. 150m of new 600mm storm sewer and 135m of 450mm storm Watson Street) sewer for separation, including design and construction management services. $ 340,000.00 Project to be funded under the G.T.F. St James Street (Prince William Install 113 m of 300mm storm sewer for separation, including design and Street to Germain Street) construction management services. Project to be partially funded under $ 70,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Bilateral Funding. Waterloo Street (Haymarket Install approx. 400m of new 300mm and 375mm storm sewer for separation, Square to Castle Street) including design and construction management services. Project to be $ 360,000.00 $ 135,000.00 partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Princess Street (Water Street to Install approx. 46 m of 300mm and 56m of 375mm storm sewer for separation, Germain Street) including design and construction management services. Project to be funded $ 160,000.00 under G.T.F. Princess Street (Wentworth Street Install approx. 255 of new 300mm storm sewer for separation, including design to Crown Street) and construction management services. Project to be partially funded under $ 205,000.00 $ 75,000.00 Bilateral Funding. Total $ 1,590,000.00 $ 1,594,350.00 Transportation Project Description Other Share City Share Dever Road Material costs to install approximately 220m of 900mm storm sewer including $ 140,000.00 construction management services. Engineering Investigation and Funding for engineering investigations and design for various projects under $ 300,000.00 Design the Storm and Transportation Categories. Asphalt Roadway Resurfacing and Renewal of asphalt roadway and concrete curb and sidewalk including Curb & Sidewalk Renewal - drainage control and landscaping in conjunction with the annual asphalt $ 434,000.00 Neighbourhoods roadway maintenance and rehabilitation program. Pay as you go. 357 Asphalt Roadway Resurfacing and Renewal of asphalt roadway and concrete curb and sidewalk including Curb &Sidewalk Renewal - drainage control and landscaping in conjunction with the annual asphalt $ 1,500,000.00 Neighbourhoods roadway maintenance and rehabilitation program. Project to be funded under G. T. F. Germain Street (St James Street to Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $43,000 / $ 130,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Lower Cove Loop) 0.28LK. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Wentworth Street (Elliott Row to Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $156,000 / $ 455,000.00 $ 170,000.00 Orange Street) 1.05LK. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including Broadview Avenue (Charlotte design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $97,000 / $ 360,000.00 $ 130,000.00 Street to Carmarthen Street) 0.67LK. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Rodney Street (Market Place to Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $140,000 / $ 550,000.00 Watson Street) 0.94LK. Project to be funded under the G.T.F. St James Street (Prince William Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $42,000 / $ 160,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Street to Germain Street) 0.28LK. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Waterloo Street (Haymarket Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $150,000 / $ 610,000.00 $ 225,000.00 Square to Castle Street) 0.98LK. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Princess Street (Wentworth Street Street reconstruction (curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving), including design and construction management services. Asphalt pavements $108,000 / $ 325,000.00 $ 120,000.00 to Crown Street) 0.72LK. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Total $ 4,524,000.00 $ 1,195,000.00 Revised 2021 General Fund Capital Program Summary Category Other Share ($) City Share ($) Total ($) Fundy Quay / Seawall Refurbishment $ 358 12,708,750.00 $ 7,407,250.00 $ 20,116,000.00 Corporate Performance $ 835,000.00 $ 1,500,000.00 $ 2,335,000.00 Finance and Administration Services $ 2,065,000.00 $ - $ 2,065,000.00 Saint John Parking $ - $ 123,000.00 $ 123,000.00 Asset and Facility Management $ 7,644,433.00 $ 3,973,000.00 $ 11,617,433.00 Parks & Recreation Services $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 150,000.00 Urban Storm Water $ 1,590,000.00 $ 1,594,350.00 $ 3,184,350.00 Transportation $ 4,524,000.00 $ 1,195,000.00 $ 5,719,000.00 Total ($) $ 29,442,183.00 $ 15,867,600.00 $ 45,309,783.00 Summary of Capital Costs (City Share) ■ Fundy Quay / Seawall Refurbishment Corporate Performance Finance and Administration Services Saint John Parking Asset and Facility Management Parks & Recreation Services ■ Urban Storm Water ■ Transportation 359 Project(s) adjusted or added as a result of Revision III to the Capital Programs Industrial Water Renewal - West Project Description Other Share Utility Share Road construction and replacement of three large culverts, including Coleson Cove Raw Water Transmission design and construction management services. Phase 1 of 2. Design $ 525,000.00 line services of Phase 2 for road construction and replacement of three large culverts. Upgrade / reconstruction - Appropriate pump sizing, electrical Musquash Water Pump Station upgrades, flood proofing, etc. Including design and construction $ 695,000.00 $ 870,000.00 management services. Phase B. Project to be partially funded under DMAF . Total $ 695,000.00 $ 1,395,000.00 Industrial Water Renewal - East Project Description Other Share Utility Share Design services to investigate connecting IP to the East Industrial Industrial Water Renewal - East piped system to reduce the wasting of water and general loss of $ 50,000.00 water in the brook system. Total $ - $ 50,000.00 Infrastructure Renewal - Sanitary Project Description Other Share Utility Share Emergency renewal of approximately 110 m of exisiting concrete Visart Street sewer that has failed in various locations causing sinkholes, including $ 200,000.00 design and construction management services. Greenhead Road SLS C Supplemental funding for the renewal of Greenhead Road SLS C. $ 90,000.00 Develop a strategy to mitigate the effects of coastal flooding on the Flood Risk Mitigation Strategy for City's infrastructure in the Lower Cove Loop area (Lower Cove SLS $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Lower Cove Loop and associated sewer collection system infrastructure). Subject to successful funding under the National Disaster Mitigation Program. Material costs to install a new CSO chamber and renew Dever Road approximately 160 m of 200mm sanitary sewer including $ 125,000.00 construction management services. Renew approx. 55 m of 300mm concrete sanitary sewer to direct Catherwood Street (Greystone Terrace) flows into an existing sanitary sewer, including design and $ 125,000.00 construction management services. Renew 100 m of 375mm TC sanitary sewer (Condition Grade of 3 Germain Street (St James Street to Lower with an in service year of 1884), including design and construction $ 110,000.00 $ 40,000.00 Cove Loop) management services. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Lower Cove Loop (Charlotte Street to Install 150 m of 525mm concrete sanitary sewer including design Germain Street) and construction management services. Project to be partially $ 255,000.00 $ 95,000.00 funded under Bilateral Funding. Renew 180 m of 300mm T.0 sanitary sewer (Condition Grade of 4 Wentworth Street (Elliott Row to Orange with a year in service of 1867), including design and construction $ 175,000.00 $ 65,000.00 Street) management services. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. SCADA Upgrades Upgrading SJW's existing SCADA network which will include $ 200,000.00 segmenting the current network. Wastewater Pumping (Prospect Street Pumping station, land acquisition, and required piping to direct flows to sewer on Main Street West for treatment at the Lancaster $ - $ 575,000.00 West at Walnut Street Lagoon, including construction management services. Broadview Avenue (Charlotte Street to Renew 275 m of 375 T.0 sanitary sewer (Condition Grade 4), Carmarthen Street) including design and construction management services. Project to $ 245,000.00 $ 90,000.00 be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. 360 Construct three headers, one for each cell for the blower system at Lancaster Lagoon the Lancaster Lagoon complete with road way construction. $ 750,000.00 Including design and construction management services. WWPS Woodlawn Park (1335 Red Head Design for the replacement of wastewater pumping stations that are at the end of their asset life to provide for reliable collection of $ 100,000.00 Road) wastewater. Rodney Street (Market Place to Watson Renewal of approx. 290 m of T.C, Brick and Concrete sanitary sewer (Condition Grade 3), including design and construction management $ 410,000.00 Street) services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Renew 111 m of 250mm and 375mm T.0 sanitary sewer (Condition St James Street (Prince William Street to Grade of 3.5 with an in service year of 1876), including design and $ 100,000.00 $ 36,000.00 Germain Street) construction management services. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Structural Lining Structurally line and point repairs to sanitary sewers, including $ 225,000.00 design and construction management services. Renew approx. 330 m of 300mm and 375mm T.0 sanitary sewer Waterloo Street (Haymarket Square to (Condition Grade of 5 with an in service year of 1869), including $ 310,000.00 $ 115,000.00 Castle Street design and construction management services. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Princess Street (Water Street to Germain Install approx. 100m of 300mm sanitary sewer for separation, including design and construction management services. Project to $ 205,000.00 Street) be funded under G.T.F . Renew approx. 250m of 225mm and 300mm TC sanitary sewer Princess Street (Wentworth Street to (Condition Grade of 5 with an in service year of 1893), with new 200mm and 300mm sanitary sewer, including design and $ 265,000.00 $ 95,000.00 Crown Street) construction management services. Project to be partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Reconstruction lift station above flood level to provide for reliable WWPS Beach Crescent (11 Beach collection of wastewater, including design and construction $ 340,000.00 $ 510,000.00 Crescent) management services. Phase A. Project to be partially funded under DMAF. Totall $ 2,460,000.00 $ 3,481,000.00 Infrastructure Renewal - Water Project Description Other Share Utility Share Engineering Investigation and Design Funding for engineering investigations and design for various $ 300,000.00 projects under the Water and Sanitary Categories. Westmorland Road & Bayside Drive Flow Installation of Electro-Magnetic flow meters east of PRV #104B and Meters /Chamber #33 Flow Limiting at PRV #10 including construction management. Supply and $ 180,000.00 Valves installation of flow limiting valves on the east side supply lines to Mill Road Vault, including construction management. Fleet Replacement Fleet Replacement for Saint John Water. Project to be funded under $ 485,000.00 Fleet Reserve. Removal of cross -connections on Potable Removal of two cross -connections on Potable Water and Raw Water Water and Raw Water Transmission Transmission mains, including construction management services $ 60,000.00 mains (Ocean Westway / Route 7 Overpass). Germain Street (St James Street to Lower Renew 100 m of 200mm watermain (1955), including design and Cove Loop) construction management services. Project to be partially funded $ 90,000.00 $ 35,000.00 under Bilateral Funding. Lower Cove Loop (Charlotte Street to Install 150 m of 200mm watermain, including design and Germain Street) construction management services. Project to be partially funded $ 135,000.00 $ 50,000.00 under Bilateral Funding. Wentworth Street (Elliott Row to Orange Renew 350 m of 300mm Cl watermain (1931), including design and Street) construction management services. Project to be partially funded $ 445,000.00 $ 165,000.00 under Bilateral Funding. Broadview Avenue (Charlotte Street to Renew 275 m of 150 mm Cl watermain (1917), including design and Carmarthen Street) construction management services. Project to be partially funded $ 225,000.00 $ 85,000.00 under Bilateral Funding. Rodney Street (Market Place to Watson Renewal of approx. 295 m of 300mm Cl watermain, including design Street) and construction management services. Project to be funded under $ 345,000.00 G. T. F. 361 St James Street (Prince William to Renew 110 m of 250mm Cl watermain (1876), including design and construction management services. Project to be partially funded $ 125,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Germain Street) under Bilateral Funding. Waterloo Street (Haymarket Square to Renew approx. 330 m of 300mm Cl watermain(1856), including design and construction management services. Project to be $ 450,000.00 $ 275,000.00 Castle Street) partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Princess Street (Wentworth Street to Renew approx. 275m of 250mm Cl (1924) watermain, including design and construction management services. Project to be $ 335,000.00 $ 125,000.00 Crown Street) partially funded under Bilateral Funding. Totall $ 2,635,000.00 $ 1,320,000.00 Revised 2021 W&S Utility Fund Capital Program Summary Category Other Share () City Share $ Total ($) Industrial Water Renewal - West $ 695,000.00 $ 1,395,000.00 $ 2,090,000.00 Industrial Water Renewal - East $ - $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Infrastructure Renewal - Sanitary $ 2,460,000.00 $ 3,481,000.00 $ 5,941,000.00 Infrastructure Renewal -Water $ 2,635,000.00 $ 1,320,000.00 $ 3,955,000.00 Total ($) $ 5,790,000.00 $ 6,246,000.00 $ 12,036,000.00 Summary of Capital Costs (Utility Share) 56% ■ Industrial Water Renewal - West ■ Industrial Water Renewal - East Infrastructure Renewal - Sanitary Infrastructure Renewal -Water 362 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2021-219 Report Date July 06, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Strategic Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. 2022 Gas Tax Funds — Quality of Life Investments AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Chair of Finance Committee Craig Lavigne Kevin Fudge John Collin Councillor Gary Sullivan It is recommended that Common Council receive and file this report and presentation received from the Finance Committee. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 25, 2021, the federal government proposed a one-time investment of $2.2 billion that would help address infrastructure priorities in municipalities and First Nations communities. The funds would flow through the federal Gas Tax Fund, a long-term, indexed source of funding for over 3,600 communities across the country. This would double the federal government's regular funding for municipalities in 2020-21 and it would provide much needed funding for communities of all sizes to help reduce the risk of infrastructure projects being delayed or cancelled. The federal Gas Tax Fund includes 18 different project categories, including transit, water and wastewater, sport infrastructure, and roads. Communities can use the funds immediately for priority projects, bank them for later use, pool the dollars with other communities for shared infrastructure projects, or use them to finance major infrastructure expenditures. The City of Saint John is set to receive an estimated amount of $4,656,597 as part of this one-time investment. This report will provide an overview of capital projects that are being proposed as part of this one-time funding for the 2022 General Fund Capital Budget. 363 -2- PREVIOUS RESOLUTION Finance Committee —July 22, 2021 - "It is recommended that the Finance Committee endorse the Quality of Life criteria established for the proposed investments and to receive and file this report as presented and forward the report and presentation to the next meeting of Common Council as a receive and file" REPORT The City of Saint John is set to receive an estimated amount of $4,656,597 as part of this one-time investment from the Federal Government to address infrastructure needs of Municipalities and First Nations. This funding will flow through the Gas Tax program and will be subject to the same regulations under this program. The program allows the flexibility to make strategic investments across 18 different project categories. • public transit • wastewater infrastructure • drinking water • solid waste management • community energy systems • local roads and bridges • capacity building • highways • local and regional airports • short -line rail • short -sea shipping • disaster mitigation • broadband and connectivity • brownfield redevelopment • culture • tourism • sport • recreation Over the past several years the City has focused on putting the right financial policies in place, dealing with structural deficits and infrastructure deficits. Two of the key polices that guide the capital investments are the Asset Management Policy and Capital Budget Policy. The Capital Budget Policy sets out the prioritization of capital projects. 1. Mandatory 2. Risk of Failure 3. Priority of Council 364 am 4. Positive Financial Impact 5. Discretionary As well as the policy sets limits on the on how much Capital is renewal (85%) and new investments (15%). The asset management policy and plan has improved information on the City's assets, condition, risk of failure, impacts of failure and prioritizing of assets. One key item that has been updated as part of the Asset Management Policy is adding quality of life to the criteria. Capital budgets over the past several years, based on how the policies are applied, often pushes quality of life assets such as parks, playgrounds, sports fields, and active transportation to the bottom based on criteria. The City is receiving a one-time top up of the gas tax funding which offers a fantastic opportunity to reinvest in our assets, with a particular focus on investments that yield broad -based impact on our community. The estimated $6,000,000 investment is being earmarked for quality -of -life assets, which is above and beyond those investments through the regular General Fund Capital budget. The working definition that staff are proposing in understanding "quality of life" within this context, are those investments that fall within the responsibilities and authority of local government that contribute to the wellness, livability, and vibrancy of our community. Quality of life investments should seek to bring people together, build connections and contribute to the enjoyment our residents experience through municipal assets. The City Manager and staff developed a criteria list in order to prioritize the assets that needed to have the most focus on for this investment. The criteria were established to ensure that projects adhere the Capital Budget Policy, Asset Management principles and align the with the various plans the City has. The Capital criteria established is as follows. • Must comDly with aDDroved Financial Policies • Subject to Council approval of Operating Budget • Focus on providing quality of life throughout entire City • Projects must be identified within an existing plan - Plan SJ, Play SJ, Neighborhood Plan, Etc. • Projects guided by Asset Management info and criteria of 85% renewal/ 15% new • Consideration for projects that offers the greatest use for the most people (diversity, access, engagement) 365 -4- • Consideration for projects that provide greatest growth return potential • Project completion by end of 2022 • Welcoming community - project aligned with population/growth strategies - i.e. Sense of belonging to the community Staff has assembled an inventory of quality of life investments to support this additional $6 million from gas tax, which not only uphold the above -mentioned criteria, but also contribute to other important community considerations. The proposed list was assembled in considering the importance of green space and parks, especially in our ongoing efforts towards economic and community recovery because of the public health pandemic. The staff recommendation also seeks to invest across the various neighborhoods across the City's geographies, ensuring that enhanced quality of life offerings can be experienced by those living everywhere in the city. Many of the projects selected could not have found their way into the City's regular capital budget, due to the limited funds and high demand of asset renewal. While the projects may not have reached a regular capital budget in the foreseeable future, all projects are identified in key long-term municipal plans and strategies, which have already received the insight and engagement of the community to qualify its importance. Lastly, it is important to note that the proposed list also seeks to contribute to the City's growth agenda. The quality of life of our residents, the vibrancy of our neighborhoods and diverse recreational offerings all improves the lives of residents, and in turn, enhance the City's unique value proposition. The proposed quality of life enhancements outlined below are clearly within the sphere of municipal authority and are tangible enhancements to the City's broader effort towards population, employment and tax base growth. Rockwood Park— $1,800,000 -Rockwood Park, designated as regional park in Play SJ, has undergone several phases as part of its Master Park Plan. It is being recommended that Phase 3 be approved. This will see investments into Lake Drive Bridge and Ponds, Interpretation Centre, Roadway and Trails. Dominion Park - $600,000 — Designated as a district park in Play SJ, this project would be in addition to the $285,000 the City has earmarked for Dominion Park rehabilitation and support the implementation of the community's recently developed Master Plan. Market Place West - $400,000 — There is a significant need to rehabilitate existing assets in this district park. Staff would also be seeking external funding partners for funding to increase the capital investment. This investment is part of the most current Master Park Plan and aligns with Play SJ. 366 -5- Forest Hills Complex - $400,000 — Forest Hills playground is a district playground and aligns with Play SJ. The plan would be to upgrade and replace much of the existing playground currently past its useful life. Harbour Passage - $700,000 — This budget proposed an extension of Harbour Passage to Tin Can Beach. This investment aligns well with Play SJ, Move SJ, South Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan and with current and future development opportunities underway. Main Street North - $400,000 — As part of the City's effort to create more active transportation options, this investment will create a protected bike lane on Main Street North. This investment would align with Move SJ and there is an expectation that cycling demand would be reduced on Harbour Passage. Art and Culture - $100,000 — The budget includes a proposed investment in arts and culture to recognize the City's diversity and continued efforts to become the most welcoming community in Atlantic Canada. Loyalist Plaza - $500,000 — As part of the Fundy Quay development underway, Loyalist Plaza will see a complete makeover. Public consultation has been undertaken for this project bringing forward ideas like installation of an Ice Pad as an example. Final plans will be brought forward at a future meeting. South Market Street - $250,000 —This budget earmarks funding to convert South Market Street to a pedestrian priority street in coordination with development plans. Various Greening/Branding/Beautification Investments - $350,000 — There is a need throughout the entire City undertake more beautification and greening efforts. This would involve investing in creating grass medians, planting more trees, creating more pedestrian bump outs and more branding opportunities. Sporting Enhancements - $200,000 — As the City continues to grow its diverse population, there is a need to look at existing assets such fields and courts. These assets need to be enhanced, supported or adjusted in order to support newer recreational offerings, to ensure the City is providing sporting opportunities for all members of the community. Little River Reservoir- $50,000 — There has been significant investments over several years at this park as part of the Master Park Plan and Play SJ. An additional $50,000 is being earmarked for various beautification investment at the park. Design and Engineering - $250,000—This funding is for all the design and engineering needed for the various projects. 367 -6- rnnrhicinn Staff will present Finance Committee more details on specific projects once the scope of the projects has been established. Some projects such as Main Street North and Forest Hills will involve discussions with the Province in order to proceed. The list of projects being proposed fit within all the financial polices approved by Council. They align with the various approved plans, population and growth strategies of the City. Common Council, and Growth Committee, will be given an opportunity to provide additional assessment of this list once Finance Committee has completed its initial review of the funding envelop and the corresponding policy considerations. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The list of 2022 Capital projects being proposed are in compliance with the Asset Management Policy, Capital Budget Policy, and align with various City plans such as Plan SJ, Play SJ, Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan and Master Park Plans. F��:��1[�1�►P1�7dIP/_1P[�/_►��I�j���1��7�7 Funding for these projects will come from a combination of Gas Tax Funding and City Funding and will form part of the overall 2022 General Fund Capital Budget. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The projects were established in collaboration with all service areas and Finance Committee. ATTACHMENTS Appendix 1. — Presentation 2022 Gas Tax Funds — Quality of Life Investments 1r 1' R , c _ 1 _ C y 4 r City of Saint John 2022 Gas Tax Funds — Quality of Life Investments July 22, 2021 SAINT JOHN 369 Working definition of "Quality of Life" for the purposes of this exercise: "Investments that fall within the responsibilities and authority of local government that contribute to the wellness, livability and vibrancy of our community. Quality of life investments should seek to bring people together, build connections and contribute to the enjoyment our residents experience through municipal assets." 370 (1)- SAINT JOHN • July 22: Gas Tax Funds — Quality of Life Investments to Finance Committee for receive and file • July 26: Gas Tax Funds — Quality of Life Investments to Common Council for receive and file • September 2: Draft General and Utility Fund Capital Budgets to Finance Committee for receive and file • October 13: General and Utility Fund Capital Budgets to Finance Committee for Approval • October 18: General and Utility Fund Capital Budgets to Common Council for receive and file • Nov 1: General and Utility Fund Capital Budgets to Common Council for Approval 371 (1)- SAINT JOHN • March 25, 2021- the federal government proposed a one-time investment of $2.2 billion that would help address infrastructure priorities in municipalities and First Nations communities. The funds would flow through the federal Gas Tax Fund. • The City of Saint John is set to receive an estimated amount of $4,656,597 as part of this one-time investment. Investments can be made in 18 different categories Public Transit Wastewater Infrastructure Drinking Water Solid Waste Management Community Energy Systems Local Bridges and Roads Capacity Building Highways Local and Regional Airports Short -line Rail Short -sea Shipping Disaster Mitigation Broadband and Connectivity Brownfield Redevelopment Culture Tourism 372 Sport Recreation SAINT JOHN Background • Capital investments are guided by several policies and align with various plan • Asset Management Policy • Capital Budget Policy • Debt Management Policy • Plan SJ/Play SJ/Move SJ/Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan • Focus of investments over past years has been renewal of assets due to the infrastructure deficit — Capital program is 85% renewal and 15% new per Capital Budget Policy • Capital Budget Policy sets out prioritization of capital renewal based on asset management data 1. Mandatory 2. Risk of Failure 3. Priority of Council 4. Positive Financial Impact 5. Discretionary 373 Q--)- SAINT JOHN • Under existing policies, quality of life assets (recreation, parks, active transportation) are often ranked lower due to low risk of failure and consequences of failure. • The revised Asset Management Policy addresses this by adding quality of life criteria as a consideration. • As part of the one-time funding from the Federal Government and an additional funding as part of the 2022 General Fund Capital Budget it is being recommended that $6,000,000 be invested in 2022 for assets considered under the quality of life criteria. • Criteria established for quality of life investments using existing asset data, Financial policies, City priorities and various City approved plans. 374 Q__)­ SAINT JOHN Criteria Established for Quality of Life Investments • Must comply with approved Financial Polices • Subject to Council approval of Operating Budget • Focus on providing quality of life throughout entire City • Projects must be identified within an existing plan - Plan SJ, Play Si, Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan, Master Park Plan Etc. • Projects guided by Asset Management data and criteria of 85% renewal/ 15% new • Consideration for projects that offers the greatest use for the most people (diversity, access, engagement) • Consideration for projects that provide greatest growth return potential • Project completion by end of 2022 • Welcoming community - project aligned with qulation/growth strategies (i.e. Sense of belonging to the commun 375 --)- SAINT JOHN Key considerations in assembling staff recommendation: • Importance of green space and natural settings for Saint John residents; • Contributing to the broader effort around Economic and Community Recovery from the public health pandemic; • Investments across the geography of the City and • Supporting the City's growth agenda. 376 SAINT JOHN Rockwood Park — $1,800,000 - Rockwood Park, designated as a regional park in Play SJ, has undergone several phases as part of its Master Park Plan. It is being recommended that Phase 3 be approved. This will see investments into Lake Drive Bridge and Ponds, Interpretation Centre, Roadway and Trails. Dominion Park - $600,000 — Designated as a district park in Play SJ, this project would be in addition to the $285,000 the City has earmarked for Dominion Park rehabilitation and support the implementation of the community's recently developed Master Plan. Market Place West - $400,000 — There is a significant need to rehabilitate existing assets in this district park. Staff would also be seeking external funding partners for funding to increase the capital investment. This investment is art of the most current Master Plan and aligns with3 lay SJ. SAINT JOHN Forest Hills Complex - $400,000 — Forest Hills playground is a district playground and aligns with Play SJ. The plan would be to upgrade and replace much of the existing playground currently past its useful life. Harbour Passage - $700,000 — This proposed budget is an extension of Harbour Passage to Tin Can Beach. This investment aligns well with Play SJ, Move SJ, the Central Peninsula Neighborhood Plan and with current and future development opportunities. Main Street North - $400,000 — As part of the City's effort to create more active transportation options, this investment will create a protected bike lane on Main Street North. This investment would align with Move SJ, as well as an expectation that cycling demand would be reduced on Harbour Passage. 378 SAINT JOHN Art and Culture - $100,000 — This budget includes a proposed investment in arts and culture to recognize the City's diversity and continued efforts to become the most welcoming community in Atlantic Canada. Recommended investments to be brought forward at later date. Sporting Enhancements - $200,000 As the Citv continues to grow its diverse pc look at ex ball court: enhanced, to support ensure th opportunit communit), forward wi pulation, there is a need to sting assets such as fields and These assets need to be supported or adjusted in order newer recreational offerings, to City is providing sporting es for all members of the . Recommendations brought align with Play SJ. 379 Various Greening/Branding/Beautification Investments - $350,000 —There is a need throughout the entire City to undertake more beautification and greening efforts. This would involve investing in greening medians, planting more trees, creating more pedestrian bump outs and more branding opportunities. Loyalist Plaza - $500,000 — As part of the Fundy Quay development underway, Loyalist Plaza will see complete rebranding and redesign. Public consultation has been undertaken for this project bringing forward ideas like installation of an Ice Pad as example. Final plans will be brought forward at a future meeting. 380 Little River Reservoir - S50.000 — There has been significant investments over several years at this park as part of the Master Park Plan and Play SJ. An additional $50,000 is being earmarked for various beautification investments at the pa rk. Design and Engineering - $250,000 — This funding is for all the design and engineering needed for the various projects. South Market Street - S250.000 — This budget earmarks funding to convert South Market Street to a pedestrian priority street in coordination with development plans. 381 r SAINT JOHN Conclusion • Aligns with current policies and plans • Projects align with criteria established • Projects fit within Gas Tax Funding Guidelines • Addresses the infrastructure deficit 40e 382 --)- SAINT JOHN • Staff recommend that the Finance Committee endorse the Quality of Life criteria established for the proposed investments and to receive and file this report as presented and forward a copy of the report and presentation to the next meeting of Common Council as a receive and file. �'ecomr»enc(cz-lion 383 (i)- SAINT JOHN 384 r' SAINT JOHN �r pDLIINT CE FgRN CE ONE PEEL PL44 SERVICE DE POLICE DE SAINT JOHN A 0 L t C in From the Commission Who is the Saint As Chair of the Saint John Board of Police Commissioners, I am pleased to present to you the Saint John Police Force 2020 Annual Report. John Board of In exercising its governance role, the Board regularly measures performance and ensures accountability of the Force. This Report is an opportunity to consolidate Police a number of those measures into a single document for the information of the community, our stakeholders, and made by the Saint John Police Force over the Commissioners? year. The Saint John Board of Police The various jobs of our members are not easy; policing is becoming increasingly complex and dynamic. Some of the key trends we see are non -criminal issues Commissioners is the that draw on police resources; mounting budgetary pressures; greater public governance authority for the scrutiny and demands for enhanced accountability and transparency; an evolving Public Safety Communications legal, regulatory and oversight environment; and changes in technology and social media usage. Center (PSCC) and the Police Force. The role of the Board is to Despite the challenges being faced, the professional and compassionate sworn and civilian members of the Saint John Police Force continue to work hard to establish a vision and actionable deliver strategies, programs, and services to improve the safety and security of objectives those who visit, work, and live in our beautiful city. (what we want to accomplish) The search for a new police chief began after Chief Stephan Drolet stepped down for our community, to provide from the position for personal reasons in February 2021. The national recruitment effort saw over 50 applicants for the job, and the Board of Police oversight and to ensure Commissioners is delighted to have attracted broad interest from top candidates accountability in the application across the country. Former Chief Superintendent (retired) with the Ontario of Police resources to Provincial Police (OPP), Robert M. Bruce has been appointed and becomes the accomplish the objectives. The 27th Chief of Police in Saint John on July 1, 2021. Chief Bruce stood out among the candidates and was selected for his extensive policing experience, Saint John Board of Police demonstrated commitment to working in partnership with the communities he Commissioners has a serves, innovative approach to the delivery of police services and high standards responsibility under the Police of integrity, leadership, and professionalism. We look forward to having him lead the Force as we embark on a progressive five-year strategic plan for the delivery Act to provide and maintain an of policing services in Saint John. adequate police force" and to Reflecting on the previous year provides an opportunity to highlight areas where advise Common Council we must focus more of our attention moving forward, as well as ensuring fiscal accordingly, so the municipality responsibility. Looking ahead, we could have never predicted the challenges that can budget the necessary COVID-19, the City of Saint John Cyber Attack, and other world issues would bring. The Board will continue to listen, bring forward community concerns, and money. In determining what help to drive reforms that will allow the citizens of Saint John to feel served and constitutes an adequate police protected by our police service. force, the Board (in consultation On behalf of the Saint John Board of Police Commissioners with the Chief of Police) has Edward W. Keyes, Q.C. Chair established priorities and Members of the Saint John Board of Police Commissioners for 2020: objectives. Edward W. Keyes Douglas Jones Michael Costello Mayor Don Darling Gary Sullivan Jeff McAloon Katelin Dean Tamara Kelly 1 SAINT JOHN POLICE FORCE 386 From the Deputy Chief The past year has certainly presented the Saint John Police Force with its share of challenges, but I take great pleasure in providing you with the Annual Report for 2020. The Saint John Police Force and its members continue to move forward, working closely with our community and residents to ensure Saint John is a safe and desirable place to work and call home. Resilience might be the best term to describe 2020 for the Saint John Police Force. As COVID-19 arrived, officers quickly adapted to the new realities of police work and ensured citizens were well served as everyone was forced into a new normal. A Provincial Law Enforcement Coordination group was formed to ensure all law enforcement agencies were equipped with accurate and current information on how to stay safe and keep the virus at bay. Officers and senior staff provided internal mechanisms so front-line service was safe and effective. I would be remiss not to thank outgoing Chief Stephan Drolet for his guidance and leadership during 2020, ensuring new strategic measures and policies were adapted to ensure ongoing efficiencies and progressive policing measures were always at the forefront. As the culture of Saint John continues to grow, the Saint John Police Force takes great pride in its community partnerships. We continue to work together to ensure compassion and awareness of the needs of our residents. The adoption of a Diversity Equity and Inclusion Advisory Committee has provided insight and allowed our membership to take on new perspectives when it comes to policing. Mental health advocacy took on a new role as the Saint John Police Force partnered with Horizon Health and the New Brunswick Department of Health and Social Development to form the Mobile Mental Health Crisis Response Unit. The program has been well received and has allowed those who need assistance to find it more quickly and efficiently. This model is evolving as we seek to provide the best service possible. A cyber-attack in November of 2020 provided new challenges for the Force. I am extremely proud of the response provided by both our sworn and civilian members. By adapting quickly and sharing information, service interruptions to the community were minimal and work continues to ensure all on-line services are fully restored. As we continue to move forward, the Saint John Police Force is working on many initiatives including the implementation of body -worn cameras, finalizing our 5-year strategic plan, and sharing procedural policies to ensure transparency remains paramount. The entire membership of the Saint John Police Force looks forward to welcoming our newly appointed Chief of Police, Robert Bruce. It has been a pleasure serving as Acting Chief and I am humbled by the opportunity and trust placed upon me by the members of the Saint John Police Force and the community that I serve. 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 387 S A 1 N T J 0 H N P 0 L I L E F 0 R C E f❑re�lues presvooing ewpraaleaehmureand qualiryeofed we tawaidso.,.Thec lu Ilve ay nar ualnes,aM H long =Q wemadel avoltnrearMa practice of etl:ul nel.>rk,r. me commuN[yhas l:g>, oq�eeratiom arunitdourmuexpent VALUES of the Face; ourCom Valdes help ensure that ourdeusion makkg and our practices satsfyvummunRyeupeclatlahs- LEADERSHIP OPEN NESS AND PARTNERSHIPS INVESTING IN OUR PEOPLE We -I.. leadership from all our employees. Wear —vomited to an oeganiaution with open Whew— commimhern m malntairiinga hed"wore Leadership k a pattern dhehaviour, nol a ranks ltle- dunnels of mmmunkafion, where teamwork leads plaoejesi—bee to the needsweNareand aspirations weam committed W dewloping efleahe leadecslip to 5hamd problem Solving and d"on-making-we ofoprempkyym. we area learning nrganlaatlpn--- throughoutihePonce 'no w 11 provlde training, Willy kpMneyiy 5vnrl�in our{ommooiry and with a leader in the pit ("Mungy prpvi(ling training opportuntyand a wpportim eeerionmentta owture yovesnment m enhawc sacra in addressing our oppotunilies for ftnce rlheskilh of oa members, and model sound leadership practice- Coe Businesses- m ensurepubicando,15—r&lk'tyto support memaers In achieving rareerand leade blp development INTEGRITY TRUSTANDRESPEU ohJW[ws and to ratisiy gov rrnem mall pmfetsLorW we ante" ritted to pfoifssioml and moral We values truHing relackoh5aip with Ube community standards. integrity--. bringing respeciful, honest,falr, serve.ThebaslsfotImmstis r 5lp forthesuhse com,ldaate and ethical behavkrrhr to the enercim of of human life;reghectfordkw5kyandequaltyrege allmio—Valum and ourpuM Saferyr-0aWdllfis far human rights and freedoms: aM respell fa the Rule of The law, We have a pdrowy msponAWt),io OONSTANT IMPROVEMENT ric[imsof uyne and llaboueall trap them with We are committed to a work erwlraunerh[wlMthe respeetand- ..vity. + fletlaillry no adapt: the C*Wity for ueah" and • ' nprm irp 5oluliunS and a pualir ed Sok. efor Ask- 7 .. - taking th. pemd with euourhtebiFq. .. 4. -• . Wk - - ice" '�'["•� ..�! -. - �.li "Y r ~-• i�.� r,l�wJ . ■ �� 4-Ai'. .. • z i i +":1L it. - s e � �ii L::: w� I��,r � 1-r '•/Ifn�t�t 1 1 2020 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 000.0�00000 000000 0 0 0 �� 0 Saint John Police Farce Organizational Chart 2020 0000000 D O D O _ January- 18 IF393 October 2WO 780 hours volunteered INCIDENT AUXILLIARY MEMBERS REPORTS IN NU BERS AAAA I I MOTOR VEHICLE 4399fKETSISSUE ACCIDENTS Charges sentt(POPA) Prosecution an- 32 VICTIM SERVICES VOLUNTEER CALLS IMIM 100,000 DAYTIME POLICING POPULATION 5F600 (DENT POPULATION IMPAIRED INT JOHN POLICE F ORCE Wellness Coordinator Over the last year, Laurett has been instrumental in managing our victim services program and team members. Part of her role with victim services include crisis intervention with individuals impacted by crime or a sudden tragedy, and working with external stakeholders including Provincial Victim Services, Domestic Outreach to ensure that individuals are supported in their time of need. In addition, Laurett manages various wellness initiatives/programs to encourage and promote a physically and psychologically healthy lifestyle. Some of these include the use of creative wellness newsletters, wellness challenges, and supportive check -ins. Specifically, Laurett has been instrumental in developing and coordinating the Peer Support Program here at S1PF. Laurett continues to work with external stakeholders including Provincial Victim Services, Domestic/Intimate Partner Violence Groups, Domestic Outreach, and other victim services/wellness agencies. Saint John Police Force Wellness Coordinator Laurett Nwaonumah y.ari iir+i.� PULL The Role of the Wellness Coordinator Laurett Nwaonumah joined the organization in January of 2020 as the Wellness and Crisis Intervention Coordinator. As it turned out, 2020 was a challenging year for all of us due to the COVID outbreak, and keeping up with our physical and psychological health was even more crucial. Deployment of the Rescue Vehicle 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 391 Community r gagement We show our support when COVID creates challenges As Parkland Saint John in Millidgeville, continued to deal with an outbreak of COVID-19, SJPF was joined by other first responders for a drive past to lift the spirits or residents/staff and let them know SJPF was thinking about them Poo Remembrance Day Remembrance Day Roll Past as the traditional ceremony could not be held at TD Station. Saint John motorists drove by and saluted Veterans in front of TD Station. 6 392 SAINT JOHN POLICE FORCE Integrated Mental Health Unit SAINT JOHN rr POLICE FORGE ONE PEEL PAPA _.SERYfGE DE POLICE _- DE SAINT JOHN 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 393 Operational and on the streets since October 2020, the Mobile Crisis Response Team consists of team members from the SJPF along with Horizon Health and Department of Social Development. The unit provides on -site acute addiction and mental health needs assessments as well as, specialized crisis intervention. Team also offers visits and check -ins for high -risk individuals in an effort to provide better support. Canine Unit Constable Peter Haslett with K9 Diesel Promotions and Po Changes 1st Class Constables: Sherry Haines 3rd Class Constables: Dylan Jones Ben Sok Officer Promotions: Tony Hayes from Inspector to Depi Mike Young from Staff Sergeant to David Brooker from Staff Sergeant Tracy Simmons from Constable to Sergeant Stan Miller from Constable to Sergeant Don Metcalfe from Constable to Sergeant Darren Milburn from Constable to Sergeant David Kimball from Constable to Sergeant Sylvia Summerville from Constable to Sergeant Retirements Sherry Mason Bruce Connell Marven Corscadden James Fleming Ramsey Hunt Daniel Oram Gregory Cram Gregory Perkins Steven Wilson Constable Connor Bodechon and Constable Amy Cunningham accepted positions in Forensics Identification as Technicians, January of 2020. 9 SAINT JOHN POLICE FORCE 394 k i kn Recognizing Dedication and Achievement Saint John Police Chief Stephan Drolet (right) presents an award to Sgt. Don MetCalfe who was promoted to Sgt. of Patrol from Constable. Cst. Tara Stewart and Cst. Brent Haines receive recognition from Chief Stephan Drolet for saving a stranded moose during a winter storm. Civilian Promotions: Heather Stevens from PSCC Operator to PSCC Supervisor Miranda Carr Morgan from Admin 3 to Admin 4 Civilian Permanent New Hires: Catherine Beamish Kyla Weston Police Chief: Stephan Drolet 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 395 Training and Performance Conducted Energy Weapon In 2020, The Saint John Police Force expanded its less lethal response options through the purchase of additional Taser conducted energy weapons and providing more uniform members with the training on the proper deployment of these devices. This training covers operational theory, use of force guidelines, proper handling, and judgment. By summer of 2021, all patrol members will be certified as Taser operators and will be able to carry the device on duty. The Tasers being employed by the Saint John Police Force is the Taser 7, which is the newest version of the Taser devices. Design improvements provide the Taser 7 increased safety and efficiency. These improvements include improvements to the probes that increase likelihood of good conductive contact, adjustments to the deployment angles to improve probe spread, and the ability to launch a second set of probes in the event of an unsuccessful first deployment due to a miss or bad probe contact. By increasing the number of Taser CEW's available to patrol members, the Saint John Police Force is increasing the less lethal capacity of our members to resolve volatile situations without resorting to higher levels of force, for the protection of the public and the officers serving the citizens of Saint John. 11 396 SAINT JOHN POLICE FORCE Raising Awareness it Bell Let's Talk Day Raising awareness and combating stigma surrounding mental illness - January 28th. Pink Shirt Day Raising awareness about bullying and was inspired to raise funds to support anti - bullying programs - February 22nd. 2020 Workforce Gender In 2020 the Saint John Police Force hired five sworn members and five civilian members. We also saw the retirement of four sworn and three civilian members. As of December 31, 2020, the Saint John Police Force had 189 filled positions. Victim Service Volunteers ■ Fanale ■ Male Sworn Members ■ Female ■ Male 2020 ANNUAL REPORT Auxiliary Members ■ Female ■ Male Civilian Members ■ Female ■ Male 2020 Workforce Years of Service Civilian Members ■ lem than 5 years ■ 5-10 years ■ 11-15 years ■ 21-25 years ■ 2Fr30 years ■ over 30 Language Sworn Members ■ 1rr20 years ■ le!;&than 5 years ■ 5-10 years ■ 11-15 years ■ 16r20 years ■ 21-25 years ■ 26-30 years ■ aver 30 Saint Jahn Police Force English English/French Members Auxiliary Members 19 0 Civilian Members 16 26 Sworn Members 114 31 Victim Service Volunteers 7 1 14 SAINT JOHN POLICE F ORCE 399 Public Safety Communication Centre "Providing the critical link between the public and emergency responders while delivering excellence in communication services." 2020 ANNUAL REPORT Saint John Police Force wants to hear from you Le Service de police de Saint John veut vous entendre e The Public Safety Communication Centre (PSCC), located in the Saint John Police Force headquarters, receives emergency and non -emergency calls for service. PSCC provides call taking and dispatching services for 2 police departments, 18 fire departments, in the Saint John Region. In 2020 the Saint John Police Force completed a Strategic Survey to gather feedback from our community Saint John Police Force Unaudited Consolidated Statement of Operations for the Period Ended December 31, 2020 Saint Jahn Police Farce Unaudited Statement of Operations For the period ended, December 312020 1 Annual December 31, 202D Year -End Budget Preliminary Results Variance Salaries and Wages 16,407,282 16,593,541 -186,259 Overtime 812,OOD 685,795 126,205 Other Personnel Costs 312,10D 206,409 105,691 Fringe Benefits 4,871,122 4,756,959 114,163 Total 22,402,504 22,242,704 159,800 General Services 458,741 336,515 122,226 Insurance 51,DO D 67,397 -16,397 Professional Services 36D,D0D 361,042 -1,042 Other Purchased Services 129,70D 339,896 -210,196 Repairs and Maintenance 115,DDD 125,318 -10,318 Rentals 972,50D 877,476 95,024 Purchased Goads 363,20D 400,596 -37,396 Government Services 5,10D 8,27D -3,170 Internal Corporate Charges 835,888 761,170 74,718 Asset Purchases 402,00D 671,095 -269,095 Total 3,693,129 3,948,773 -255,644 Surplus/Deficit 26,095,633 26,191,478 -95,845 Revenue 520,ODD 721,891 2D1,891 Net Operating Expenses 25,575,633 25,469,587 106,046 16 SAINT JOHN POLICE F ORCE 401 Violations, Crime Statistics The number and classifications of Incident Reports generated throughout the year is a strong indication of policing activity. The Saint John Police Force maintains internal record of all Incident Reports in our Records Management System. Public Service Requests On average each year, the Saint John Police Force receives 60,000 public service requests. Complaints FORMAL COMPLAINTS 2019 2019 2020 Received 17 12 13 Summarily dismissed 0 4 S Informal Resolution 1 1 4 No Further Action 3 1 0 Settlement Conference 0 0 0 Active 0 2 0 Loss of Jurisdiction 6 4 1 Withdrawn 4 0 0 Unfounded 2 0 0 Resolved 1 0 0 INFORMAL COMPLAINTS Received 16 43 96 Reviewed 16 43 96 TOTAL COMPLAINTS 33 55 99 PROCESSED 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 402 SAINT JOHN POLICE FORCE 2020 ANNUAL REPORT n rff; P00" FogCE Hn\A/ arP \A/P (Jninp,? The Saint John Police Force is committed to Constant Improvement. It is one of the five Core Values of the Force. Let us know if this Annual Report meets your needs. How can we improve it? Write the Chief of Police: Acting Chief Hayes 1 Peel Plaza Saint John Police Force Saint John, N.B. E21- 4L1 July 21, 2021 Mayor Reardon and Members of Common Council 15 Market Square Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Request to Remove Heritage Designation 114-116 Wentworth Street Please remove my buildings at 114 and 116 Wentworth Street, (including 87 and 89 Orange) from the Orange Street Heritage Conservation Area. Neither 114 or 116 Wentworth Street were included when the Orange Street Heritage Conservation Area was approved by Council in 1990. Consequently, I can see little disruption to the integrity of the area, or difficulty in staff administration of the Orange Street Area, by their removal. Please rest assured that I will continue to treasure these buildings which I have been the proud steward of for almost 30 years. I fully intend to retain and sensitively conserve all of the character defining elements, to a much higher standard than required under your By -Law, as I did before they were designated. In addition, to ensure their authenticity is protected, I have initiated discussions with the National Trust for Canada. My intention is to have protective covenants placed on my buildings. I was previously Chair of the Board of Governors of this organization. I have considerably more confidence in the National Trust to ensure that the heritage values of these buildings will be protected, than I do in the current disfunctional Heritage Program or By -Law HC-1. Sincerely, Jim H Bezanson e July 21, 2021 Mayor Reardon and Members of Common Council 15 Market Square Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Request to Remove Heritage Designation 66 Sydney Street/161 Princess Street Please remove my buildings at 66 Sydney Street and 161 Princess Street, (including 157 Princess Street; 159 Princess Street; 161 Princess Street and 169 Princess Street from the Princess Street Heritage Conservation Area. These buildings sit at the corner of Princess and Sydney Streets. They are surrounded to the north and east, by the recent addition to Saint Mac's School. The former Mayor White residence, across Sydney Street, will likely soon be demolished in similar fashion as the currently controversial building on the corner of Carmarthen and King Street East. The human scale and historic context of my buildings have already been irreparably compromised by the 11-story development across Sydney Street. In approving it, Council clearly demonstrated their willingness to disregard the surety of the incremental investments of many contributing citizens, in favour of feathering the cap of the well-heeled few. Good governance requires respect for those who agree to be governed. Council has failed its people. I can see little disruption to the integrity of the area, or difficulty in staff administration of the Princess Street Area, by the removal of my buildings. I owned 191 Princess Street and developed it over a fifteen -year period. If I was starting 191 Princess Street now, I would probably give up on it. That's about where I'm at with my current project down the street at 161 Princess Street. I began discussions and submitting drawings two years ago for a 27-unit $8 million project. It got reduced to 17. If staff ever stop requesting additional information maybe half will get built. Ironically by the time I get my Building Permit, my various Heritage Permits will have expired and I will have to begin all over. A more honest name for the One -Stop Development Shop, would be to simply remove the word One. As with my other properties, please rest assured that I will continue to treasure these buildings which I have been the proud steward of for almost 25 years. I fully intend to retain and sensitively conserve all of the character defining elements, to a much higher standard than required under your By -Law, as I did before they were designated. In addition, to ensure their authenticity is protected, I have initiated discussions with the National Trust for Canada. My intention is to have protective covenants placed on my 405 buildings. I was previously Chair of the Board of Governors of this organization. I have considerably more confidence in the National Trust to ensure that these buildings contribute to the heritage of Saint John, than any protection afforded by the Heritage Bylaw. Sincerely, Jim H Bezanson KI. About Person/Group Presenting First Name: Greg Last Name: Cutler Name of Organization/Group (where applicable): Saint John Ability Advisory Committee Address: 171 Adelaide Street Saint John, New Brunswick. E2k-1w9 Canada Day Time Phone Number: 506-650-3763 Email gregory.cutler@saintiohn.ca If you do NOT wish to have your personal information (address, phone number, email) become part of the public record, please check this box. No About your Request Topic of Presentation: Saint John Ability Awareness Committee Orientation Presentation Purpose for Presentation (what is the ask of Council): The purpose of the presentation would be for the Saint John Ability Advisory Committee to provide a presentation to the newly formed council outlining the SJAAC goals, mandate, accomplishments etc. Because the group would need to line up sign language interpreters, they were hoping to present during the Sept 7 council meeting - if possible. Background Information: The Ability Advisory Committee is an advisory group supported by City of Saint John. This committee that provides leadership in making our community more inclusive. Using our diverse expertise we partner with people with disabilities, government, business and the public to remove barriers by providing information and advocacy regarding disability issues 407 About Person/Group Presenting First Name: Valentin Last Name: Boinitski Name of Organization/Group (where applicable): Saint John Local Immigration Partnership Address: The City of Saint John office in the Market Tower Saint John, New Brunswick. E21- 41-1 Canada Day Time Phone Number: (506) 721-8694 Email valentin.boinitski@saintiohn.ca If you do NOT wish to have your personal information (address, phone number, email) become part of the public record, please check this box. Yes About your Request Topic of Presentation: Introducing the Saint John Local Immigration Partnership Purpose for Presentation (what is the ask of Council): Orientation briefing to the new Members of the City Council on the mandate and operations of the Saint John Local Immigration Partnership project. Background Information: The Saint John Local Immigration Partnership project (SJLIP) is a collaborative community initiative aiming to improve the newcomer settlement and integration experience in Saint John. The City of Saint John is a contract holder for SJLIP since September 2020. Most of the funding for the project comes from the federal government (IRCC), with some matching funding from the City of Saint John. O SAINT JOHN REGION > THE CHAMBER CHAMPIONS FOR BUSINESS Chamber's 35th Annual Golf Tournament Thursday, August 12, 2021 Rockwood Park Golf Course �, + �0. T K' / T M HOLE spinsor Hole Sponsorship Opportunity What a great way to promote your business to a captured audience! Let everyone know you are back in business! To get the maximum benefit from sponsorship, we encourage hole sponsors to designate representatives from their firm to meet and greet golfers throughout the day. Some organize fun activities at their designated hole. If interested contact the Chamber office at 634-8111 or email: ccunningham@thechambersj.com $125 per golfer (includes, green fees, cart and lu While continuing to practice social distancing and adhering to guidelines Public Health, tee off times will be provided once again this year. 410 Online Auction ` Donate an auction item! Here's an exclusive opportunity for you, our Chamber members, to promote your business! Donate an auction item for our online auction and get exposure for your company's products and services, your logo and your website will be included. Bidding is open to anyone! Contact Carole Cunningham, at ccunningham@thechambersj.com Saint John Region Chamber of Commerce 1 78 Prince William Street, Saint John, New Brunswick E21L 2B3 Canada Sent by ccunningham@thechambersj.com powered by Constant Cr Contact Try email marketing for free today! 411 Q�T= �i -1 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT M&C No. 2021-223 Report Date July 21, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Corporate Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. Contract Management Function and Information Governance System CLOSED SESSION DISCUSSION REASON This matter is to be discussed in closed session pursuant to the provisions of subsection 68(1)(c) of the Local Governance Act. OPEN SESSION RESOLUTION REQUIRED? Yes, resolution and Public Report from Committee of the Whole to be added to open session AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Brian Irving/Elspeth Hagan Melanie Tompkins John Collin RECOMMENDATION 1. The City of Saint John enter into a Software Licence Agreement comprised of and incorporating the: (i) Order Form Agreement; (ii) HighQ Product Specific Terms; (iii) HighQ Information Security Controls; (iv) HighQ Service Availability, Maintenance, and Support Terms; and (v) Thomson Reuters Terms and Conditions in the form as attached to this M&C with Thomson Reuters for the Contract Lifecycle Management product known as HighQ, and further 2. the City enter into the Thomson Reuters Mutual Non -Disclosure Agreement in the form as attached to this M&C, and further 3. the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Software Licence Agreement and Mutual Non -Disclosure Agreement and any document ancillary thereto. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2019, The City of Saint John (the "City") adopted a Re -Structuring Plan which contemplates a re -structuring of the organization, including the creation of a new Contract Management Function and the creation of 2 positions to support this 412 new function. Those 2 positions were filled in Q1 of 2021 and the work on the Contract Management Function has been underway since. In order to implement an efficient and effective Contract Management Function that is in line with industry standards, a Contract Lifecycle Management product is required for which a licence agreement must be in place. The purpose of this report is to seek authority for the City to enter into such a licence agreement with Thomson Reuters for a product known as HighQ - which staff has determined to be the best and most cost-effective solution for the City's information governance needs - and a non -disclosure agreement to facilitate pre -work for the efficient implementation thereof. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION N/A STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This Report aligns to Common Council's focus on enhanced service delivery, fiscal responsibility, and the stated goals of the re -structuring as captured in Workplan 2021. REPORT In 2019, the City undertook significant re -structuring, in order to identify any possible re -organization or re -alignment that would lead to a more efficient and effective business model. The 2019 Re -Structuring Plan contemplates a re- structuring of the organization, including the creation of a new Contract Management Function and the creation of 2 positions to support this new function. Those 2 positions were filled in Q1 of 2021 and the work on the Contract Management Function has been underway since. Flowing from this re -structuring, in January, the City Manager issued Workplan 2021, based on key priorities for the City. Included in the Workplan was a series of Tier 1 Major Initiatives, including a Performance Measurement System, and Tier 2 initiatives, including the Development of a Contract Management System. In order to give effect to the Contract Management function created in the re- structuring, an effective Contract Management System must be implemented. The General Counsel Office ("GCO") holds many records, both through the City Clerk's function as well as through the work of Real Estate Services, and Legal. Many of these files are critical to the effective management and risk mitigation of the City. Updated information governance practices and systems that are in line with industry standards for the working files of GCO, including the Clerk's Office, is long overdue. Furthermore, the 2020 cyberattack has shown the importance of a sophisticated, secure, and comprehensive cloud -based system. 413 In anticipation of implementation of an information governance system, substantial scoping and evaluation of the use case was undertaken by the GCO, in consultation with key stakeholders in IT, Procurement, Finance, and Customer Service, amongst others. Key elements of the use case include: • efficient intake of service requests; • reduced external Legal spend due to reliable availability and curation of precedent materials; • instant creation of drafts based on templated agreements; • knowledge retention and management of existing GCO knowhow and expertise to ensure consistent, high quality advice and approaches to the City's legal needs; • workflows allowing for enhanced collaboration across the City routing to internal stakeholders and signatories when appropriate; • comprehensive support for the City Clerk's function and dovetailing with the LaserFiche repository of Common Council records; • tracking and reporting of KPIs (performance management features); • enhanced analytics and reporting ability on various metrics for the benefit of Common Council and City leadership; • efficient creation and management of complete files, including GCO emails associated with documentation; • full contract lifecycle management, including management of warranty periods, renewals etc.; • contract security, retention, management, and retirement features; and • ability to manage appropriate holds of records, as required in complex litigation. In summary, the information governance system will enhance risk management and mitigation and allow agile and cost-effective support of all City Departments and initiatives by providing the ability to "work smarter and better, faster" and optimize the use of GCO time. A variety of options were considered when scoping out the information governance system, from currently deployed software and systems at the City (with enhanced licensing requirements) to Software as a Solution (SaaS) and the hybrid in between. Factors that were considered in the selection of an option were cost, features, functions, security, and accreditations. A review and screening of four Contract Lifecycle Management software systems was undertaken. Each vendor was asked to demonstrate capacity and functionality as well as provide costing for consideration. Each vendor offered a demo and a deep dive on City requirements. Based on a weighted scoring matrix HighQ, a Thomson Reuters product, is the lead candidate and provides the most cost-effective solution. Thomson Reuters is a well-known provider of first-class legal software solutions. 414 The cost of implementation (set-up and professional fees) is well under $10,000. An allowance of an additional 10 hours of professional service fees, as a buffer, gives us comfort that the total expenditure for the first year (including licensing) will be below $20,000. Ensuing years will range from $14-25,000 in licence fees, based on the number of licensees considered optimal.' GCO has decided to start with the lowest number of licences and reassess as needed. This modest investment will ensure that the City's interest is better protected and allow all City Departments to reap significant benefits. The terms and conditions upon which the HighQ product will be licensed (attached) have been reviewed by GCO and are recommended for acceptance. A sample order agreement is attached to show the terms and conditions; the actual order document would be generated upon receiving approval from Common Council. In addition, a non -disclosure agreement required to facilitate pre -work to ensure efficient implementation has been reviewed by GCO and is also recommended. A work plan with multiple work streams has been developed with initial implementation anticipated to be complete by December 2021. Full functionality is anticipated to be available to the full GCO team in early 2022. F9�:,�I[��1►�1►7d1►�G►►�[�iG1��1�jC��1►�►�j The initial cost of implementation and the licence fee for 2021 can be absorbed in the 2021 budget. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS In the preparation of this Report and the identification of the appropriate software solution, the GCO consulted and worked with the Finance Dept., the City Clerk's team, IT (Ms. Stephanie Rackley-Roach), Procurement, and Customer Service. A comprehensive, but preliminary, review of security features has been undertaken by IT and all protocols have been considered. The recommended solution is cloud -based and hosted in Canada. The recommendation complies with the provisions of the City's Procurement Policy. ATTACHMENTS HighQ Order Form Agreement HighQ Product Specific Terms HighQ Information Security Controls HighQ Service Availability, Maintenance, and Support Terms Thomson Reuters Terms and Conditions Thomson Reuters Mutual Non -Disclosure Agreement ' All fees are subject to annual year increases, which can be mitigated and reduced through multi -year licensing. 415 -trf jD Id 1 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT M&C No. 2021-222 Report Date July 22, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Strategic Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. Letter of Engagement - PWC CLOSED SESSION DISCUSSION REASON This matter is to be discussed in closed session pursuant to the provisions of subsection 68(1)(c) of the Local Governance Act. OPEN SESSION RESOLUTION REQUIRED? Yes, resolution and Public Report from Committee of the Whole to be added to open session AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Ian Fogan/Melanie Tompkins Kevin Fudge/Melanie Tompkins John Collin RECOMMENDATION That the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a Letter of Engagement with PWC in regards to TD Station. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of the City of Saint John's Sustainability Plan, an exercise to review the efficiency and effectiveness of the various agencies, boards and commissions was undertaken. The review of the operations of TD Station Commission has identified an alternative management arrangement that could very likely increase the use of the building and lower the operating subsidy. The report seeks to enable the engagement of PwC to help draft a Request for Qualifications, a Request for Proposal and an agreement for management of TD Station. 1�:7��/[�I�1L�:7���1 �►j/[�l��l None 416 STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The review and work align with Council priority of being fiscally responsible. REPORT As part of the City of Saint John's Sustainability Plan, an exercise to review the efficiency and effectiveness of the various agencies, boards and commissions was undertaken. A Request for Expressions of Interests for lease of TD Station was issued in January 2020 with Commission approval. The General Manager of TD Station, Mike Caddell, was part of the Evaluation Committee for this process. One proponent, Spectra, was identified as the successful proponent with whom City entered into negotiation for a Lease and Management Services. The Covid pandemic impacted industry and prevented parties from reaching an agreement. At that point, the City Manager decided to pause the negotiations with Spectra in 2020 until Covid was under control as it prevented large gathering in events W-WI 9 Now that we are reaching a point where the pandemic restrictions are being lifted in North America and there is pent up demand in the market now for live events, the City and TD Station will be well served to be ready for same. Staff sees value in having an arrangement similar to what the City has agreed to put in place with Transit Commission and at the most recent Harbour Station Commission meeting, after some discussions between the Chair of the Commission and staff, it was resolved that the Commission would support the City issuing an RFP for the Management of TD station (as opposed to a lease of TD Station that had been sought with REOI issued in 2020). The Commission agrees that management by a large player in the events venue industry will bring benefits to TD Station and the City that the current arrangement cannot. The network such a player would bring cannot be understated. A two-step process is proposed to complete the procurement. The first step would be to issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to narrow down a field of possible proponents to no more than two or three. This step would also ensure that the next, more labour-intensive step, of issuing a Request for Proposals, is only completed with those firms qualified through step 1. This process would also limit the production of confidential material to only those firms with which the City would want to negotiate based on qualifications. Expert guidance is required to draft the procurement documents and manage the negotiations with sophisticated proponents. PWC was hired in 2020 to help the City negotiate a lease for TD Station with Spectra during the REOI process. It has full knowledge of the TD Station operations from that engagement and brings very 417 pointed expertise in the area of large events venue negotiations. PWC is familiar with all the players and has developed numerous management agreements for other venues that the City may use for its purpose. The recommendation is that the City retain PWC (Ron Bidulka) for the purpose of developing and managing a procurement process for management services for TD Station at a cost of $65,000. These costs can be absorbed under the 2021 operating budget. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The review seeks to reduce the subsidy to operate the building and the cost of the engagement can be absorbed in the 2021 operating budget. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS This report has been generated in collaboration between Strategic Affairs and the General Counsel office. The Harbour Station Commission has also been consulted and the Commission is supportive of the City seeking to procure an alternative management arrangement for TD Station. ATTACHMENTS None HE QDS'am2T low M&C No. M&C 2021-222 Report Date July 22, 2021 Meeting Date July 26, 2021 Service Area Strategic Services SUBJECT. Letter of Engagement - PWC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION OF COUNCIL The City of Saint John seeks to retain the services of PwC in aid to draft a Request for Qualifications and a Request for Proposals in relation to procurement of services relating to the City of Saint John Sustainability Plan. That the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a Letter of Engagement with PwC in regards to drafting a Request for Qualifications, a Request for Proposals and providing expert advice through the procurement process in relation to the City's review of it's Agencies, Boards and Commissions. 419 July 26, 2021 Subject: Recommended Appointments to Committees The Committee of the Whole, having met on July 26, 2021, makes the following recommendations: Canada Games Foundation: to appoint Kimberly Beaton for a 3-year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; City of Saint John Shared Risk Pension Plan Board of Trustees: to appoint Russell Wilson as an Alternate Trustee for a 4-year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2025; Fort LaTour Development Authority: to appoint Derrick Stanford for a 3-year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; Harbour (TD) Station Commission: to appoint Patricia Ellsworth and James LeMesurier, each for 3-year terms from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; and grant an exemption to extend Ed Keyes' appointment for a one-year term to continue as Chair of the Commission to 26 July 2022; PRO Kids: to reappoint Jordan Tracey, Andrew Holmes, Patrick Steeves each for 3-year terms from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; and to appoint both Ben O'Neill and Kris Trotter for 3 year terms from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; Saint John Aquatic Centre Commission: to appoint both Peter Murray and David Connell for 3-year terms from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; Saint John Board of Police Commissioners: to reappoint Michael Costello for a 3-year term from July 30, 2021 to July 30, 2024 Saint John Community Arts Board: to appoint both Andrea Kikuchi and Guylaine Cyr for 3-year terms from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; Saint John Energy: to appoint Neil Jacobsen for a 3-year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; Saint John Free Public Library: to appoint both Mark Breen and Rona Howald for 3-year terms from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024. Saint John Transit Commission: to appoint Neville Crabbe for a 3-year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024. Trade and Convention Centre Oversight Committee: Notwithstanding the policy adopted by Common Council on October 29, 2012 regarding appointments to agencies, boards, and commissions to appoint Patricia Ellsworth for a 3 year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; to appoint Nicky Matthews for 3 year term from July 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024; and to appoint Justin Tinker for a 3 year term from July 40- SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4fwwvw.saintjohn.ca I C.P 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada F2L 4Li -�� 4 26, 2021 to July 26, 2024 pending confirmation his willingness to serve on this committee. Sincerely, Donna Reardon Mayor 40— SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L4fI,w.saintjohn.ca I C.P 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada F2L4Li �� vwv4 -I