2025-12-01_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour
City of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
AGENDA
Monday, December 1, 2025
6:00 pm
2nd Floor Common Council Chamber, City Hall
An Electronic means of communication will be used at this meeting. The public may attend the meeting in
person in the Council Chamber or view the meeting on the City’s Website (www.saintjohn.ca) or on Rogers
TV.
Pages
1.Call to Order
1.1 Land Acknowledgement
1.2 National Anthem
2.Approval of Minutes
2.1 Minutes of November 17, 2025 1 - 7
3.Approval of Agenda
4.Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
5.Consent Agenda
5.1 Council Community Fund - Application from Councillor Stewart
(Recommendation: Approve Application)
8 - 12
5.2 Proposed Street Vesting - 0 Berryman Street (Portion of PID 55112510)
(Recommendation in Report)
13 - 24
5.3 Saint John Community Arts Board - Recipients of the Funding Program
(Recommendation in Report)
25 - 34
5.4 Conservation of Watershed Lands (Recommendation in Report)35 - 135
5.5 Correspondence: A. Andrade - Request to Present re: Protect Heritage 136 - 138
Infrastructure (Recommendation: Receive for Information)
5.6 Correspondence: Alzheimer Society NB - Request to Present re: Dementia
Friendly Communities (Recommendation: Refer to Clerk to Schedule
Presentation)
139 - 140
6.Members Comments
7.Proclamation
7.1 International Day of Persons with Disabilities - December 3, 2025 141 - 141
8.Delegations / Presentations
9.Public Hearings - 6:30 p.m.
9.1 Proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment with Planning Advisory Committee
Report and Staff Presentation - Annual Housekeeping Text Amendments (1st
and 2nd Reading)
142 - 188
9.2 Proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment with Planning Advisory Committee
Report and Staff Presentation - 259 Foster Thurston Drive - Text Amendment
Business Office Use (1st and 2nd Reading)
189 - 221
9.3 Proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment with Section 59 Conditions with Planning
Advisory Committee Report and Staff Presentation - 421 Woodward Avenue
(1st and 2nd Reading)
222 - 418
10.Consideration of By-laws
10.1 Public Presentation - Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment - 0 Rex Hurley / 0
Glen Road
419 - 426
10.2 Business Improvement Levy By-Law Amendment (3rd Reading)427 - 427
11.Submissions by Council Members
11.1 Proposal for Fort Howe and Robertson Square (Councillor Ogden)428 - 429
12.Business Matters - Municipal Officers
12.1 Chief Administrative Officer Update on select catalytic projects and advocacy
(Verbal)
12.2 Housing for All Strategy Update 430 - 465
13.Committee Reports
13.1 Finance Committee: 2026 General Fund Operating Budget 466 - 507
2
13.2 Finance Committee: 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget 508 - 531
13.3 Finance Committee: 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget 532 - 567
13.4 Public Safety Committee: Municipal Emergency Response Plan (MERP) -
2025 Revision
568 - 635
14.Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda
15.General Correspondence
16.Supplemental Agenda
17.Committee of the Whole
17.1 Recommended Appointments to Committees 636 - 636
17.2 Amended and Restated Agreement of Purchase and Sale 637 - 637
17.3 Funding Agreement - Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation of Canada 638 - 638
17.4 Local Leadership for Climate Adaptation - Vulnerability Assessment 639 - 639
17.5 Update Right of First Refusal for 75 Smythe Street 640 - 640
17.6 Housing for All – License Agreement Red Zones Department of Transportation 641 - 642
17.7 Community Safety and Security Team and Community Resilience Fund &
Policy
643 - 678
18.Adjournment
3
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
1
MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING
COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
NOVEMBER 17, 2025, AT 6:00 PM
2ND FLOOR COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL
An Electronic means of communication will be used at this meeting. The public may
attend the meeting in person in the Council Chamber or view the meeting on the City’s
Website (www.saintjohn.ca) or on Rogers TV.
Present: Mayor Donna Noade Reardon
Deputy Mayor John MacKenzie
Councillor-at-Large Gary Sullivan
Councillor-at-Large Brent Harris
Councillor Ward 1 Greg Norton
Councillor Ward 1 Joanna Killen
Councillor Ward 2 Barry Ogden
Councillor Ward 3 Gerry Lowe
Councillor Ward 3 Mariah Darling
Councillor Ward 4 Paula Radwan
Councillor Ward 4 Greg Stewart
Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer B. McGovern
General Counsel M. Tompkins
Commissioner Finance K. Fudge
Fire Chief R. Nichol
Commissioner Utilities and Infrastructure Services I. Fogan
Commissioner Public Works M. Hugenholtz
Commissioner Growth and Community Services A. Poffenroth
Commissioner Human Resources S. Hossack
City Clerk J. Taylor
Deputy City Clerk A. McLennan
1. Call to Order
1
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
2
1.1 Land Acknowledgement
Councillor Killen read aloud the Land Acknowledgement and called for a moment of
reflection.
“The City of Saint John/Menaquesk is situated is the traditional territory of the
Wolastoqiyik/Maliseet.The Wolastoqiyik/Maliseet along with their Indigenous Neighbours,
the Mi’Kmaq/Mi’kmaw and Passamaquoddy/Peskotomuhkati signed Peace and
Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 1700s that protected their rights to lands
and resources.”
1.2 National Anthem
2. Approval of Minutes
2.1 Minutes of November 3, 2025
Moved by Councillor Darling, seconded by Councillor Killen:
RESOLVED that the minutes of November 3, 2025, be approved.
MOTION CARRIED.
3. Approval of Agenda
Moved by Councillor Radwan, seconded by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that the agenda of November 17, 2025, with the addition of items 17.1 2022
Memorial Cup - Legacy Fund Transfer; 17.2 Extension of Group Benefit Coverage to
Council Members; and 17.3 CAO Interim Position, be approved.
MOTION CARRIED.
4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
No disclosures were declared.
5. Consent Agenda
5.1 RESOLVED that the submitted infographic Housing for All Strategy - Progress
Update be received for information.
5.2 RESOLVED that as recommended in the submitted report M&C 2025-267:
Scheduling of a Public Hearing Date for Zoning By-Law Amendments for Mobile and Mini-
Homes and the Rezoning of 19 Anglin Drive, Common Council schedule public hearings
on Monday, January 12, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. for a Text Amendment submitted by Staff for
Staff led amendments to the Zoning By-Law associated with Mobile and Mini-Homes; and
a Rezoning submitted by Atlantic Community Housing Ltd. for 19 Anglin Drive (PID
550054779) in the Council Chamber, City Hall 2nd floor, 15 Market Square, Saint John,
NB.
5.3 RESOLVED that the Council Community Fund application submitted by Councillor
Lowe for P.R.O. Kids for $1,500, be approved.
2
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
3
5.4 RESOLVED that the correspondence from S. McAlary re: 2026 Hospice Gala be
received for information.
Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Killen:
RESOLVED that the recommendation set out in each consent agenda item respectively,
be adopted.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. Members Comments
Members commented on various local events.
7. Proclamation
8. Delegations / Presentations
8.1 Top Corner Hockey Saint John
Top Corner Hockey Founder, Chris Green, reviewed the submitted presentation entitled
“Top Corner Hockey - Saint John, NB, Canada” and played a video providing an overview
of the program.
Moved by Councillor Darling, seconded by Councillor Radwan:
RESOLVED that the presentation by Top Corner Hockey Saint John be received for
information.
MOTION CARRIED.
9. Public Hearings – 6:30 p.m.
10. Consideration of By-Laws
10.1 Zoning By-Law Text Amendment - Crematorium Use Within Medium Industrial
Zone (3rd Reading)
Having been absent for the public hearing, the Mayor and Councillors Killen and Radwan
withdrew from the meeting.
Deputy Mayor MacKenzie assumed the role of Chair for Item 10.1.
Commissioner Poffenroth provided an overview.
Moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Councillor Darling:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-Law Number C.P. 111-209 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John” amending the Zoning By-Law to permit the
creation of a crematorium use, that would allow for stand-alone cremation facilities in the
Medium Industrial (IM) zone, be read.
MOTION CARRIED.
3
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
4
The by-law entitled "By-Law Number C.P. 111-209 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John” was read in its entirety.
Moved by Councillor Lowe, seconded by Councillor Stewart:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-Law Number C.P. 111-209 A Law to Amend the
Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John” amending the Zoning By-Law to permit the
creation of a crematorium use, that would allow for stand-alone cremation facilities in the
Medium Industrial (IM) zone, be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate Common
Seal affixed thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled "By-Law Number C.P. 111-209 A Law to
Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John.”
The Mayor and Councillors Killen and Radwan reentered the meeting.
10.2 Public Presentation - Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment for Summit Drive /
Clint Drive
Commissioner Poffenroth advised that an amendment to the Municipal Development Plan
is being considered that would redesignate on Schedule A of the Municipal Development
Plan land having an approximate area of 18 hectares identified as a portion of PID
00311126, from Rural Resource Area and Park and Natural Area, to Stable Area; and
redesignate on Schedule B of the Municipal Development Plan land having an
approximate area of 18 hectares identified as a portion of PID 00311126 from Rural
Resource and Park and Natural Area to Stable Residential, and extend the boundary of
the Primary Development Area (PDA) to extend the existing Low-Rise Residential
neighbourhood. Written objections to the proposed amendment may be made until
Wednesday, December 17, 2025.
10.3 2026 Business Improvement Area Levy Amendment (1st and 2nd Reading)
The City Clerk advised that the required public notices have been advertised in the
newspaper and on the City’s website and no written objections have been received from
non-residential users within the legislated time period for submissions.
Council may now approve the 2026 BIA budget and adopt the amendment to the Business
Improvement Levy By-Law to set the 2026 levy rate. There is no change to the area rate
of 0.16.
Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Killen:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Board of Directors of Uptown Saint John Inc.,
Common Council approve the submitted 2026 Business Improvement Area budget.
MOTION CARRIED.
Moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Councillor Ogden:
4
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
5
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “A Law to Amend By-Law Number BIA-2, Business
Improvement Levy By-Law” by applying a levy of 16 cents for each one hundred dollars
of assessed value for 2026, be read a first time.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a first time by title, the by-law entitled “A Law to Amend By-Law Number BIA-2,
Business Improvement Levy By-Law.”
Moved by Councillor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Sullivan:
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “A Law to Amend By-Law Number BIA-2, Business
Improvement Levy By-Law” by applying a levy of 16 cents for each one hundred dollars
of assessed value for 2026, be read a second time.
MOTION CARRIED.
Read a second time by title, the by-law entitled “A Law to Amend By-Law Number BIA-2,
Business Improvement Levy By-Law.”
11. Submissions by Council Members
11.1 Notice of Motion - Proposal for Fort Howe and Robertson’s Square (Councillor
Ogden)
Councillor Ogden read aloud his Notice of Motion re: Proposal for Fort Howe and
Robertson’s Square. In accordance with the Procedural By-Law section 16.27 the motion
is deferred to the next meeting of Council, December 1, 2025.
12. Business Matters – Municipal Officers
12.1 Community Grants Revised Program and Policy
Deputy Mayor MacKenzie provided an introduction.
Supervisor Community Development, L. Lambert, provided an overview of the revised
Community Grants program and the Community Grants Program policy.
Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Stewart:
RESOLVED that as recommended in the submitted report M&C 2025-260: Community
Grants Revised Program and Policy, Common Council approve the Community Grant
Program Policy as attached to MC 2025-260.
MOTION CARRIED.
13. Committee Reports
13.1 Growth Committee: Updates and Transition Plan from City of Saint John Succeed
and Stay Immigration Strategy to Pathways to Belonging Regional Immigration
Strategy
Deputy Mayor MacKenzie provided an overview as Chair of the Growth Committee.
5
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
6
Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Killen:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Growth Committee, Common Council:
1. Endorse the Pathways to Belonging Regional Immigration Strategy as presented
by Envision Saint John and supported by regional partners; and,
2. Transition from the Succeed and Stay Immigration Strategy to the new Pathways
to Belonging Regional Immigration Strategy and direct staff to continue to promote
and deliver on the responsibilities of the City in the new regional strategy.
MOTION CARRIED.
13.2 Finance Committee: 2026 General Fund Operating Budget
Councillor Sullivan provided an overview of the 2026 General Fund Operating Budget as
Chair of the Finance Committee.
Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Finance Committee, Common Council reflect
upon the proposed 2026 General Fund Operating Budget, make all inquiries to staff and
receive and file this report and presentation.
MOTION CARRIED.
13.3 Finance Committee: 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
Councillor Sullivan provided an overview of the 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget as
Chair of the Finance Committee.
Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Harris:
RESOLVED that Common Council reflect upon the proposed 2026 Utility Fund Operating
Budget, make all inquiries to staff and receive and file this report and presentation.
MOTION CARRIED.
14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda
15. General Correspondence
16. Supplemental Agenda
17. Committee of the Whole
17.1 2022 Memorial Cup – Legacy Fund Transfer
Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Stewart:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on
November 17, 2025, the City enter into an agreement with 2022 MEMORIAL CUP SAINT
JOHN HOST COMPANY INC. (“MCSJ”) & SAINT JOHN HOCKEY FUND LTD. (dba
SAINT JOHN SEA DOGS FOUNDATION, the “Foundation”) generally in the form as
presented to Committee of the Whole at its meeting held November 17, 2025, regarding
the transfer of a legacy fund from MCSJ to the Foundation, for purposes of maintaining an
6
COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL
November 17, 2025 / le 17 novembre 2025
7
outdoor ball hockey arena as contemplated under a 2022 Donation Agreement between
the City & MCSJ, and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the said
agreement and any other documents ancillary thereto.
MOTION CARRIED.
17.2 Extension of Group Benefit Coverage to Council Members
Moved by Deputy Mayor MacKenzie, seconded by Councillor Lowe:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on
November 17, 2025, group benefit coverage be extended on a voluntary basis to Council
members with a cost-sharing arrangement of seventy-five percent (75%) paid by the City
and twenty-five percent (25%) paid by the Council member, commencing with the 2026
operating budget as of January 1, 2026.
MOTION CARRIED.
17.3 CAO Interim Position
Moved by Councillor Lowe, seconded by Councillor Norton:
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on
November 17, 2025, Common Council endorse the appointment of Kevin Fudge, who
currently holds the position of Chief Financial Officer/Chief of Staff with the City of Saint
John, as the Interim Chief Administrative Officer effective December 12th, 2025, through
to the selection and commencement of employment date of a permanent Chief
Administrative Officer.
MOTION CARRIED.
18. Adjournment
Moved by Councillor Lowe, seconded by Councillor Stewart:
RESOLVED that the meeting of Common Council held on November 17, 2025, be
adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
7
Council Community Fund Application Form A – EXTERNAL FORM
Councillor Stewart
Council Community Fund Application FORM A
The Information you provide on this form will be used to assess eligibility and consideration for
the award of funds at a Common Council meeting.
Program Description
Through the Council Community Fund Policy (the Fund) Council Members may apply for funding
for projects or events that enhance the vibrancy and wellbeing of the residents of the City or minor
capital expenditures to improve infrastructure. The Fund supplements Council’s existing
Community Grants program, allowing a timely and flexible approach to requests for smaller
initiatives that align with Council priorities that would not otherwise coincide with the timing of the
Community Grants Program.
Successful projects will advance one of Council’s five priority areas Grow, Green, Belong,
Move and Perform.
Application and Eligibility for Community-Based Organizations
Applications must comply with the City of Saint John Council Community Fund Policy. For a
complete description of application and eligibility criteria please review the Council Community
Fund Policy.
Applications are always open for submissions during the calendar year.
Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) must be a registered non-profit or registered
charitable organization holding its principal activities within the City of Saint John.
Application must also demonstrate that your proposal:
is based in the City of Saint John
will spend the funding within the financial year in which it is awarded.
Applications have a funding limit of $1500 per Council Member.
FORM A.
Name of the Council Member submitting this application:
8
Council Community Fund Application Form A – EXTERNAL FORM
P.R.O. Kids
Charity organization, that is considered a branch of municipality.
Greg Cutler – Manager of Community Development
506-650-3763
gregory.cutler@saintjohn.ca
15 Market Square Saint John, N.B. E2L 4L1
Positive Recreation Opportunities for Kids (P.R.O. Kids) is a charitable service operated by the
City of Saint John that matches children and youth (up to 18) in financial need, with organized,
registered recreation activities. Pro Kids assist families with the cost of registration fees,
equipment and transportation for their children. Each year, hundreds of local kids are given
the opportunity to participate in sports, recreation, arts or culture activity of their choice.
P.R.O. Kids is a confidential service available to all children and youth in Saint John,
Quispamsis, Grand Bay-Westfield and Rothesay. All administration costs are covered by these
municipalities, allowing 100% of all donations to P.R.O. Kids to go directly to assisting the
children and youth of our community.
Name of Community-Based Organization:
Non-profit status: (registered non-profit number, registered charitable organization number)
Name and Title of CBO individual responsible for the management of the Funds
Phone Number:
Email Address:
Address:
Tell us a bit about your group (what does your group do?)
9
Council Community Fund Application Form A – EXTERNAL FORM
Please confirm the amount of funds you are requesting: $1500
We intend to accept the funds identified through the Council Community Fund Application and
turn that into sponsorships for 4-6 children to participate in organized, registered recreation
activities.
NA
100% of the funds committed through this process will provide youth aged with the opportunity
to participate in organized recreational opportunities they may not otherwise have because of
financial need within the family.
We feel P.R.O. Kids advance the Council priorities of Grow and Belong.
Tell us about what you want to do (describe the project / event / and any small capital asset
request to support the project/event)
Where is the location of your project / event?
What do you think the benefits will be to people living in the city?
How does your project / event contribute to addressing the priorities of Common Council?
How much will your proposal cost?
What do you need to carry out your project or event what is the estimated cost?
Breakdown of costs Amount
Youth sponsorships $1500
TOTAL:
Estimated completion date:
Will you be able to complete the project / event
and obtain any small capital assets within the
financial year in which it is requested?
Yes / No
Estimated completion date: NA
10
Council Community Fund Application Form A – EXTERNAL FORM
To Be Acknowledged by the individual responsible for managing the Funds for the
Community-Based Organization named above.
Accountability:
I acknowledge that if funds are provided by the City of Saint John, I will accept
responsibility that the funds will be used for the stated purpose and within the timeline
stated above.
I acknowledge that I will be responsible for keeping all receipts and/or invoices relating to
the project or event above and completing an Outcome Report within 45 days of the
project or event completion date.
Liability Waiver for Community Based Organization Fund Recipients
By submitting this application, I hereby acknowledge and agree that neither the City, its council,
nor any of its members, agencies, officers, employees, or agents shall be held liable or
responsible for any injury, including death to any person or for any claims, damages, liabilities,
losses, costs, or expenses, including legal fees, arising out of or in connection with the use,
allocation, distribution, or expenditure of the Council Members Discretionary Community Fund.
I, as an authorized signatory or representative who has legal authority to bind the Community-
Based Organization, agree to indemnify and hold harmless the aforementioned entities from all
claims, damages, liabilities and losses incurred in relation to or resulting from the use of the
allocated funds.
Greg Cutler
Printed name of authorized signatory
Signature of authorized signatory
11-19-2025
Date
11
Council Community Fund Application Form A – EXTERNAL FORM
Available funds remaining in Council member’s Community Fund budget: $1500
Your privacy:
We will use the information you provide on this form for the award of funds. The award of funds
is reported publicly. All information held by us is liable to disclosure under the Right to
Information and Protection of Privacy Act unless it is exempt.
City Clerk acknowledgement: (To be completed by City Clerk or their designate)
I acknowledge that the proposal described above meets the eligibility requirements of
the Council Community Fund Policy (CCFP) and may proceed to the next public meeting
of Common Council.
12
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Page 1 of 1
November 20, 2025
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Street Vesting - 0 Berryman (Portion of PID 55112510)
At the November 18, 2025 meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee, they
considered the attached report regarding the vesting of a public street.
Yeva Mattson, Planner with Growth and Community Services, appeared before
the Committee and provided an overview of the proposed subdivision and street
vesting.
Colin McDonald, the applicant, spoke in favour of staff recommendation.
One letter was received in opposition.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council assent to the attached tentative plan of
subdivision (MS Acadia Inc. Subdivision, September 19, 2025) with
respect to the proposed vesting of a portion of PID 55112510 as a Public
Street.
2. That Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of one or
more City/Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure the provision of
the required work and facilities associated with the extension of
Berryman Street.
3. That Common Council assent to any necessary Municipal Servicing
Easements.
4. That Common Council assent to money-in-lieu of Land for Public
Purpose.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Mitchell
Chair
13
Report Date: November 13, 2025
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting Date: November 18, 2025
SUBJECT
Applicant: Colin McDonald
Landowners(s): MS Acadia
Location:
Civic Address: PID: Lot Size:
Berryman Street (portion of the site is at the end of Berryman Street)
55112510 15.22 hectares
Plan Designation: Stable Residential
Zoning Low-Rise Residential (RL)
Application Type: Subdivision
Jurisdiction: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council
concerning the vesting of public streets.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This application involves the dedication of land as a Public Street, which would serve as an
extension of the existing Berryman Street. The proposed public street would provide access to
16 Lots, which would be utilized for low-rise residential development. Approval of the application
is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION
1.That Common Council assent to the attached tentative plan of subdivision (MS Acadia
Inc. Subdivision, September 19, 2025) with respect to the proposed vesting of a portion
of PID 55112510 as a Public Street.
14
Colin McDonald PID 55112510 November 13, 2025
Page 2 of 4
2.That Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of one or more
City/Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure the provision of the required work
and facilities associated with the extension of Berryman Street.
3.That Common Council assent to any necessary Municipal Servicing Easements.
4.That Common Council assent to money-in-lieu of Land for Public Purpose.
DECISION HISTORY
The Berryman Investment Inc. Subdivision was created in 1997 and foresaw low-rise residential
development across PID 55112510 with access off Old Black River Road and Cottage Road.
Since 1997, Berryman Street, Helena Drive, Bernice Court, and Miranda Way have all been
developed. Except for Bernice Court, the remaining streets were designed for future road
extensions. This application involves the extension of Berryman Street, with a revised layout
from the original subdivision plan.
ANALYSIS
Proposal
The subject site is 15.22 hectares, with the proposed street and new lots being contained within
a 1.43-hectare portion of the site. This site is located at the end of Berryman Street, in a
subdivision off Old Black River Road on the East Side of the City. The area is largely low-
density residential development with some industrial, rural and community facility properties
located in the broader area. The proposed configuration of the lots and extension of the street
conform with the development pattern of the existing subdivision.
Subdivision
The attached Tentative Plan of Subdivision “MS Acadia Inc – September 19, 2025” identifies a
portion of PID 55112510, identified as Berryman Street, to be vested as a Public Street. Vesting
of public streets requires the assent of Common Council, and a recommendation from the
Planning Advisory Committee. Approval of a City/Developer Agreement, and Municipal
Servicing Easements are also requested, to facilitate the extension the road and water and
sanitary services.
Tentative approval of the lots will be facilitated by the Development Officer upon the vesting of
the public street, which will provide physical and legal access to any future lots. The attached
Subdivision Plan does not propose the dedication of a lot for Land for Public Purposes and our
Parks department has indicated they would prefer money-in-lieu be provided. The
recommendation includes the assent to money-in-lieu of LPP for the subdivision.
Municipal Plan and Zoning Bylaw
The site is designated as Stable Residential in the Municipal Plan, which are neighbourhoods
within the Primary Development Area that have the potential to accommodate additional
development, at a scale and density consistent with the surrounding context. The surrounding
neighbourhood largely consists of Low-Rise Residential (RL) zoning and corresponding housing
15
Colin McDonald PID 55112510 November 13, 2025
Page 3 of 4
typologies. The extension of Berryman Street would facilitate similar development patterns and
would conform to the requirements of the Municipal Plan and the Zoning By-Law. Approval of
the proposed subdivision is recommended.
Service Area Review
Internal Service Areas Feedback
Infrastructure No concerns
Building No concerns
Emergency Management Fire and Emergency Services recommends that
any new homes (outside of an 8-minute average
response time) be sprinklered in accordance with
NFPA 13D Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler
Systems in One and Two-Family Dwellings and
Manufactured Homes, 2016 Edition.
Parks Requests the provision of money-in-lieu of LPP
rather than land dedication.
Traffic No Concerns
Parking Commission No concerns as long as on-site parking is provided
per the zoning bylaw requirements
External Agencies
Department of Local Government and
Environment – WAWA
No concerns.
Conclusion
The applicant seeks to formally vest lands as a Public Street for the extension of Berryman
Street and the continuation of an existing low-rise residential development. In addition to the
vesting of the public street, the approvals include the assent to a City/Developer Subdivision
Agreement, Municipal Servicing Easements and money-in-lieu of Lands for Public Purpose. As
this application meets the intent of the Municipal Plan, Zoning By-Law, and Subdivision By-Law,
approval of the application is recommended.
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No other alternatives were considered.
ENGAGEMENT
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 October 25, 2025. As of the date of this
report, 1 letters was received in opposition to the application.
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Manager Director Commissioner
Jennifer Kirchner RPP, MCIP Pankaj Nalavde RPP, MCIP Amy Poffenroth P.Eng., MBA
16
Colin McDonald PID 55112510 November 13, 2025
Page 4 of 4
Contact: Yeva Mattson
Telephone: (506) 721-8453
Email: yeva.mattson@saintjohn.ca
Application: 25-0213
APPENDIX
Map 1: Aerial Photography
Map 2: Future Land Use
Map 3: Zoning
Attachment 1: Site Photos
Submission 1: Tentative Plan of Subdivision
17
B
e
r
r
ym
a
n
S
t
.
Miranda
Way
Bayside
Dr.
B
ernic
e
C
t.
Helena
Dr.
Old BlackRiverRd.Cottage Rd.Aerial Context - Berryman Street
Subject Property Public Street Vesting 0 170 34085 m
18
B
e
r
r
ym
a
n
S
t
.
Mirand
a
Way
Bayside
Dr.
B
ernic
e
C
t.
Helena
Dr.
OldBlack RiverRd.Cottage Rd.Subject Property
Future Land Use
Heavy Industrial
Rural Resource
Major Community Facility
Stable Residential
Urban Reserve
0 180 36090 m
Municipal Plan - Berryman Street
19
IM
RR
RR
IM
FD
CFM
RR
RU
IM
US
RL
RL
RL
RL
B
e
r
r
ym
a
n
S
t
.
Mirand
a
Way
B
ernic
e
C
t.
BaysideDr.
Helena
Dr.
Old Black RiverRd.Cottage Rd.Subject Property
Zoning
Low-Rise Residential (RL)
Rural Residential (RR)
Medium Industrial (IM)
Utility Service (US)
Major Community Facility (CFM)
Future Development (FD)
Rural (RU)
0 180 36090 m
Zoning - Berryman Street
20
ATTACHMENT 1: SITE PHOTOGRAPHY
Jennifer Street looking South where the extension would occur
Corner of Berryman and Miranda, looking north along Miranda Way from subject site
21
Corner of Berryman and Miranda, looking north along existing Berryman Street from subject site
22
8.68m
7.
5
2
m
6.
1
1
m
16.54m LOT 10AREA = 1409 SMLOT 16AREA = 509 SMLOT 15AREA = 508 SMLOT 14AREA = 508 SMLOT 13AREA = 513 SMLOT 12AREA = 637 SMLOT 11AREA = 869 SMLOT 9AREA = 1379 SMLOT 8AREA = 1167 SMLOT 7AREA = 608 SMLOT 6AREA = 517 SMLOT 5AREA = 517 SMLOT 4AREA = 517 SMLOT 3AREA = 519 SMLOT 2AREA = 521 SMLOT 1AREA = 521 SMCIVIC# 1PID 55198634PID 55198642PID 55198659PID 55206890PID 55238489PID 55238497PID 55207815PID 55207807PID 55238505PID 55238513CIVIC# 27PID 55198626PID 00339259PID 55222665PID 55222657PID 00338178PID 00023739PID 55124135PID 55112510vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
v
v vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
v
v
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv10.00m12.27m10.10m5.18m8.29m
5.97m
5.90m 8.73m8.75m2.04m2.00m3.29m3.31m3.28m3.32m3.30m3.30m3.30m3.29m3.30m3.30m3.35m3.24m3.27m3.30m3.28m3.26m3.25m8.64m
8.68m
5.99m
6.00m
8.56m
8.60m 3.34m6.00m
6.01m
6.01m
6.01m
6.04m
6.04m
8.41m
8.42m
3.31m3.28m6.02m
6.03m
3.30m3.32m8.26m
8.30m
6.26m
6.89m14.82m 14.07m6.30m6.31m6.11m22.47m6.51m8.48m
8.53m
8.34m
8.30m 6.05m
6.05m 7.30m
6.25m8.61m 18.26m 21.01m 18.34m17.40m
9.
0
5m
11.58m
14.41m
6.65m5.63m10.45m6.65m11.82m
10.02m
8.21m
9.73m
15.11m
13.71m
6.14m
8.03m
4.22m2.33m7.53m
16.66m4.23m2.35m5.99m
5.99m
9.60m
9.70m 3.27m7.87m
7.86m
3.42m3.41m3.24m7.85m
7.89m
3.36m3.19m3.21m3.37m6.00m
9.68m
6.00m 3.25m3.25m3.33m7.84m
7.85m
6.01m
3.31m3.25m3.27m7.84m
7.84m
3.31m3.34m6.01m
5.99m3.27m9.65m
9.69m2.08m6.00m11
4
3
7
10912 11
3
9
6
11
8
3
2
14
9
7
2
5.42m 5.12m
19.98m
3.00m
3.00m2.01m2.01m2.01m150°13'50"17.01617m±17m±17m±17m±7m±17m±17m±17m±17m±17m±17m±19m±23m±19m±17m±17m±22m±Rev.Project No.ScaleDate (yy/mm/dd)Reviewed ByGeneral NotesFUNDY EngineeringLegendProject:27 Wellington RowSaint John, NBE2L 3H4Serving Our Clients' Needs FirstTel. (506) 635-1566Fax. (506) 635-0206fundy@fundyeng.comwww.fundyeng.comDesigned ByMS ACADIA INC.BERRYMAN STREETSAINT JOHNSAINT JOHN COUNTY, NBSUBDIVISION PLAN25/09/19AMNEMO0184961:400Scale: Key Plan1:7500New BrunswickGrid North2 540 5007 363 700
1.All directions are New Brunswick GridsAzimuths and have been derived by usingGNSS.2.All units in metric unless stated otherwise.3.All dimensions in millimeters unless statedotherwise.AREA OF WORKCOTTAGE ROADBERRYMAN STREET(WIDTH 19.98m)0Scale = 1:4004020Meters7 3
6
3
8
0
0
New BrunswickGrid NorthBERNICE COURTHELENA DRIVEBERRYMAN STREETBERNICE COURT23
24
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-276
Report Date November 18, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Growth and Community
Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Saint John Community Arts Board - Recipients of the Funding Program
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head Chief Administrative Officer
Kelly Green Amy Poffenroth / David
Dobbelsteyn
J. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
The Chief Administrative Officer recommends:
1. That Common Council receive and file the Saint John Community Arts Board’s letter
supporting the granting of funding to the successful applicants for the 2025 Fall/Winter
Small Grants Funding; and,
2. That the Chief Financial Officer facilitates payment to the successful organizations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Saint John Community Arts Board is awarding Community Arts Grants to eight applicants on
the merits of community engagement, support for artists, diversity, and arts components. A total
award of $21,600 is being distributed this round to celebrate arts and culture and support local
events, festivals and artistic organizations. The successful applicants include literary, cultural, and
classical music events, productions, public art, as well as a master class for aspiring professionals
in the arts.
The Saint John Community Arts Board’s Grant Funding program provides financial support to
non-profit organizations in Saint John for the facilitation of Festivals or Projects with an Arts and
Culture mandate. The funds for these grants come from the Arts Board’s annual budget. The Arts
Board provides two rounds of Small Grant Funding each year: Spring/Summer and Fall/Winter.
25
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
Common Council - July 7, 2025
Common Council receive and filed the Saint John Community Arts Board’s
letter supporting the granting of funding to the successful applicants for the 2025
Spring/Summer Small Grants Fund
Common Council, January 27, 2025
Common Council receive and file the Saint John Community Arts Board’s letter supporting the
granting of funding to the successful applicant for 2025 Winter Small Grants Funding
REPORT
As described in the City of Saint John Arts and Culture Policy, adopted by Common Council on
September 26, 2005, the arts make a substantial contribution to the quality of life and vitality
of our community. The City of Saint John believes that one of the most effective means of
facilitating the development of arts and culture in Saint John is to provide funding support to
non-profits arts and/or cultural organizations serving our community. In this way, arts and
culture organizations are encouraged to establish themselves, enhance their services, and
provide their programming to the community. Accordingly, the city, through the Saint John
Community Arts Board has implemented the Community Arts Funding Program. This program
is designed to provide project support for non-profit organizations or groups wishing to offer
quality arts activities in any discipline of the creative arts within the City of Saint John.
The Community Arts Funding Program (Small Grants Program) is administered by the Saint John
Community Arts Board on behalf of the City of Saint John. The Community Arts Board consists
of residents appointed by Council’s Nominating Committee and one Councilor. The City’s Arts
& Culture Coordinator acts as the Program Officer for the Community Arts Funding Program but
does not vote. The jury consists of three members of the Arts Board’s Grant Committee.
The Program provides financial support in two categories:
Project/Activity Funding – Arts-related projects, activities, events, or initiatives
(including a series of activities or events) that are primarily participatory, actively
engage the public, are educational in nature, or that develop the arts in the community.
Arts Festival Funding – Preparation and presentation of one-day or multi-day arts
festivals, major arts events, or arts celebrations.
The Arts Board is pleased to fund the following projects and festivals for the 2025 Fall/Winter
Small Grants:
26
1. Greater Saint John Chinese Cultural Association | Chinese New Year Gala
Award:$3,500
The 2026 Greater Saint John Lunar New Year Celebration Gala will take place at the
Imperial Theatre in Saint John. This signature cultural event is not only a joyous
celebration of the traditional Chinese New Year but also a heartfelt tribute to the
growing Chinese community in Saint John and our shared sense of belonging to this
beautiful city.
The Gala will showcase an exciting lineup of performances by talented Chinese artists
from both the local community and other cities, including musicians, dancers, singers,
and martial artists. After more than a month of dedicated rehearsals, they will present
around 20 diverse artistic performances that blend tradition, creativity, and cultural
pride.
2. Fundy Sea Shanty Festival Inc. | Spring Tide Sea Shantyfest
Award: $3,500
This festival which takes place Uptown, celebrates those songs that were sung by sailors
during the Age of Sail, will include musical performances, workshops, historical lectures,
a seafood chowder and contemporary dance.
It will showcase Saint John and its connection to shipbuilding and seafaring. The only
other festival of this scope and magnitude in Atlantic Canada is held annually in
Saint Martins each August.
3. Interaction School of Performing Arts | Matilda Spring Production
Award: $2,500
This award supports the Spring production at Interaction School of Performing Arts.
Their mandate is to inspire and empower children and youth through theatre education
that fosters imagination, self-expression, and a lifelong appreciation for the arts.
The production will be “Matilda”. Matilda bursts with energy, wit, and heart, bringing
Roald Dahl’s beloved story to life through vibrant performances and imaginative staging.
Centered around the brilliant and brave Matilda Wormwood, the show follows her
journey as she navigates a world of neglectful parents, a tyrannical headmistress, and
the power of her own intellect and courage.
There will be community engagement components, such as story times and interactive
games at local libraries and bookstores, and behind the scenes open rehearsals,
workshops at local schools, and more.
27
4. Saint John Jewish Historical Society Inc. | Celebrating Jewish Authors in Saint John
Award: $2,000
The Jewish community of Saint John includes a number of writers – authors, journalists
and scholars. For most, their work has never been celebrated outside of their fields, and
for some, their written works are out of print, are hard to find, or remain unpublished.
This project proposes to uncover these works and share them as part of a celebration
and reading night in the spring of 2026.
The proposed research project and the event proposed at the project’s conclusion will
be open to the community to attend and to hear the stories of the many Jewish authors
who made up the Saint John Jewish community and their individual creations as
journalists, novelists, poets, playwrights, and academic writers. Much of their work will
provide some reflection on their lives growing up in Saint John and contributing to their
home community, whether they made their careers here or elsewhere.
5. Uptown Saint John | Uptown Box Art 2026
Award: $3,500
Uptown Saint John Inc. is presenting the fifth annual instalment of the Uptown Box Art
Program. This is a well-known, ongoing initiative designed to beautify public spaces,
deter graffiti, uphold cultural diversification, support an attractive place to visit, work,
and live while showcasing local artistic talent. This program is unique because the public
art can be watched throughout the progress of the instalment, as well as enjoyed well
into the future. The public will also be invited to the celebratory unveiling event
6. Writers Federation of New Brunswick | Word Spring 2026
$2,800
Word Spring 2026 is an annual gathering of New Brunswick writers, and will be a live,
public event, held in Saint John at the Crowne Plaza Hotel. This event includes
professional development workshops, open mic readings, and two provincial award
ceremonies: the NB Writing Competition Literary Soiree and the 11th annual NB Book
Awards, which will be held at Lily Lake Pavilion.
7. Saint John Theatre Company | Arc Academy Master Class Pilot Project
Award: $3,500
As part of a three-year organizational plan to be ready to occupy the new Courthouse
Stage facility on Kings Square, the Saint John Theatre Company has developed the ARC
Academy, a theatre training program that will leverage the skills of visiting ARC artists
to create professional quality training programs for aspiring theatre makers high-school
age and upward. The support of the Saint John Community Arts Board would be directed
for allowing Saint John based theatre-makers to attend at no cost.
28
The long-term goal of ARC Academy is to upgrade the skills of local theatre makers in
all disciplines: onstage, design, stage management, directing, playwrighting. The
growth of the talent base will support the professional development of the ARC by
ensuring that we have a local talent base ready for the rigors of professional
production. These Master-Classes will be built on the experience gained during a
similar series offered in 2010 as part of the Saint John Cultural Capital Program.
8. Saint John String Quartet | Living Sound
Award: $300
The “Living Sound” project speaks to the benefits listeners in care living environments
experience as a result of engaging and participating in live music activities. The project
is inspired by the work of the famous neurologist Dr. Oliver Sacks, who often pointed to
the critical role that music can play in personal and community well-being. He asserted,
for example, that "Music imprints itself in the brain deeper than any other human
experience ... Music brings back the feeling of life when nothing else can".
There is abundant research on how music "lights up" the brain in positive ways, building
and strengthening neural networks. In care facilities, residents typically respond
viscerally to music, especially when it is familiar to them.
The “Living Sound” project will enable the quartet to give special attention to Saint
John’s care home residents, with presentations given in eight (8) care home and hospice
facilities throughout the region. SJSQ includes native French personnel and therefore
able to present Living Sound in both official languages where appropriate.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Grow
Aligning with the principles of smart growth, Plan SJ, and Arts and Culture Policy
Belong
Enhance the quality of life, recreation, arts, and culture opportunities, and social well-
being in a safe place to live.
Perform
Plans, policies, procedures, and best practices.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
The 2025 General Fund Operating Budget included a $70,000 budget for the Saint John
Community Arts Board, with $40,000 allotted for the Small Grant Funding Program.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Saint John Community Arts Board Grant
Committee’s Jury
Andrea Kikuchi, Christopher McFarlane,
Laura Oland
29
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: 2025 Fall Winter Small Grants Committee – Memorandum
30
Chair/President
Andrea Kikuchi
Vice Chair
Laura Oland
2nd Vice Chair
Ann Mowatt
Bryn Robinson
Lindsay Jacquard
Jeremy Cairns
Dahlia Das
Councilor Radwan
Chris McFarlane
Jack Zhao
Maria Murphy
Alexandra Fournier
Jennifer Botsford
Alheri Bihgni
Marcela Torres
Arts and Culture
Coordinator
Kelly Green
Address P.O. Box/C.P. 1971
Saint John, NB/N-B E2L 4L1
Tel: (506) 721-6856
artsandculture@saintjohn.ca
*Logo based on City Hall
sculpture “Progression” by
Claude Roussel, CM, ONB,
RCA
MEMORANDUM November 18th, 2025
Mayor Donna Reardon and Members of Saint John City Council
Your Worship and City Councillors,
Re: Saint John Community Arts Fall/Winter 2025 Funding
Program
A meeting of the Saint John Community Arts Board’s Grant Jury
was held on Thursday, November 6th to decide the Community
Arts Fall/Winter 2025 grant recipients.
The Saint John Community Arts Board’s Jury approved the grant
amounts to be awarded to each organization or group as per
the attached list.
This round, we awarded a total of $21,600. Such funding will be
covered under the 2025 Saint John Community Arts Funding
Program, from the $70,000 budget allocated by Common
Council to the Board’s various programs.
During this round of grants, the board received 12 project,
event, and festival submissions. The 8 successful applications
represent our diverse arts and cultural community and will add
to the growth, prosperity, and vibrancy of the city.
The Community Arts Board recommends that Saint John
Common Council receive and file this letter and direct the
Commissioner of Finance to issue cheques to be distributed to
the grant recipients at a forthcoming presentation.
Respectfully Submitted,
Andrea Kikuchi
Chair, Saint John Community Arts Board
Attached: List of Grant Recipients for 2025 Fall/Winter Funding
31
2025 FALL/WINTER ART GRANT RECIPIENTS
Total of Grants Awarded: $21,600
1. Chinese New Year Gala $3,500
The 2026 Greater Saint John Lunar New Year Celebration Gala will take place at the
Imperial Theatre in Saint John. This signature cultural event, put on by the Greater Saint
John Chinese Cultural Association, is a joyous celebration of the traditional Chinese New
Year and a heartfelt tribute to the growing Chinese community in Saint John and our
shared sense of belonging to this beautiful city.
The Gala will showcase an exciting lineup of performances by talented Chinese artists from
both the local community and other cities, including musicians, dancers, singers, and
martial artists. After more than a month of dedicated rehearsals, they will present around
20 diverse artistic performances that blend tradition, creativity, and cultural pride.
2. Spring Tide Sea Shantyfest $3,500
This festival, put on by Fundy Sea Shanty Festival Inc., celebrates those songs that were
sung by sailors during the Age of Sail, will include musical performances, workshops,
historical lectures, a seafood chowder and contemporary dance.
It will showcase Saint John and its connection to shipbuilding and seafaring. The only other
festival of this scope and magnitude in Atlantic Canada is held annually in St Martins each
August.
3. Matilda Spring Production $2,500
This award supports the Spring production at Interaction School of Performing Arts. Their
mandate is to inspire and empower children and youth through theatre education that
fosters imagination, self-expression, and a lifelong appreciation for the arts.
The production will be “Matilda”. Matilda bursts with energy, wit, and heart, bringing
Roald Dahl’s beloved story to life through vibrant performances and imaginative staging.
Centered around the brilliant and brave Matilda Wormwood, the show follows her journey
as she navigates a world of neglectful parents, a tyrannical headmistress, and the power of
her own intellect and courage.
There will be community engagement components, such as story times and interactive
games at local libraries and bookstores, behind the scenes open rehearsals, workshops at
local schools, and more.
32
4. Celebrating Jewish Authors in Saint John $2,000
The Jewish community of Saint John included a number of writers – including authors,
journalists and scholars. For most, their work has never been celebrated outside of their
fields and for some their written works are out of print, hard to find or remain
unpublished. This project proposes to uncover these works and share them as part of a
celebration and reading night in the spring of 2026.
The proposed research project and the event proposed at the project’s conclusion will be
open to the community to attend and to hear the stories of the many Jewish authors who
made up the Saint John Jewish community and their individual creations as journalists,
novelists, poets, playwrights, and academic writers. Much of their work will provide some
reflection on their lives growing up in Saint John and contributing to their home
community, whether they made their careers here or elsewhere.
5. Uptown Box Art 2026 $3,500
Uptown Saint John Inc. is presenting the fifth annual instalment of the Uptown Box Art
Program. This is a well-known, ongoing initiative designed to beautify public spaces, deter
graffiti, uphold cultural diversification, supporting an attractive place to visit, work, and
live while showcasing local artistic talent. This program is unique because the public art
can be watched throughout the progress of the instalment, as well as enjoyed well into
the future. The public will also be invited to the celebratory unveiling event
6. Word Spring 2026 $2,800
WordSpring 2026, put on by the Writers Federation of New Brunswick is an annual
gathering of New Brunswick writers, will be a live, public event, held in Saint John at the
Crowne Plaza Hotel. This event includes professional development workshops, open mic
readings, and two provincial award ceremonies: the NB Writing Competition Literary
Soiree and the 11th annual NB Book Awards, which will be held at Lily Lake Pavilion.
7. Arc Academy Master Class Pilot Project $3,500
As part of a three-year organizational plan to be ready to occupy the new Courthouse
Stage facility on Kings Square, The Saint John Theatre Company has developed the ARC
Academy, a theatre training program that will leverage the skills of visiting ARC artists to
create professional quality training programs for aspiring theatre makers high-school age
and upward. The support of the Saint John Community Arts Board would be directed for
allowing Saint John Based theatre-makers to attend at no cost.
The long-term goal of ARC Academy is to upgrade the skills of local theatre makers in all
disciplines: onstage, design, stage management, directing, playwrighting. The growth of
the talent base will support the professional development of the ARC by ensuring that we
33
have a local talent base ready for the rigors of professional production. These Master-
Classes will be built on the experience gained during a similar series offered in 2010 as part
of the Saint John Cultural Capital Program.
8. Living Sound $300
The “Living Sound” project, by the Saint John String Quartet, speaks to the benefits
listeners in care living environments experience as a result of engaging and participating in
live music activities. The project is inspired by the work of the famous neurologist Dr.
Oliver Sacks, who often pointed to the critical role that music can play in personal and
community well-being. He asserted, for example, that "Music imprints itself in the brain
deeper than any other human experience ... Music brings back the feeling of life when
nothing else can".
There is abundant research on how music "lights up" the brain in positive ways, building
and strengthening neural networks. In care facilities, residents typically respond viscerally
to music, especially when it is familiar to them.
The “Living Sound” project will enable the quartet to give special attention to Saint John’s
care home residents, with presentations given in eight (8) care home and hospice facilities
throughout the region. SJSQ includes native French personnel and therefore able to
present Living Sound in both official languages where appropriate.
34
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-266
Report Date November 25, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Conservation of Watershed Lands
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head Chief Administrative Officer
Dean Price Ian Fogan J. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that Common Council resolve to:
1. On City-owned lands within the drinking water watershed of Loch Lomond and the
watershed of Spruce Lake noted on the attached maps, the City will prohibit activities
incompatible with in-situ conservation of biodiversity including but not limited to heavy
industry, industry, commercial forestry, and energy development.
2. Adopt the mission statement developed by Saint John Water for the lands as guiding
principles for future policy, management plans, and bylaws. Adopt and enable a long-term
management commitment that supports in-situ biodiversity conservation.
3. Work with the Fundy Region Service Commission, municipality of Fundy St Martins
Council, Town of Hampton municipal Council and Municipal area of Fundy Shores to have
them adopt similar policies in their Municipal Plan or Rural Plan as applicable and their
Zoning Bylaws updated for land owned by the City of Saint John that exists outside of its
municipal boundaries.
4. Support the recognition of the identified City-owned watershed lands as Other Effective
Area-Based Conservation Measure (OECM) and authorize execution of the Conservation
Recognition Agreement. Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the Conservation
Recognition Agreement with the provincial Department of Natural Resources and Energy
Development (DNRED), as required by the Province of New Brunswick to facilitate
reporting of these lands and OECMs.
35
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Saint John holds a significant responsibility to protect both the quality and quantity of
drinking water for its residents. With nearly 8,000 hectares of land owned for the purpose of
safeguarding drinking water—6,500 hectares of which lie within the Loch Lomond and Spruce
Lake watersheds—the City is also uniquely positioned to demonstrate leadership in land
stewardship and biodiversity conservation. Currently, a total of 4,842.24 hectares—3,320.64
hectares within the Loch Lomond Drinking Water Watershed and 1,521.60 hectares within the
Spruce Lake Water Watersheds— have the potential to demonstrate municipal leadership and
contribute to long-term area-based conservation outcomes through recognition of these lands as
Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs). OECM recognition does not in itself
create new protections — rather, it acknowledges areas that are already being effectively
managed for biodiversity, even if conservation was not the original purpose.
This report recommends long-term management resolutions and associated policy revisions that
would support long-term biodiversity conservation and therefore enable this recognition. These
recommendations would reinforce the City’s existing priorities around watershed protection
while also unlocking new conservation benefits, including:
Community recognition and support for environmental leadership;
Strengthened resilience to climate change, forest pests, and wildfire;
Reduced water treatment costs through natural filtration;
Potential property tax reductions;
Legal and policy mechanisms to resist future industrial and incompatible development.
The resulting OECM recognition would position the City of Saint John as a leader in municipal
conservation while contributing to Canada’s and the global community’s target to conserve 30%
of lands and inland waters by 2030 and supporting New Brunswick’s 15% land conservation target
by 2027.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
N/A
REPORT
Background on OECMs
Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) are geographically defined areas,
other than Protected Areas, that are governed and managed in ways that achieve long-term
biodiversity conservation, even if that is not their primary purpose. OECMs are a globally
recognized tool for area-based conservation that was introduced under the United Nations
Convention on Biological Diversity. Alongside Protected Areas, they contribute to meeting the
targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), which Canada has
committed to. Most relevant is Target 3 – to protect or conserve 30% of lands and waters by 2030.
There are specific global and pan-Canadian criteria that have been defined for both Protected
36
Areas and OECMs. Canada’s progress towards Target 3 is tracked through the Canadian Protected
and Conserved Areas Database (CPCAD), which is managed by Environment and Climate Change
Canada (ECCC).
At the provincial level, New Brunswick’s Department of Natural Resources and Energy
Development (DNRED) has committed to conserving 15% of the province’s land by 2027, with a
goal of working toward 30% conserved by 2030. Both Protected Areas and OECM will play a role
in meeting these provincial targets. While the City-owned watershed lands are managed primarily
to protect drinking water/source water supply, they also support in-situ biodiversity conservation,
making them a candidate for potential OECM recognition. Making the recommended policy
revisions and recognizing these lands as OECMs would demonstrate the City of Saint John’s
leadership in watershed stewardship and biodiversity protection—while aligning with New
Brunswick’s emerging biodiversity strategy under the Nature Legacy framework.
Project background, current status and next steps
The City of Saint John’s progress toward OECM designation reflects a deliberate, multi-year
process in partnership with the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) and the Province of New
Brunswick. The process began in January 2020, when NCC acquired the Fowler-Bell property
within the Loch Lomond Drinking Water Watershed (DWW), followed by the signing of a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City’s Water Department in August 2023. Using
the pan-Canadian Decision Support Tool (DST), NCC assessed the identified lands against OECM
criteria in October 2025, and identified gaps that must be addressed before formal recognition
could occur. Although existing municipal bylaws generally prohibit development within the
Drinking Water Watersheds, they do not explicitly exclude activities such as commercial forestry,
industrial operations, or certain forms of energy development, that could negatively impact
biodiversity, particularly on lands that may be privately owned.
To address the gaps identified and meet OECM criteria, this report proposes specific resolutions
for implementation in the very near future, as well as a long-term commitment for the City to
update relevant policies and bylaws when renewed to be consistent with these resolutions. For
example, Section 14.2 ENIRRONMENTAL PROTECTRON (EP) ZONE, under the City’s Zoning Bylaw,
which pertains to land zoned as Environmental Protection (EP), could be amended to include clear
regulations prohibiting industry, commercial forestry, and energy development within the
watershed lands. Rmportantly, this prohibition would not apply to infrastructure required for the
delivery of safe drinking water, which remains a primary function of these lands. Rn addition, this
report proposes that the City would work collaboratively with other municipalities that have
jurisdiction over identified Drinking Water Watershed lands and surrounding buffer areas to
update their bylaws and policies, ensuring consistent mechanisms of protection across all
relevant jurisdictions.
The City of Saint John already implements many biodiversity-friendly practices across its drinking
water/source water watershed lands, including protecting riparian buffers, restoring degraded
37
areas, and managing for natural forest regeneration. Biodiversity management includes
maintaining healthy, resilient ecosystems by promoting native species diversity, supporting
mixed-age and structurally complex forests, and retaining continuous forest canopy to support
wildlife habitat and natural water filtration. Rn parallel with the OECM recognition process, City
staff commissioned the development of the Loch Lomond Watershed Management Plan (Spruce
Lake Watershed Management Plan to follow) and a mission statement for all drinking water
watersheds, finalized in May 2025.
Pending Council’s adoption of the resolutions in this report, final DST updates are expected to be
completed by the end of 2025, followed by a communications campaign to celebrate recognition
and the formal reporting of these lands for inclusion in CPCAD.
This Report proposes the following two actions with the goals of:
Ensuring that the City-owned lands within the drinking water watershed of Loch Lomond
and the watershed for Spruce Lake are managed to provide a long-term safe, clean, and
resilient water supply for the community in a way that also supports biodiversity and
ecosystem health, and
Facilitating the associated recognition of the City’s leadership and the contribution that
these lands make towards biodiversity conservation.
1. Formally adopt and enable a long-term management commitment that supports in-situ
biodiversity conservation, on City-owned lands within the drinking water watershed of Loch
Lomond and the watershed of Spruce Lake, the City will prohibit activities incompatible with in-
situ conservation of biodiversity including but not limited to heavy industry, industry, commercial
forestry, and energy development.
Adopt the mission statement developed by Saint John Water for the lands as guiding principles
for future policy, management plans, and bylaws. Update all relevant policies to explicitly
incorporate the resolutions, as they are renewed.
Work with the Fundy Region Service Commission, municipality of Fundy St Martins, Town of
Hampton and Municipal area of Fundy Shores to have similar policies updated for land owned by
the City that exists outside of Saint John’s municipal boundaries.
2. Support the recognition of the identified City-owned watershed lands as OECMs and
authorize execution of the Conservation Recognition Agreement.
Endorse the recognition of the identified City-owned watershed lands as OECMs through their
reporting to the Canadian Protected and Conserved Areas Database (CPCAD), in collaboration
with the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) and the Province of New Brunswick.
38
Long-Term Environmental, Water, and Recognition Benefits of OECM
Designation Protection of Safe Drinking Water: Natural filtration through intact forest
cover supports high water quality, reducing treatment costs and health risks.
Forest Fire and Pest Risk Mitigation: Management plans emphasize restoration of
Wabanaki-Acadian forests, which are more resilient to pests, fire, and climate change. The
designation of an OECM can potentially open up provincial sources of funding to help with
ongoing management expertise.
Tax Reductions: Recognition of these lands as conservation areas may make them eligible
for reduced municipal or provincial property taxes. The Province of New Brunswick is
currently developing a new biodiversity strategy and has indicated intent to develop tax
incentives as part of that framework. City of Saint John staff have received assurances
that, should such incentives be adopted, properties designated as OECMs will be eligible
for retroactive compensation.
Public Engagement and Positivity: A visible long-term environmental commitment builds
community pride and confidence in municipal leadership. NCC as a national conservation
partner will work with the City to celebrate this recognition. (eg. Partnership watershed
signage, video recognition, national spotlight on CSJ leadership).
Crown land within the watershed: A commitment from the province of New Brunswick
to recognize crown land within the DWW as conserved therefore removing the ability to
have industrial activity and commercial forestry on non-city owned lands.
NCC land acquisition-as a land trust, NCC pays fair market value for properties
contributing to conservation areas. NCC can work with the City to acquire more private
land in the watersheds for conservation and water protection.
Barrier to Industrial Development: The policy changes recommended to support OECM
recognition will formalize the land use purpose and helps shield these areas from
incompatible future developments.
Description and Map of the Watershed Areas
The City’s current drinking water source area includes:
Loch Lomond (including Latimer Lake) Watershed
The Spruce Lake Watershed currently is used for industrial purposes and is an important resource
to protect as the City continues to grow.
Appendix A is two comprehensive maps of these areas including crown lands, private lands, the
DWW boundary, and City owned lands proposed for OECM recognition. The lands are currently
39
zoned for water protection and are mostly forested with varying degrees of degradation and
restoration needs.
Description of the area within the watershed areas being assessed for OECM recognition
Loch Lomond & Latimer Lake Watershed lands being assessed
Size: 3320.64 hectares
Current Authorities: Province of New Brunswick, City of Saint John, Municipalities of
Hampton and Fundy-St. Martins (Managed by the Fundy Region Service Commission)
Ownership: City of Saint John
Use: Rndustrial water and Primary drinking water supply for the City
Projects Completed:
o Extensive water quality monitoring (monthly and event-based)
o Stratification and temperature studies in key lakes
o Tree planting and restoration through the Two Billion Trees Program
o Public education initiatives including signage
Spruce Lake Watershed lands being assessed.
Size:1521.60 hectares
Current Authorities: Province of New Brunswick, City of Saint John, Municipality of Fundy
Shores (Managed by the South West Region Service Commission)
Ownership: City of Saint John
Use: Rndustrial water and possible future or supplementary drinking water source
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Sustainable and resilient infrastructure supporting the source water.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
Recognition of the City’s watershed lands as OECMs will have positive economic, social, and
environmental impacts without negatively affecting existing services. Environmentally, intact
forest cover within the Loch Lomond and Spruce Lake watersheds will continue to provide natural
filtration, safeguarding drinking water quality, reducing treatment costs, and lowering health
risks. Economically, OECM recognition may make these lands eligible for future municipal or
provincial tax reductions and open new funding opportunities for forest restoration and
management. Socially, the recognition demonstrates visible environmental leadership, fostering
40
community pride, public engagement, and national recognition through the City’s partnership
with the Nature Conservancy of Canada. Additionally, commitments from the Province to
conserve adjacent Crown lands and NCC’s partnership with fair-market land acquisitions will
further strengthen regional conservation outcomes, reduce industrial pressures, and protect the
long-term sustainability of the City’s key watersheds.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Pankaj Nalavde
Blair MacPhee
Jacqueline Boucher
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A: Maps of DWWs showing land to recognized
Appendix B: Decision Support Tool
Appendix C: Watershed Management Mission Statement
Appendix D: Draft Conservation Recognition Agreement
Appendix E: Watershed Management Plan for Loch Lomond
Appendix F: List of PRD’S for OECM recognition
41
42
43
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 1
Decision Support Tool – Screening Template
This Screening Template allows users to undertake a structured evaluation of a site to see if it meets the criteria for a Protected Area
(PA) or Other Effective area-based Conservation Measure (OECM). A site must meet all criteria to be countable as either a PA or
OECM.
For each criterion in this template, select the statement (drop down item) that best describes the site’s characteristics. Provide a
brief explanation of whether the intended effect of the criterion is met, and how. In some cases the criterion can be met through
multiple mechanisms – these should be considered together. Include enough information to provide a rationale for how criteria are
met or not. This information enables federal, provincial, or territorial jurisdictions to evaluate the screening and informs their
decision on whether to report a site in their jurisdiction.
Use this Screening Template in conjunction with the Decision Support Tool guidance document. The guidance document explains
the criteria that are used to evaluate sites against the agreed Pan-Canadian definitions of PAs and OECMs. It also provides
supporting guidance for the interpretation of each criterion. Additional supporting materials are available here:
https://www.conservation2020canada.ca/accounting.
44
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 2
Decision Support Tool – Screening Criteria
This template is intended to be used in conjunction with the decision support tool and detailed interpretation guide.
BASIC INFORMATION
Name of Site Saint John Drinking Water Watersheds
Designation Municipally owned lands for Drinking Water Watershed (DWW) protection
Province/Territory New Brunswick
Year of Establishment /
Securement
Ongoing from at least 1917 to present
Area (ha)
6,480 ha in total owned by the City of Saint John within the DWWs (a total of 4842,32 ha- 3,320.72 ha within the Loch
Lomond DWW, and 1,521.60 ha within the Spruce Lake and East / West Musquash DWWs are being assessed for OECM
recognition).
Governing Authorities Municipality – City of Saint John
Explanation of
Governing Authorities
(optional)
Only provide description if very complex or not well understood. This is not necessary for most sites.
Governance Type
(WDPA type)
Sub-national Government
Legal Basis /
mechanisms
Fee simple ownership under the Province of NB Land titles Act ; L-1.1 - Land Titles Act (gnb.ca); Province of NB Clean Water Act
C-6.1 - Clean Water Act (gnb.ca); Regulation 2001-83 - Watershed Protected Area Designation 2001-83 - Watershed Protected
Area Designation (gnb.ca); Council adopted resolutions that these lands are to be managed for the benefit of the water and
biodiversity and prohibiting incompatible activities and to accept a Mission Statement for fee simple lands being assessed; Land
use planning, and conservation/environmental protection policies and zoning bylaws across the City of Saint John and
surrounding municipalities (Fundy St. Martins/Fundy Region Service Commission, Hampton, Fundy Shores/South West Region
Service Commission) provide multiple layers of protection for city owned lands within drinking water watersheds.
Explanation of legal
basis / mechanisms
(optional)
Land was acquired and is managed for DWW protection by the City of Saint John;
45
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 3
Summary of Essential /
Relevant natural, social
and cultural values
This assessment includes municipally owned lands in three DWW’s: Loch Lomond watershed (including Latimer Lake) east of the
city, and the Spruce Lake and East/West Musquash Watersheds west of the city. These lands include a variety of habitats
including mature Wabanaki (Acadian) forest, freshwater wetlands, streams, lakes and shoreline and supports species at risk. The
Loch Lomond DWW protects water quality and quantity for over 13,000 residents of Saint John, while the western watersheds
provide a backup water supply for the city.
46
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 4
TABLE 2: STANDARDS THAT FURTHER DEFINE AND DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PROTECTED AREAS AND OECMS
CRITERIA: INTENDED EFFECT OF
THE CRITERION SCREENING CHOICE
EVIDENCE-BASED RATIONALE:
Rationale/evaluation of how area meets or does not meet the
intended effect of the criterion
OUTCOME
SCOPE OF
OBJECTIVES
Objectives have
sufficient scope to
result in the in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity.
C. The area has
objectives consistent
with, whether
intentionally or
otherwise, the in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity.
Yes - OECM
PRIMACY OF
OBJECTIVES
Objectives are such
that they result in the
in-situ conservation of
biodiversity.
C. Primary and
overriding objectives
are clear and not in
conflict with the in-
situ conservation of
biodiversity.
Yes - OECM
TABLE 1: STANDARDS COMMON TO PROTECTED AREAS AND OECMS
CRITERIA: INTENDED EFFECT OF
THE CRITERION SCREENING CHOICE
EVIDENCE-BASED RATIONALE
Rationale/evaluation of how area meets or does not meet the
intended effect of the criterion
MEETS
INTENDED
EFFECT?
GEOGRAPHICAL
SPACE
Demarcates the area to
facilitate the in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity.
A. The geographical
space has clearly
defined and agreed-
upon borders.
Yes
47
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 5
EFFECTIVE
MEANS – 1
Activities incompatible
with the in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity do not
occur and compatible
activities are effectively
managed.
A. The
mechanism(s)
provide(s) the
ability to prevent
incompatible
activities and
manage all other
activities within the
area, such that the
in-situ conservation
of biodiversity can
be achieved
Yes
48
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 6
EFFECTIVE
MEANS – 2
A. The
mechanism(s)
compel(s) the
authority(ies) to
prohibit activities
that are
incompatible with
the in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity.
Yes
LONG TERM
The area is
permanently protected
or conserved and not
easily reversed.
A. The
mechanism(s) is/are
intended to be in
effect for the long
term and not easily
reversed.
Yes
TIMING
Biodiversity is
protected or conserved
year-round.
A. The
mechanism(s) is/are
in effect year-round
All of the protective mechanisms are in effect year-round. Yes
49
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 7
TABLE 2: STANDARDS THAT FURTHER DEFINE AND DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PROTECTED AREAS AND OECMS
CRITERIA: INTENDED EFFECT OF
THE CRITERION SCREENING CHOICE
EVIDENCE-BASED RATIONALE:
Rationale/evaluation of how area meets or does not meet the
intended effect of the criterion
OUTCOME
GOVERNING
AUTHORITIES
The in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity is not
jeopardized by
relevant governing
authorities.
D. While not all
relevant governing
authorities are
bound by a
management regime
that delivers the in-
situ conservation of
biodiversity, the area
is being managed in a
manner likely to
continue achieving
the in-situ
conservation of
biodiversity.
Yes - OECM
BIODIVERSITY
CONSERVATION
OUTCOMES
Biodiversity is
conserved in-situ.
C. The area is being
managed in a way
that delivers the in-
situ conservation of
biodiversity.
Yes - OECM
50
2025 DST City of Saint John DWW .docx
Select Date
Version: March 2021 8
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT
OUTCOME / EVALUATION
Screening Outcome: OECM (meets all criteria)
Is this an Interim Target 1 area: no
Is this a candidate Target 1 area: yes
No De
Currently reported to CPCAD/CARTS? No
Total Area (ha) to be reported to CPCAD/CARTS: TBD
Identify deficiencies that
could be overcome in
order to report as PA or
OECM
What, if any, actions could be undertaken to meet the Pan-Canadian criteria and standards for reporting?
Based on the existing mechanisms in place, this land meets the Pan-Canadian criteria of an OECM however, to support broader
understanding and awareness, we have recommended the municipality update relevant policy clarifying this land is intended
as a conserved area, long-term.
Lead evaluator / assessor Emilie Day, Paula Noel, Megan Lafferty; Nature Conservancy of Canada
Arielle DeMerchant, Forest Planning and Stewardship Branch, Department of Natural Resources and Energy Development
Communications /
Engagement
Dean Price, Municipal Engineer and Manager, P3 Operations, Source Water Protection, City of Saint John
Pankaj Nalavde, Community Planning and Housing Director, City of Saint John
Approvals Dean Price, Municipal Engineer and Manager, P3 Operations, Source Water Protection, City of Saint John
51
Mission Statement for Watershed Management
The primary objective of the City of Saint John lands within drinking water watersheds
is to provide safe drinking water for the residents of Saint John. To achieve this, natural
ground cover must be maintained to allow for a clean, natural water filtration process to
occur which supports good quality and cost-effective for treatment.
The primary goal of forest management is to restore the degraded forest on the
properties to resemble a late successional, Wabanaki-Acadian Forest type. This includes
increasing species diversity in a way that also promotes later-successional species,
increasing diversity of tree age classes, and promoting the development of large, old
trees. The resulting forest will be more resilient to threats from climate change, pests, fire,
and will therefore reduce risks to water quality and quantity.
A management plan is being developed for the Loch Lomond Watershed, including the
Latimer Lake Watershed, as well as the Spruce Lake Watershed. This follows preliminary
field investigations and desktop analyses aimed at assessing overall conditions and
identifying potential risks. The management plan will focus on factors that can improve or
degrade water quality such as land use, forest cover and composition, and human
activities within the watershed. Protection of this resource is the most cost-effective way
to ensure this water remains in good condition for the future and that the watershed
maintains its ecological integrity for the benefit of human and wildlife populations.
The following guiding principles will be used to develop the management plan,
recommendations, and future actions:
Understand the water, the forest, and the interactions between aquatic and
terrestrial environments
Protect existing water quality
Conserve and Restore our forest and landscapes
Manage the watershed for resilience, future generations, and overall ecological
integrity
Engage with partners, stakeholders, and the community
Management actions will occur on city owned land where the city can directly manage the
landscape and will focus on monitoring changes and improving ecological integrity of city
lands. Stakeholder and community engagement actions will be undertaken to promote
education sharing and active involvement in the protection of this watershed.
High level goals for the City’s water utility also include:
investing in strategic land purchases,
proactively monitoring and managing city owned lands
encouraging biodiversity
annual investments in ecological restoration
reducing the risk of wildfires
52
commitment to continuous monitoring and management of the lands, lakes and
watercourses for water quality and healthy ecosystems.
Date: January 27, 2025
Approved by: Date approved by:
53
1
Conservation Recognition Agreement (the “Agreement”)
This Agreement is made as of ____________________, 2025 (the “Effective Date”),
BETWEEN:
His Majesty the King in right of the Province of New Brunswick, as
represented by the Minister of Natural Resources and Energy
Development (the “Minister”);
-AND-
The City of Saint John, a body corporate by Royal Charter
confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of
the Province of New Brunswick (the “City”)
The Minister and the City are hereafter referred to collectively as the “Parties”.
WHEREAS the Government of New Brunswick has endorsed Canada’s Biodiversity
Outcomes Framework and 2020 Goals and Targets;
AND WHEREAS the Government of New Brunswick is supporting Canada
Biodiversity Target 1 to protect 17% of Canada’s terrestrial area and inland water
through protected areas and OECMs through the Nature Legacy initiative;
AND WHEREAS the Pathway to Canada Target 1 has established that the federal,
provincial and territorial jurisdictions have authority and responsibility to report
protected areas and Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECM)
within their respective jurisdictions to the Canadian Protected and Conserved Areas
Database (CPCAD);
AND WHEREAS the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Department of Natural
Resources and Energy Development (DNRED), as a member of the Conservation,
Wildlife and Biodiversity Steering Group (CWBSG) that serves to advance
biodiversity conservation in Canada and that reports to the Federal-Provincial-
Territorial Ministers Responsible for Conservation, Wildlife and Biodiversity, has
assumed responsibility to report qualifying non-federal lands in New Brunswick to
CPCAD;
AND WHEREAS the City is owner of and has authority to prevent, control and
manage activities on City-owned drinking water watersheds as further articulated at
Schedule “A” hereto (the “Land”) that may have a negative impact on water quality;
AND WHEREAS the Land has ecological and cultural importance due to being the
source of safe, clean drinking water for 17,000 customers in Saint John;
54
Conservation Recognition Agreement
AND WHEREAS the Land has been under a management framework consistent with
biodiversity conservation for several decades;
AND WHEREAS both parties acknowledge that the Land makes a meaningful
contribution to the in-situ conservation of biodiversity and wish to see it protected in
perpetuity;
AND WHEREAS both parties acknowledge there is value in recognizing this
contribution to conservation by reporting the land nationally to CPCAD as an OECM.
STATED PURPOSE
This Conservation Recognition Agreement is to affirm that the subject lands will be
managed [to conserve biodiversity / in a way that is consistent with biodiversity
conservation] and that both parties agree that the qualifying lands will be reported to
CPCAD by the Department of Natural Resources and Energy Development
(DNRED).
NOW THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that the Parties hereto, in consideration of
the mutual covenants contained herein, agree as follows:
1 The Minister
1.1 The Minister:
a) agrees that the land defined in Schedule A meet the definition of an OECM as
per the attached assessment (Schedule B).
b) will ensure land is reported to CPCAD or to any future national database that
replaces CPCAD.
2 The City of Saint John
2.1 The City of Saint John:
a) will protect the land defined in Schedule A, so long as they are owners of the
said lands.
b) will notify the Minister of any impending change of ownership of the said lands.
c) will manage the land in a way that is consistent with biodiversity conservation
as outlined in the attached assessment (Schedule B).
55
Conservation Recognition Agreement
d) will notify the Minister of any new significant risks, new impacts or new
governing authorities.
e) agrees that the land meets the definition of OECM as per the attached
assessment (Schedule B).
f) agrees that DNRED will report the land to CPCAD or to any future national
database that replaces CPCAD; and
g) understands that changes to the stated mandate/purpose of the land or its
management regime may result in the land no longer qualifying as an OECM and in
DNRED removing it from CPCAD or from a future national database that replaces
CPCAD.
2.2 It is intended that the City of Saint John be responsible for the complete,
diligent, and timely performance of its responsibilities under this Agreement in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in compliance with
all applicable federal and provincial laws and regulations and any applicable
municipal by-laws, orders and rules.
3 Transparency
3.1 The City of Saint John understands and agrees that information about the
reported land will become publicly available through:
CPCAD database, which contains spatial and attribute data;
the New Brunswick e-claims website, which provides online viewing and maps
showing the location of mineral tenure within the province;
the World Database on Protected Areas;
And for use by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), DNRED, or
third parties for mapping and assessments of New Brunswick’s protected and
conserved areas network.
Information may also be used in future databases that replace the abovementioned
or new databases with the same purposes.
And that the attached assessment (Schedule B) may be shared within the protected
areas community of practice across Canada (e.g. protected area practitioners within
the provincial, territorial, indigenous, and federal governments and with members of
the Canadian Council on Ecological Areas).
56
Conservation Recognition Agreement
4 Verification/Accountability
4.1 It is agreed the DNRED will request permission from the City of Saint John to
access the land to conduct biological inspections and evaluations and may perform
remote sensing evaluations without permission.
5 Communications
5.1 It is agreed that site specific communications material relating to this
Agreement will be co-developed by DNRED and the City of Saint John and published
with permission.
5.2 Public announcements, public activities, and signage relating to this
Agreement, whether at official ceremonies or at press conferences or through press
releases or other means of communication with the public, shall be agreed upon
beforehand by the Parties.
6 Notices
10.1 Any changes to the stated mandate/purpose or management regime/plan will be
reported to DNRED in a timely manner for verification that the land still qualifies as an
OECM.
Minister of Natural Resources and Energy Development
Hugh John Flemming Forestry Centre
1350 Regent Street
Fredericton, NB E3C 2G6
Attention: Director of Forest Planning and Stewardship
E-mail: Chris.Norfolk@gnb.ca
7. Non-Binding MOU.
This MOU is intended to constitute an expression and mutual understanding of the
Parties’ willingness to work collaboratively in support of the stated purpose of this
agreement. None of the Parties intend this MOU will create any legally binding or
enforceable rights or obligations.
57
5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have vested their representative with
the necessary authority to sign this Agreement on their behalf and set their respective
hands and seals as of the date first above written.
SIGNED ON BEHALF OF THE MINISTER OF
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY
DEVELOPMENT
The City of Saint John
___________________________________
[The City of Saint John signing authority]
HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN THE RIGHT
OF THE PROVINCE OF NEW
BRUNSWICK
AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES AND ENERGY
DEVELOPMENT
_______________________________
Chris Norfolk
Director of Forest Planning and
Stewardship, Department of Natural
Resources and Energy Development
Date: ________________________
58
6
Schedule A
List of PIDs /Maps
Schedule B
Joint GNB and landowner Assessment of Property
Definitions
Biodiversity: The variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter
alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes
of which they are a part: this includes diversity within the species, between species
and of ecosystems.
Pathway to Canada Target 1: As a party to the UN Convention on Biological
Diversity, Canada endorsed 20 Targets to reverse global declines in biodiversity in
Aichi, Japan in 2010. In 2015, federal, provincial, and territorial (FPT) Ministers
responsible for Conservation, Wildlife, and Biodiversity endorsed corresponding
Canadian targets. Canada Target 1 commits Canada to effectively conserve 17% of
its land and freshwater by 2020. In 2017, FPT Ministers launched a collaborative
process (Pathway to Canada Target 1) to develop national guidance for protected
areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). In June
2018, NB and the other FPT governments reaffirmed a commitment to collaborate on
a process that would see Canada achieve this target.
Nature Legacy initiative: The Government of New Brunswick is contributing to
Target 1 goals by leading a provincial initiative to double the amount of protected
land and achieve 10% protection by 2023.
Protected Area: A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and
managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term
conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.
Other effective area based conservation measures (OECM): A geographically
defined area other than a Protected Area, which is governed and managed in ways
that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in-situ conservation of
biodiversity, with associated ecosystem functions and services and where applicable,
cultural, spiritual, socio–economic, and other locally relevant values.
The Canadian Protected and Conserved Areas Database (CPCAD): contains the
most up to date spatial and attribute data on marine and terrestrial protected areas
and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECM) in Canada. It is
compiled and managed by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), in
collaboration with federal, provincial, and territorial jurisdictions.
Conservation, Wildlife and Biodiversity Steering Group (CWBSG): The Federal-
Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Assistant Deputy Ministers’(ADM) Biodiversity Steering
59
Conservation Recognition Agreement
Group (BSG) was formed in response to a 2006 request from FPT Deputy Ministers
for more ADM-level oversight of shared national work on biodiversity. This work
addresses Ministerial priorities and those of Director-level and Director General-level
committees. Reflecting the direction provided by Ministers in 2015, this federal,
provincial and territorial forum was renamed the Conservation, Wildlife and
Biodiversity Steering Group.
60
61
ii
Table of Contents
List of Figures -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------v
Mission Statement and Overview ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vi
1. Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
2. Regulatory Framework ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
2.1 Clean Environment Act and Clean Water Act --------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
2.2 Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Regulation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------2
2.3 Watershed Protected Area Designation Order -------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
2.4 Migratory Bird Convention Act and Migratory Birds Convention -------------------------------------------------------3
2.5 New Brunswick Fish and Wildlife Act -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
2.6 Species at Risk Act and New Brunswick Species at Risk Act --------------------------------------------------------------3
2.7 Local Regulations ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
3. Summary of Previous Reports ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
3.1 Summary of 2013 Loch Lomond Forest Management Plan ---------------------------------------------------------------4
3.2 Summary of 2013 Water Quality Analysis and Recommendations for the City of Saint John’s Loch Lomond
Watershed --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5
3.3 Summary of 2013 Wildlife and Conservation Management Plan ---------------------------------------------------------5
3.4 Summary of 2014 Latimer Lake Management Plan -------------------------------------------------------------------------6
3.5 Summary of 2015 Loch Lomond Watershed Dynamics of pH and TOC with Management Recommendations -7
4. Existing Watershed Conditions --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8
4.1 Geophysical -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8
4.2 Forests -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8
4.3 Water Quality --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12
4.4 Watercourses and Wetlands --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14
4.5 Wildlife and Critical Habitat -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
5. Risks ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
5.1 Human Pressures ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
5.1.1 ATV Trails and Fording ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18
5.1.2 Illegal Dumping -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18
5.1.3 Encampments and Bonfires ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20
5.1.4 Land Use----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20
5.1.5 Encroachment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
62
iii
5.1.6 Invasive Species -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
5.1.6.1 Glossy Buckthorn (Frangula alnus) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
5.1.6.2 Japanese Knotweed (Reynoutria japonica, syn. Fallopia japonica) -------------------------------------- 22
5.1.6.3 Wild Parsnip (Pastinaca sativa) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
5.1.6.4 Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
5.1.6.5 Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 22
5.2 Natural Pressures ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
5.2.1 Forest Composition ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
5.2.2 Pests and Disease ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29
5.2.3 Climate Change --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29
5.2.4 Wildfires ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
6. Forest Management ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
6.1 Restorative Forestry Operations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
6.1.1 Ideal Forest Stand Characteristics for Water Quality ------------------------------------------------------------- 36
6.1.2 Impacts of Balsam Fir Dominance on Water Quality ------------------------------------------------------------- 36
6.1.3 Best Practices for Watershed Forest Management ---------------------------------------------------------------- 37
6.1.4 Strategies for Reducing Balsam Fir and Promoting Climate-Resilient Species ------------------------------- 37
6.1.5 Managing Mature and Overmature Forest Stands ----------------------------------------------------------------- 38
6.1.6 Enhancing Forest Resilience to Disturbances ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 39
6.2 Forestry Operations ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
6.2.1 Management Unit Framework---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
6.2.1.1 Specific Recommendations for Forestry Operations within Management Units ------------------------ 42
6.2.1.1.1 Management Unit 1 (Latimer Lake and Robertson Lake) -------------------------------------------- 42
6.2.1.1.2 Management Unit 2 (First Lake North) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 42
6.2.2 Overview of Forestry Management Approaches ------------------------------------------------------------------ 42
6.2.3 Harvesting Methods Applicable to the Watershed ---------------------------------------------------------------- 43
6.2.3.1 Clear Cutting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 43
6.2.3.2 Single Tree Selection Cut --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44
6.2.3.3 Group Selection Cut ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 45
6.2.3.4 Strip Cut ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 45
6.2.3.5 Shelterwood Cut -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 46
6.2.3.6 Other Relevant Intermediate Treatments ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 47
6.2.3.7 Stand Regeneration ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 48
6.2.4 Criteria for Prioritizing Stands for Forestry Treatment ----------------------------------------------------------- 48
6.2.5 Long Term Objectives for Forest Stands After Treatment ------------------------------------------------------- 49
6.2.6 Post Treatment Monitoring ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 49
6.2.7 Recommended Operational Constraints ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 49
7. Water Quality Monitoring -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 50
7.1 Lake Monitoring ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 50
7.2 Tributary Monitoring ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 50
7.3 Forestry Operation Monitoring ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 53
8. Priority of Land Acquisitions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 53
63
iv
9. Outreach & Communications ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 54
9.1 Education -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 54
9.2 Advisory Committee ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 54
9.3 Community Engagement -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 55
10. Recommendations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 55
11. References --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 65
64
v
List of Figures
Figure 1. Forest stand types in the Loch Lomond Watershed divided into softwood, hardwood, and mixed wood
stands. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 2. Investigated sites within the Loch Lomond Watershed that occured summer 2023. ............................................. 11
Figure 3. Water quality sampling sites in the Loch Lomond Watershed monitored by Saint John Water staff. ............ 13
Figure 4. Comparison of GeoNB and modeled GIS layers in the Loch Lomond watershed. ................................................. 15
Figure 5. Dump sites and junk/scrap yards in the Loch Lomond Watershed. .............................................................................. 19
Figure 6. Geonb road network and trails identified through desktop analysis and infield work, as well as dam
locations in the Loch Lomond Watershed. .................................................................................................................................................. 24
Figure 7. Forest stand risk rankings the the Loch Lomond watershed where blue represents low risk, yellow
indicates medium risk, and red signifies high risk. ................................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 8. Forest stand risk rankings on City of Saint John owned lands where blue represents low risk, yellow
indicates medium risk, and red signifies high risk ................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 9. Climate change resiliency depicted for the entire Loch Lomond watershed. ........................................................... 31
Figure 10. Climate change resiliency depicted for City of Saint John owned land in the Loch Lomond watershed. .. 32
Figure 11. Climate change risk rankings throughout the Loch Lomond watershed where blue represents low risk,
yellow signifies medium risk, and red indicates high risk. ................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 12. Climate change risk to forested stands illustrated on City of Saint John owned lands in the Loch Lomond
watershed where blue represents low risk, yellow signifies medium risk, and red indicates high risk.. ........................... 34
Figure 13. Management Units for forestry operations occuring in the Loch Lomond watershed. ...................................... 41
Figure 14. A profile of a clearcut silviculture system in a conifer-dominated stand depicting conditions directly after
harvest. Illustrations by Jodi Hall. ................................................................................................................................................................. 44
Figure 15. A profile of an individual selection silviculture system depicting stand conditions after a cut with
llustrations by Jodi Hall. .................................................................................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 16. An aerial view of a group selection harvest in a tolerant hardwood stand depicting an initial harvest
illustrated by Jodi Hall. ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 45
Figure 17. An aerial view of a strip cut silviculture system depicting first removal cut with residual mature seed
trees retrieved from www.gov.bc.ca. ............................................................................................................................................................. 46
Figure 18. A profile of a uniform shelterwood silviculture system depicting first removal cut with illustrations by
Jodi Hall. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 47
Figure 19. Tributary water quality monitoring sites within the Loch Lomond watershed. Sites 1-9 are monitored
monthly, whereas Site 10 is only monitored during rain events. ....................................................................................................... 52
List of Tables
Table 1. Percentage land use cover of multiple land use types for tributaries in the Loch Lomond Watershed. .......... 16
Table 2. Land use in the Loch Lomond and Latimer Lake catchment areas. ............................................................................... 20
Table 3. Tributary water quality monitoring sites within the Loch Lomond watershed. Sites 1-9 are monitored
monthly, whereas Site 10 is only monitored during rain events. ....................................................................................................... 51
Table 4. List of recommendations proposed. A status has been given for recommendations that have been
implemented recently or actions that are currently ongoing. Timeline indicates the time commitment of actions
through the span of this management plan; Shortterm 0-5 years; Midterm 0-15 years; and longterm 0-25 years. .... 56
65
vi
Mission Statement and Overview
This management plan was developed for the Loch Lomond Watershed, including the Latimer Lake
Watershed. This follows preliminary field investigations and desktop analyses aimed at assessing overall
conditions and identifying potential risks. The management plan focuses on factors that improve or degrade
water quality such as land use, forest cover and composition, and human activities. Protection of this
resource is the most cost-effective way to ensure this water remains in good condition for the future and
that the watershed maintains its ecological integrity for the benefit of human and wildlife populations.
The following guiding principles were used to develop the management plan, recommendations, and future
actions:
• Understand the water, the forest, and the interactions between aquatic and terrestrial
environments
• Protect existing water quality
• Conserve and Restore our forest and landscapes
• Manage the watershed for resilience, future generations, and overall ecological integrity
• Engage with partners, stakeholders, and the community
The primary objective of the City of Saint John lands within drinking water watersheds is to provide safe
drinking water for the residents of Saint John. To achieve this, natural ground cover must be maintained to
allow for a clean, natural water filtration process to occur which supports good quality and cost-effective
for treatment.
The primary goal of forest management is to restore the degraded forest on the properties to resemble a late
successional, Wabanaki-Acadian Forest type. This includes increasing species diversity in a way that also
promotes later-successional species, increasing diversity of tree age classes, and promoting the
development of large, old trees. The resulting forest will be more resilient to threats from climate change,
pests, fire, and reduce risks to water quality and quantity.
High level goals for the City’s water utility also include:
✓ investing in strategic land purchases,
✓ proactively monitoring and managing city owned lands
✓ encouraging biodiversity
✓ annual investments in ecological restoration
✓ reducing the risk of wildfires
✓ commitment to continuous monitoring and management of the lands, lakes and watercourses for
water quality and healthy ecosystems.
This management plan presents recommendations and actions to meet the overarching goals and objectives.
Management actions will occur on city owned land and will focus on monitoring changes and improving
ecological integrity of city lands. Stakeholder and community engagement actions will be undertaken to
promote education sharing and active involvement. Together these actions are aimed to protect and improve
this vital watershed.
66
1
1.Introduction
The Loch Lomond Watershed Management Plan serves as a comprehensive framework for safeguarding
the long-term health and sustainability of a critical water resource. The plan is designed to address the
growing pressures on the watershed, including climate change, urban development, and land-use changes,
which pose significant risks to water quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem resilience. By integrating
scientific research, stakeholder collaboration, and adaptive management strategies, this plan aims to ensure
the continued provision of clean, safe drinking water for the City of Saint John while promoting ecological
integrity and climate resilience.
The primary goals of the management plan include protecting and enhancing water quality within the
watershed, mitigating the impacts of climate change on water resources and forest ecosystems, promoting
sustainable land-use practices to minimize ecological degradation, and fostering community engagement
and stewardship to support long-term conservation efforts. These objectives guide the development of
targeted strategies that balance conservation priorities with the region’s social and economic needs.
Climate change has emerged as a key challenge in watershed management, influencing precipitation
patterns, streamflows, and forest health. The plan emphasizes proactive adaptation measures to enhance
resilience against climate-related risks such as increased stormwater runoff, flooding, and changes in
vegetation composition. This includes assessing forest stand resiliency, identifying high-risk areas, and
implementing management interventions that support ecosystem adaptation.
By aligning with best practices in watershed management, this plan provides a roadmap for maintaining the
integrity of the Loch Lomond Watershed in the face of environmental change. Through continued
monitoring, adaptive decision-making, and collaboration among stakeholders, this initiative will help
ensure the sustainability of the watershed for generations to come.
2. Regulatory Framework
The regulatory framework governing work in the watersheds is shaped by a combination of federal,
provincial, and regional legislation. These regulations establish processes, legal obligations, and best
practices to mitigate environmental impacts from activities in the watershed. Key legislation that may
impact work in the watersheds includes the Clean Environment Act, Clean Water Act, Watershed Protected
Area Designation Order, Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Regulations, Migratory Birds Convention
and Migratory Birds Convention Act, Species at Risk Act (SARA), New Brunswick SARA, New
Brunswick Fish and Wildlife Act, and the Fisheries Act.
2.1 Clean Environment Act and Clean Water Act
The Clean Environment Act (1989) is designed to protect the environment in New Brunswick by regulating
various aspects, including pesticide control, the designation of contaminants, land restoration, wetland and
coastal area management, solid waste oversight, and electricity generation (East Coast Environmental Law,
2022). Additionally, the Act provides guidance for the operation of water and wastewater commissions.
The Clean Water Act is focused on safeguarding the quality of drinking water in New Brunswick. This
legislation governs the restoration of water resources, alterations to wetlands and watercourses, the
establishment of land and water advisory committees, and the management of contaminants and waste.
67
2
2.2 Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Regulation
The Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Regulation (WAWA) (Reg 90-80), established under section 40
of the Clean Water Act in 1990, aims to protect wetlands and watercourses from development in New
Brunswick. A permit is required from the New Brunswick Department of Environment and Local
Government (NBDELG) for any temporary or permanent alterations made to or within 30 meters of a
wetland or watercourse (NBDELG, 2012). Additionally, working within 30 meters of a watercourse in a
Watershed Protected Area Designation Order requires a Ministerial Exemption and may be subject to
stricter requirements to safeguard water quality.
All work within wetlands or watercourses must be conducted during low-flow conditions, typically between
June 1st and September 30th each year. This timeframe helps minimize negative impacts such as
sedimentation and avoids the spawning periods of many anadromous fish species. The Province of New
Brunswick’s WAWA Technical Guidelines (2012) provide comprehensive guidance and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for various types of wetland and watercourse alterations.
2.3 Watershed Protected Area Designation Order
The Watershed Protected Area Designation Order, established by the Province of New Brunswick in 2001,
aims to safeguard drinking water source watersheds. The Order divides the watershed into three distinct
zones:
• Zone A: The watercourse or waterbody itself.
• Zone B: The area within 75 meters of the stream bank.
• Zone C: The remainder of the watershed, outside the 75-meter setback zone
Certain activities are restricted based on the zone in which they occur, including recreation, boating,
agriculture, residential development, landscaping, forestry, pesticides, road construction, and aquaculture
(NBDELG, n.d.). Any activity not permitted by the Order requires approval from the NBDELG through an
exemption application. These limitations are in place to protect the watershed and minimize activities that
could negatively impact water quality and overall watershed health.
For this management plan, forestry restrictions will have the most significant impact on implementation.
These restrictions have been incorporated into the planning of any forestry activities. Key limitations
include the use of selection cutting, which maintains a well-distributed stand of trees and limits canopy
openings to no larger than 300 m². In Zone B, forestry operations are restricted to between January 1 and
March 31. Cutting is limited to once every five years with no more than 30% of the wood volume harvested.
In Zone C, clearcutting is allowed but must be limited to areas smaller than 25 hectares, with a 100-meter
unharvested buffer between clearcut and selectively cut areas. On larger properties (greater than 10 ha), no
more than 25% of the land can be clearcut, and areas must be left for at least ten years or until regeneration
reaches 2 meters.
68
3
2.4 Migratory Bird Convention Act and Migratory Birds Convention
The Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA) safeguards migratory bird species shared between Canada
and the United States, prohibiting activities such as hunting, capturing, harming birds, and disturbing or
destroying their nests and eggs. The Act, enforced by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC),
requires wind farm developments and similar projects to avoid impacts on migratory birds, especially
during critical breeding and nesting periods. Recent updates to the Migratory Birds Regulations (2022)
enhanced nest protection by providing year-round safeguards for nests of certain migratory species listed
under Schedule 1. These updates align with the Species at Risk Act (SARA) to further protect vulnerable
migratory bird populations.
The Migratory Birds Convention (MBC), an agreement between Canada and the United States, aims to
conserve migratory bird populations through coordinated protection measures. Established in response to
declines caused by unregulated hunting and habitat destruction, the MBC protects migratory birds, their
nests, and eggs while managing hunting seasons, designating protected areas, and limiting harmful
activities.
2.5 New Brunswick Fish and Wildlife Act
The New Brunswick Fish and Wildlife Act (NB FWA) is focused on conserving fish and wildlife
populations while supporting sustainable use. The Act regulates activities such as hunting, fishing, and
trapping by setting limits, seasons, and licensing requirements. It also protects habitats and promotes
conservation initiatives through research and education.
2.6 Species at Risk Act and New Brunswick Species at Risk Act
The Species at Risk Act (SARA) focuses on the protection and recovery of wildlife species at risk in
Canada, with legal provisions to safeguard listed species, their habitats, and nests. The Act prohibits harm
to these species and the destruction of their critical habitats on federal lands or in cases involving aquatic
species or migratory birds protected under the MBCA. Recovery strategies and action plans outline
measures for protecting and restoring populations and habitats.
The New Brunswick Species at Risk Act (NB SARA) provides additional safeguards for wildlife species
at risk of extinction or extirpation in the province. This legislation identifies and lists species at risk, which
include endangered, threatened, and vulnerable species, and mandates the development of recovery
strategies and conservation actions. Key protections under NB SARA apply to species listed in Schedule A
and their designated Survival or Recovery Habitats, as outlined in Prohibitions Regulation 2013-39.
2.7 Local Regulations
In addition to the federal and provincial regulations outlined above, the watershed spans several local
municipalities, including the City of Saint John, Town of Hampton, Village of Fundy-St. Martins, and the
Fundy Rural District. Each of these municipalities has its own bylaws, zoning regulations, and planning
objectives, which may impose additional restrictions on land use and activities within the watershed.
69
4
3. Summary of Previous Reports
Fourth-year undergraduate students from the University of New Brunswick (UNB) Faculty of Forestry and
Environmental Management were contracted by SJW to develop a forest management plan for Loch
Lomond Lake in 1989, followed by watershed management plans for the Loch Lomond Watershed in 2013
and the Spruce and Latimer Lake Watersheds in 2014. These projects were completed as part of their
management practicum course, providing students with hands-on experience in environmental management
across sectors such as forestry, forest engineering, water quality management, and wildlife biology. While
this work served as a valuable learning opportunity and produced comprehensive reports for SJW, the
project team intends to refine and streamline the findings into a more efficient and practical management
strategy. The following is a high-level summary of their work and recommendations; however, given that
these reports are now a decade old, some recommendations may no longer be applicable to current
conditions.
3.1 Summary of 2013 Loch Lomond Forest Management Plan
A preliminary forest assessment of the Loch Lomond Watershed was conducted using aerial photographs
from the Department of Natural Resources and Energy Development to determine forest type, species
composition, and maturity. In the fall of 2012, a forest inventory was completed to validate the desktop
assessment, covering approximately 1% of the land base (567 inventory points). Priority areas were
determined based on stand type, fir and spruce composition, and even distribution of plots throughout the
watershed. The inventory revealed that the watershed's forest composition consists primarily of balsam fir
(29%) and spruce (24%), followed by mixedwood (21%), hardwood (13%), and a balsam fir-spruce mix
(13%).
From this assessment, 21 silviculture blocks were selected based on key priorities, including high balsam
fir content, significant mortality risk over the next 20 years, even-aged canopy structure, high spruce
content, and suitability for salvage harvesting. These blocks were modeled to assess pre- and post-treatment
conditions, as well as long-term forest development over 50 years using a Forest Vegetation Simulator
(FVS). Natural risk factors identified in each silviculture block included spruce budworm infestation,
blowdown, canopy loss, increased runoff, and forest fire risk.
Considering these factors, a six-year harvest plan was developed, identifying Silviculture Block 2 as the
highest priority. In June 2013, a detailed assessment of Block 2 (75.4 ha), located near the northern shore
of Third Lake, was conducted. This block underwent more extensive sampling and modeling than the others
and was divided into four zones to account for variations in ground conditions and forest characteristics.
Red spruce was determined to be the most suitable species for the site, with thinning operations
recommended to enhance its growth. However, none of the recommended forestry operations have been
implemented within the watershed to date, although some activities have occurred in areas beyond the
report's scope.
Based on the forest inventory and FVS modeling, the forestry group provided overall recommendations for
forestry operations within the watershed. These recommendations emphasize best practices for working
within drinking water watersheds to minimize the risk of adverse water quality impacts.
70
5
3.2 Summary of 2013 Water Quality Analysis and Recommendations for the City of Saint John’s
Loch Lomond Watershed
Hydro Logic, the group that led the water quality assessment in the Loch Lomond Watershed, completed a
watershed report card to communicate the status of water quality in seven sub watersheds. The report card
included graded parameters such as: benthic macroinvertebrates (BMI), forest cover, dissolved oxygen
(DO), wetland cover, conductivity, pH, nitrates and road density; and non-graded parameters such as:
dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and soil erodibility. Twenty-three sites were assessed using physical
parameters (over a 100 m stretch), YSI readings (dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity) and BMI sampling.
Water was also collected from thirteen locations throughout the watershed for laboratory analysis (nitrates,
DOC). Riparian cover, wetland cover, and road density were assessed using GIS software.
Average grades were generally good, with only a few sub watersheds receiving failing grades in riparian
cover (sub watershed 7: Latimer Lake area), wetland cover (sub watersheds 6 and 7), DO (sub watershed
5: Between Barnesville Road and Braydon Lake Road), and road density (sub watershed 2: Otter Lake
Road/Upper Quaco Road area). Overall grades mostly fell under the “B” category, with the exception of
wetland cover (C) and road density (D).
Soil erodibility was assessed as a non-graded parameter through GIS by using the Revised Universal Soil
Loss Equation to predict the soil loss at stream crossings in the watershed. Soil erosion rates ranged from 0
- 56,600 tons/ha/year across 238 stream crossings. These rates were categorized from low to high soil loss,
with the majority of soil loss rates falling within the low and medium categories (between 0 - 18,000
tons/ha/year). Sub watershed 2 (Otter Lake Road/Upper Quaco Road area) showed the highest number of
stream crossings and the highest rate of soil erodibility.
DOC results collected from thirteen sites across the watershed ranged from 1.3 - 8.9 mg/L. When combined
with chlorine (the disinfectant used during water treatment), DOC and total organic carbon (TOC) can
interact and form THAs and HAAs (Saint John Water, 2020). With the commissioning of the Loch Lomond
Drinking Water Treatment Facility in 2018 which allows for filtering and removal of organics, levels of
THA and HAA have reduced dramatically (Saint John Water, 2020). Maintaining a consistent raw DOC
and TOC concentration within the Loch Lomond Watershed will ensure the long-term effective removal
processes at the water treatment plant and low concentrations of chlorine by-products.
This report provided recommendations to maintain and improve water quality through continued
monitoring, improving riparian areas through tree planting and maintaining vegetated buffers, limiting road
development and stream crossings, and consulting with the public on protecting the watershed. They also
recommended the creation of a stream monitoring plan to be implemented during forestry operations.
3.3 Summary of 2013 Wildlife and Conservation Management Plan
The wildlife management group “8 Point Wildlife Consultants'' were the creators of the Loch Lomond
Wildlife and Conservation Management Plan. The group's objectives were to “address issues of
maintaining water quality, forest health, healthy ecosystems, and biodiversity as they relate to wildlife”.
Their main concerns were around beaver activity (changing habitat, restricting water movement, and
spread of Giardiasis), browsing from white tailed deer and moose, spruce budworm outbreaks, and
endangered species. Population models were created for beaver, deer, and moose over a 25-year period to
71
6
help inform where their populations will be located and how it might affect the forest. The population
models were created in the Systems Thinking, Experiential Learning Laboratory with Animation
(STELLA) program.
To quantify Spruce budworm (SBW) effects on different tree stands, a model was created in Microsoft
Excel. The group used various tree species compositions with different Budworm Impact Classes to
determine the impact on different stand combinations. To control the SBW population, they recommend
letting different bird species that predate on SBW be used as the deterrent. They state that these birds can
also act as an indicator of an infestation. Increased populations of certain bird species may give an indication
of increased SBW populations; however, this would be a delayed form of indication as the SBW population
would have to be established to contribute to an increase in bird population. For more direct management,
they recommended harvesting the host species in at risk stands, as well as increasing mixed wood stands
within the watershed. Removal of balsam fir stands was recommended. This is likely to have more of an
impact on managing for a SBW outbreak than trying to control after the fact.
The report examined endangered species at a limited capacity, primarily by mapping out potential habitat
for likely to occur endangered species within the watershed. Unique and sensitive tree stands were mapped
as high conservation value based on following criteria: 1) old, mature stand areas, 2) diameter of dominant
tree layer, and 3) stands composed of species found in low occurrences (rare). During field assessments, a
Wood Turtle, a SARA listed endangered species, was also observed and is likely to be present along
multiple watercourses within the watershed. Bats were excluded from the report due to the first detections
of White Nose Syndrome in the province taking place at the time of reporting. Snapping turtles were left
out because at the time it was thought that none occurred in the Loch Lomond watershed and that they were
not a good water quality indicator.
3.4 Summary of 2014 Latimer Lake Management Plan
Latimer Lake, a subwatershed of the Loch Lomond Watershed (subwatershed 7 in the 2013 Loch Lomond
Assessment), is the intake point for the City’s water treatment facility. This subwatershed was only assessed
spatially using GIS analysis in 2013 due to time constraints, so further analysis was completed by the UNB
Forestry and Environmental Management Class of 2014. This report was presented collaboratively with all
disciplines (forestry, water, wildlife) contributing to certain sections.
Forest inventory activities targeted fifty-two high risk stands and fifteen low risk stands within the Latimer
Lake watershed to recommend five stands for treatment (selection harvesting and understory pre-
commercial thinning) over a two-year period. Each stand was modeled using Open Stand Model to describe
current stand conditions and recommended treatment and projections over 20 years with and without
treatment. An economic evaluation was completed to identify any costs or revenues that could be collected
from recommended treatments. A cost of $1,340 was projected (UNB, 2014) however, in the current market
it would likely cost substantially more.
Forest cover and BMI were assessed to determine the health of the Latimer Lake Watershed. The grading
scheme for forest cover differed from the 2013 Loch Lomond Assessment, where a grade of “A” in 2015
indicated forest cover greater than 55% and in 2014 a grade of “A” indicated forest cover greater than 60%.
Total forest cover equaled 85% and received a grade of “A”. One BMI sample was collected at the western
72
7
inlet of Latimer Lake due to the lack of tributaries that flow into the lake and received a grade of “A”.
Further to these assessments, a watershed health risk assessment was completed to assess the severity and
probability of negative impacts on the watershed. This assessment included risks associated with public
access to the watershed, airport location, recreational activities, proximity to residential development,
wildlife activity and natural disturbances. At the time of the report the group stated that no present-day high
risks were identified (potential Spruce Budworm outbreaks were identified as high risk), but
recommendations were included to mitigate any potential future impacts in all risk levels.
Wildlife surveys were completed for beavers and ungulates during the forest inventory, as well as by using
aerial photography followed by on the ground follow-up. There was no beaver activity observed on Latimer
Lake. A map of potential beaver immigration sites was created, and it was recommended that these sites be
monitored for activity in the future. At the time of the report Latimer Lake was in a wildlife management
zone with relatively high deer populations (12% hunting rate), although there was minimal evidence of
ungulate populations recorded during field investigations. The moose population in the zone was reported
to be healthy as well. The group's conclusion was that the population was deemed to not be an issue at the
time, although monitoring was recommended, with management actions proposed if an issue were to arise.
3.5 Summary of 2015 Loch Lomond Watershed Dynamics of pH and TOC with Management
Recommendations
A follow-up report was completed by the UNB Environmental Management Class of 2015 to model the
dynamics of pH and TOC in the Loch Lomond Watershed. The objectives of this study were to:
1. Identify waterbodies or catchments which yield the highest potential inputs of high
TOC and low pH.
2. Determine landscape scale and site-specific sources of pH and TOC.
3. Estimate the relative net discharge of water, pH, and TOC from sub-catchments to see
which parts of the watershed are contributing (a) the most water volume and (b) poorest
water quality.
4. Quantify the relative impact of lake retention time and buffering capacity of 3rd Lake,
2nd Lake, and Loch Lomond with respect to neutralizing pH and TOC levels,” (UNB,
2015).
Eighteen sub-basins were identified, and 38 sample sites were chosen. At least one sample was taken from
each sub-basin. Samples were collected in October and November 10 m upstream of the confluence with
the Lake and measured for TOC, cation and anion values in parts per million (ppm), and pH. Stream
discharge (velocity) was measured 10 m upstream from the bridge/culvert or from the mouth. ArcGIS was
used to define soil type, geology, wetlands, hydrological models and slopes/flow direction.
A Forest Hydrology Model was developed across nineteen sub-basins using Ordinary Least Squares
regression to simulate snowpack accumulation, and melt, surface runoff, interflow and baseflow, daily
water table fluctuations, soil temperatures, and forest cover type. The outputs of the model display stream
discharge and TOC results for differing watershed types. Precipitation was found to have the largest impact
on pH and TOC rates due to increased runoff into the lakes and their tributaries. The most acidic and highest
TOC sample sites were located near wetland complexes, signaling that wetlands could be a point source of
acidity and TOC.
73
8
Bathymetric surveys of Loch Lomond Lake, Second Lake, and Third Lake were completed using maps
obtained from DNRED to estimate water retention times in the lakes. Longer retention periods of water in
lakes reduces TOC levels and neutralizes pH. Loch Lomond was found to have a seven-month (218 days)
retention time, Second Lake has a two and a half month (76 days) retention period and Third Lake has a
35-day retention period. Higher TOC levels were observed in winter months at the Latimer Lake intake,
displaying a 7-month lag effect from summer rainfall events. pH was at its lowest in March/April, and
highest (7-7.2) in summer months, which also correlates to a seven-month retention period for Loch
Lomond Lake. Because of the benefits of high retention times on pH and TOC levels, efforts to maintain
or improve the retention time of the lakes were recommended. Methods to improve retention included
preventing erosion and sediment deposition through maintaining healthy riparian areas and reducing
fording/stream crossing and/or increasing lake volume through dredging.
The Ratcliffe Brook sub-basin was identified as an area of concern. This area contributed 73% of the acidity
and 51% of the TOC to the lake. This area had a high conifer cover (65%), possible point sources (junkyard),
and multiple improperly built stream crossings. Further investigation was recommended for the Ratcliffe
Brook sub-basin to assess riparian areas along the brook and mitigation of soil erosion, and to investigate
soil organic carbon content to identify high input areas. BMPs to reduce suspended solid loads, and to create
a spillway to divert the water flow to McLellan Brook to lessen the negative effects of Ratcliffe Brook
during heavy rain were recommended.
4. Existing Watershed Conditions
Utilizing data from previous UNB reports, the project team conducted a desktop analysis to assess the
watershed's current condition which will be discussed in the following sections.
4.1 Geophysical
The Study Area is within the Kennebecasis [geologic] Formation, which is comprised of coarse-grained
sedimentary rocks. The site is in the Fundy Coastal Ecodistrict of the Fundy Coast Ecoregion which
encompasses the southern Bay of Fundy coast from Shepody Bay to Passamaquoddy Bay. It is comprised
of shallow loamy soils and acidic glaciofluvial soils (Zelazny et al., 2007).
4.2 Forests
The forest inventory for the Loch Lomond Watershed (LLW) relied primarily on GeoNB’s LiDAR data,
supplemented by aerial photography provided by the City of Saint John and preliminary field surveys. The
watershed covers approximately 10,419 hectares, with 7,617 hectares classified as forested land. Within
this forested area, 3,957 hectares (52%) consist of softwood stands, 1,852 hectares (24%) are hardwood,
and 1,808 hectares (24%) are mixedwood (Figure 1). The City of Saint John owns 3,730 hectares of the
7,617 hectares of forested land within the LLW. Of this city-owned forest, 1,749 hectares (47%) consist of
softwood stands, 920 hectares (25%) are hardwood stands, and 1,061 hectares (28%) are mixedwood. The
proportion of mixedwood stands is notably higher on city-owned land compared to the overall watershed
composition. The dominant tree species within the watershed are balsam fir (23.6%), birch (12.5%), red
spruce (10.9%), black spruce (9.5%), and tolerant hardwoods (6.8%), with other species present in smaller
quantities. A similar composition is observed on City-owned lands, where balsam fir (18.4%), birch
74
9
(13.5%), red spruce (11.8%), black spruce (11.6%), and red maple (7.1%) are the most prevalent species.
This report focuses on balsam fir due to its dominance and current role posing risks to forest health and
water quality.
In 2013, a UNB forest management plan identified 21 forest stands in the Loch Lomond Watershed as
potential risks to water quality. These stands were reassessed in summer 2023 to compare current conditions
with the previous report's findings. A low-intensity cruise evaluated other stands, focusing on mature
softwood, particularly balsam fir-dominated areas, and locations with multiple proximate balsam fir stands
(Figure 2).
The assessments revealed diverse forest conditions across the watershed. While generally aligning with
GeoNB's LiDAR data, some discrepancies were observed. Stand delineations were occasionally inaccurate,
and tree species were sometimes misidentified or omitted. Notably, aerial photographs did not capture
blowdown areas, which varied in severity from small patches to near-total stand destruction.
Blowdown was more prevalent in stands with high concentrations of mature or overmature trees and
shallow-rooted species, conditions conducive to such disturbances. While these observations provide
valuable insights into localized events, they are not representative of the entire watershed, as the
assessments specifically targeted susceptible sites.
Ongoing assessments will monitor and evaluate other potential areas of concern. This fieldwork will ensure
the timely identification and integration of new disturbances, such as blowdown or other forest degradation,
into the Loch Lomond Watershed management strategy.
75
10
Figure 1. Forest stand types in the Loch Lomond Watershed divided into softwood, hardwood, and mixed wood stands.
76
11
Figure 2. Investigated sites within the Loch Lomond Watershed that occured summer 2023.
77
12
4.3 Water Quality
Saint John Water currently monitors water quality at 10 sites within the Loch Lomond Watershed. Sampling
is completed at all sites seasonally (May, August, and November), excluding winter when the lakes are
frozen, and measures organics (E. coli, fecal coliforms, ammonia, etc.) and inorganics (metals) (Figure 3).
Temperature readings are also collected using a handheld meter during sampling. ACAP Saint John
analyzed data from 2008 to 2022 to develop a picture of water quality in the Loch Lomond Watershed.
The British Columbia Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy has developed source
drinking water quality guidelines (SDWQGs) to help identify risks to current and future drinking water
sources (British Columbia Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, 2020). These guidelines
better reflect the quality that source water should be at the intake before treatment, rather than the criteria
of drinking water post treatment. These guideline levels will be used to track water quality parameters that
are monitored throughout the watershed.
Metal concentrations were below maximum acceptable concentrations (MAC), aesthetic objectives (AO)
or undetectable at all sites, with the exception of aluminum and iron. Saint John Water follows an
operational guideline of <100 µg/L of total aluminum for optimal water treatment operations. Five sites
(ER-4, ER-7, ER-8, ER-9 and ER-10) exceeded the operational guideline on more than one occasion. The
MAC of aluminum under the Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines is 2900 µg/L; none of the samples
exceeded the MAC. Aluminum is generally found in higher concentrations in surface water than in
groundwater (Health Canada, 2021). Aluminum samples only exceeded the operational guidelines once at
the Latimer Lake intake (December 10, 2008), suggesting that the lag time in water movement from the
feeder lakes to the intake is allowing the concentrations of aluminum to deplete naturally before reaching
the treatment facility.
Average annual concentrations of iron exceeded the aesthetic objective (AO) of 0.3 mg/L at three sites on
multiple occasions from 2008-2021 (Figure 4). “At concentrations above 0.3 mg/L, iron can stain laundry
and plumbing fixtures and produce undesirable tastes in beverages. The precipitation of excessive iron
imparts an objectionable reddish-brown colour to water. Iron may also promote the growth of certain
microorganisms, leading to the deposition of a slimy coating in water distribution pipes” (Health Canada,
1978). Groundwater in New Brunswick is known for being high in iron due to the geology of the area.
Additionally, iron can be leached from soils through natural functions of parent material or in areas with
high acidity (coniferous forests for example), iron can be leached out of the soil due to the drop in pH. It is
likely that the lakes with higher iron concentrations have natural inputs of groundwater, or their tributaries
are flowing through coniferous dominated forests and pose no threat to the overall quality of source water
but rather an aesthetic issue. Iron can generally be removed or reduced during the water treatment process
(Health Canada, 1978). Iron did not exceed the AO at the Latimer Lake intake on any occasion from 2008-
2022.
78
13
Figure 3. Water quality sampling sites in the Loch Lomond Watershed monitored by Saint John Water staff.
79
14
Average annual heterotrophic plate counts (HPC) exceeded guidelines (500 CFU/100 ml) at all sites in
Loch Lomond excluding ER1 in 2008 and at ER4-10 in 2013. HPC counts can vary depending on the
baseline values found in the watershed and should be compared to other indicators such as E. coli and total
coliform levels (Health Canada, 2013). The MAC set by SJW for E. coli is 0 CFU/100 ml. We can assume
that this level should apply to treated drinking water, since it is unrealistic to think that untreated source
water could meet this criterion. The SDWQGs recommend <10 CFU/100 ml for untreated water. Following
this criteria, the average E. coli concentrations exceeded this recommended value at 5 out of 9 monitoring
sites (ER-2, ER-4, ER6-7 and ER-9; this does not include the Latimer Lake intake as this data was
unavailable). Additional monitoring throughout the watershed is recommended to further investigate
sources of E. coli and other coliforms.
TOC is highly variable in natural waterways and has many sources, including soil, decomposing vegetation,
and leaf litter. These sources can be exacerbated by human activities, causing erosion and sedimentation,
as well as precipitation, causing runoff of organic material and soil into waterways. Both coniferous forest
and bogs are known to be higher in TOC, which is thought to be due to the longer degradation of coniferous
needles over leaves and the leaching of carbon from the peat in bogs. TOC is naturally degraded in aquatic
environments through settling, degradation by bacteria, and in slow-flowing areas, photo-oxidation. The
goals for SJW are to keep TOC levels as low as possible to reduce operations costs and to manage
chlorination byproducts. When TOC in raw water exceeds 7.0 mg/L, water treatment costs begin to
increase. The SDWQGs recommend a MAC of 4.0 mg/L of TOC. Monitoring DOC/TOC during regular
watershed sampling and the addition of tributary sampling could help pinpoint sources of organic carbon.
Additionally, investigating the types of wetlands found within each sub-watershed, forest type, and
sediment inflow through stream walks could help to understand where TOC originates from and thus what
management strategies could be effective.
Overall, the water within the Loch Lomond Watershed is of high quality and with treatment provides quality
drinking water to the citizens of Saint John. Maintaining this quality will be imperative to the effective use
of the water treatment plant and therefore recommendations for improved lake monitoring and the
implementation of a tributary monitoring program are provided in Section 6 of this report. These programs
will be used to monitor changes and pin-point sources of organics and bacteria, so issues can be addressed
as they are discovered. Additionally, it was noted that phosphorus is not measured during monitoring
currently and represents a data gap. Phosphorus is a limiting nutrient for algal and cyanobacteria growth,
both of which can impact water quality and biofoul infrastructure causing treatment issues.
4.4 Watercourses and Wetlands
To understand the sources of organics and bacteria entering the source water lakes, it is crucial to investigate
tributaries and wetlands. While overall lake water quality is excellent, these areas may reveal how land use
and natural sources contribute to increased inflows of undesirable organics or bacteria, particularly in the
context of unpredictable and heavy precipitation. To identify unmapped watercourses and wetlands beyond
the provincial inventory (GeoNB database), LiDAR-based predictive models were used to generate
watercourse and wetland layers, supplementing existing GeoNB shapefiles (Figure 4).
80
15
Figure 4. Comparison of GeoNB and modeled GIS layers in the Loch Lomond watershed.
81
16
A total of 65 watercourses, including major tributaries and previously unmapped smaller streams, were
identified within the watershed. Understanding their location is essential for tracing water origins. Based
on size and land use composition, six sub-watersheds were delineated to inform the tributary monitoring
program described later in this document. To pinpoint potential sources of organics or bacteria within these
sub-watersheds, land use percentages were calculated using GeoNB layers for non-forest areas, forests,
wetlands, and roads, clipped to each tributary's catchment area. The total area for each land use type was
calculated and a percentage derived from the total area of the tributary’s catchment. The majority of
infrastructure listed under Loch Lomond Watershed is comprised of roads. All layers used were from
GeoNB with the exceptions of wetlands where Boreal’s interpreted wetland layer was used, which resulted
in some overlap between layers where parts of the same area were included in calculation twice (e.g., forests
and wetlands overlapping) (Error! Reference source not found.). The Baxters Corner sub-watershed
exhibits the highest settlement value, suggesting significant human influence. The Ratcliffe Brook sub-
watershed has the largest wetland percentage, indicating potentially high natural organic sources and low
pH. Forest cover remains substantial in most sub-watersheds, with a notable reduction in Baxters Corner,
where residential development is more prevalent.
Table 1. Percentage land use cover of multiple land use types for tributaries in the Loch Lomond Watershed. Tributary Area Agriculture Settlement Industrial Infrastructure Road Forest Boreal Wetland Water Body Gravel Pit Third Lake Eastern 1 5 4 1 79 21 2
Third Lake Northern 4 1 2 1 93 16
McBrien Lake 10 3 5 0.1 1 79 14 83
Ratcliffe Brook 38 2 2 0.1 0.02 1 87 33 2 1
Baxters Corner 3 9 15 0.3 0.6 2 64 17 2
Terro Lake 4 1 90 9 6
Third Lake Southern 5 3 4 2 83 14 1 1
Loch Lomond Watershed 1.6 2.4 0.5 1.1 77.3 20.6 12.4 0.5
Wetlands were interpreted through GIS using various techniques to ensure and confirm accuracy, including
slope calculations from highly accurate LiDAR data, orthophotography, and GeoNB layers. Ground
truthing has been accurate for most identified wetlands by the model and interpretation; however, it has
been noted that desktop identification of wetlands has limitations in identifying sloped forested wetlands
as the slopes are generally higher than 2%. Although this wetland layer is highly accurate, field delineation
of these wetlands will be needed to confirm exact boundaries prior to any activities taking place. This
additional analysis provides a much more accurate account of wetlands within the watershed compared to
mapped wetlands present on GeoNB (51% more wetland area, totaling 2146.84 ha) and will be crucial for
forest management and operations.
Overall, the desktop analysis using updated Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) and aerial photography
allowed for more precise prediction of wetlands, smaller watercourses, and the watershed boundary,
compared to the data available through GeoNB (Figure 4). There were some small, noted differences
82
17
between the legislated GeoNB watershed boundary and the one created by the project team; for that reason,
the team will use the created boundary as the true boundary going forward. As predicted, with the updated
data available, a large number of wetlands and smaller watercourses were identified and will be used to
guide forestry operations and stand selection.
4.5 Wildlife and Critical Habitat
The Loch Lomond Watershed is home to large, intact ecosystems that support diverse habitats for wildlife
and plant species, including many species at risk such as turtles, bats, birds, and rare plants. Healthy
ecosystems benefit these species, and in turn, these species contribute to the continued health of the
ecosystem, creating a mutually reinforcing cycle.
Although American beaver is commonly monitored in other source water watersheds, Saint John Water
(SJW) does not actively monitor their presence. Instead, beaver activity is assessed through passive
observations during routine sampling and other watershed work. While beaver dams can occasionally pose
issues, they often provide valuable ecosystem benefits, such as habitat for other species and improved water
retention. Due to the lack of significant issues, beavers are managed by SJW on an as-needed basis.
Understanding the flora and fauna in the watershed is key to conserving critical habitats, particularly for
species at risk. The presence of these species often indicates healthy ecosystems, while their absence may
signal environmental disturbances. Many species at risk are underpopulated due to habitat limitations, often
driven by human activities that disrupt their environment. Protecting these species requires minimizing
human impacts on their habitats and preserving viable, healthy environments. The Atlantic Canada
Conservation Data Centre (ACCDC) is a valuable resource for biodiversity records and should be consulted
when making conservation decisions. Additionally, field surveys prior to any operations will help identify
rare or at-risk species and critical habitats, ensuring their protection.
The Species at Risk Act and Migratory Bird Convention Act must be followed when conducting work in
the watershed, with careful timing around breeding, nesting, and migration periods to minimize disruptions.
Identifying lands with high conservation value based on current conditions and resident species is crucial
for long-term ecosystem health. Designating these areas for conservation will safeguard the watershed’s
biodiversity and protect its role as a reliable source of drinking water. Partnering with land stewardship
organizations like the Nature Conservancy of Canada will provide valuable guidance for expanding
conservation areas within the watershed.
5. Risks
Since the water quality within the watershed remains in good standing, identifying and managing risks that
may impact water quality in the future is imperative to ensuring the long-term protection of the source
water.
5.1 Human Pressures
Human pressures on ecosystems are numerous, ranging from agricultural runoff containing excess nutrients
to industrial discharge of pollutants. These pressures, if unmanaged, can lead to a variety of negative
83
18
impacts on water quality, including eutrophication and sedimentation. Ongoing monitoring is essential to
not only identify these activities in high-risk areas but also to quantify their impact, track trends, and assess
the effectiveness of implemented management strategies. This will likely involve collaborative efforts with
stakeholders and the public, including educational outreach programs, implementation of best management
practices, and policy development. The following sections will identify specific human pressures on the
watershed, outlining their potential impacts on water quality and exploring strategies for effective
monitoring and mitigation. There is a bias towards human pressures identified on CSJ lands and this is
where field work has been completed. There are likely additional pressures on private lands that were not
accessible during surveys. These pressures on both CSJ and private lands can be reduced through public
education and awareness.
5.1.1 ATV Trails and Fording
The Loch Lomond Watershed has a large network of ATV trails which can be detrimental to the health of
the watershed. These trails often run directly through watercourses in what are known as fording areas, or
over degraded culverts, disturbing the watercourses and adding increased sediment and pollutants into the
streams. A total of 12 visible fording sites have been identified within the watershed using GIS and field
investigation. Furthermore, ATV trails provide access to remote areas for the general public where littering,
illegal dumping, bonfires, and forest alteration risk the health of the watershed and its landbase. ATV/UTV
use is heavy with little regard for wetlands and watercourses within the watershed. ATV/UTV use is
generally associated with old forest access roads and trails; however, new trails are being constructed as
well. Curbing the creation of new and sprawling trails, as well as installing proper culverts and bridges at
fording sites will aid in reducing the impact ATV/UTV’s are having on the landscape. This could be
achieved through outreach and partnering with local ATV clubs, building community awareness of the
issue, and enforcing trail use guidelines on city lands.
5.1.2 Illegal Dumping
Multiple dump sites were observed throughout the watershed from field surveys, desktop analysis, and
points obtained from the 2013 Loch Lomond Assessment. The majority of dump site points noted by UNB
were historical dump sites from old farmsteads, whereas the additional ones observed during field surveys
and desktop analysis were more recent or continually ongoing. It was found that some of these sites fall
within the Protected Zone B (75 m stream buffer zone) while others were within the general 30 m provincial
stream and wetland buffer zones and may be leaching various substances into these watercourses (Figure
5). To mitigate risks, the City of Saint John should prioritize cleanup of dump sites with the highest risk to
impact water quality and ecosystem health by determining both proximity to watercourses and the
hazardousness of the materials dumped.
84
19
Figure 5. Dump sites and junk/scrap yards in the Loch Lomond Watershed.
85
20
5.1.3 Encampments and Bonfires
Unauthorized social gathering encampments within the watershed's forested areas pose significant
environmental and safety concerns. Primarily located on city property and associated with heavy ATV/UTV
activity, these encampments lack proper sewage infrastructure, leading to fecal contamination of nearby
water sources. Furthermore, large, open fire pits situated close to coniferous forests present an elevated fire
hazard. Uncontained fires in these remote, heavily wooded areas can result in substantial forest or ground
fires, causing major damage to forest stands. This damage, in turn, negatively impacts water quality through
increased sedimentation, reduced natural filtration, and elevated organic carbon input. To mitigate these
risks, ongoing identification and facilitated removal of these encampments is recommended.
5.1.4 Land Use
The Loch Lomond Watershed has many different land uses within it, given the nature of many different
types of property owners - municipal, private, industry, and crown land. Some land uses have the potential
to impact water quality and forest health such as mining, large forestry operations, large developments, and
most notably, riparian degradation and encroachment. The most notable land uses that may impact water
quality within the watershed are gravel pits, agriculture, junk yards, rifle ranges, airports, and residents,
which can contribute to sedimentation, pollutant leaching, nutrient loading, and increased bacteria loading.
Proper mitigation of these activities in proximity to watercourses, and disposal measures for waste are vital
to protecting the health of the waterways (Table 2). Since the bulk of these land uses are not on city land,
it is important that the city remains active in the watershed to build awareness of these issues and work with
landowners to remove land use conflicts, when possible, through land acquisitions and mitigation of
impacts.
Table 2. Land use in the Loch Lomond and Latimer Lake catchment areas.
Land Use Area (ha) Percent of land base (%)
Loch Lomond Catchment
Agricultural Land 178 1.70
Settlement Land 279 2.66
Infrastructure Land 114 1.09
Industrial Land 59 0.57
Forested Land 8055 76.88
Latimer Lake Catchment
Settlement Land 2.3 1.23
Infrastructure Land 2.4 1.23
Forested Land 103 53.50
Building a relationship with the Fundy Regional Service Commission and the numerous rural municipalities
that the watershed falls into could help to ensure any new development is considered in terms of watershed
health and that bylaws are being followed. A close relationship with the Department of Environment
86
21
regional office in Saint John could also aid in ensuring that the Watershed Protection Designation Order is
being followed and enforced.
5.1.5 Encroachment
Given the rural environment the watershed falls into, encroachment onto city owned land is prevalent as it
is viewed as public land. The majority of this encroachment is through the creation of ATV trails and bonfire
pit locations, as well as shelters/camps. Although this is inherently not always an issue, high risk activities
in these areas could affect forest health and water quality.
Encroachment is most readily observed next to residential areas where lawns or trails are created on city
land. Encroachment can also be seen from industrial use such as gravel pits and forestry operations.
Resource extraction from city land has been observed primarily and most recently through the extension of
a gravel pit next to city property. This form of encroachment can be the most damaging as it alters the
ecosystem as well as hydrology within the watershed which can affect the water quality. Monitoring
boundaries and enforcing when encroachment is happening is vital to ensuring long term forest and
watershed health. Aerial photography is a great way to monitor encroachment at a large scale and within
developed areas; in the understory of forests however, it is still best observed through on the ground surveys
to check boundary lines.
5.1.6 Invasive Species
Invasive species pose a significant threat to watershed integrity, rapidly transforming ecosystems by
displacing native species and disrupting habitats. While a comprehensive assessment of their full impact
within the watershed is underway, field observations have confirmed their presence. Given the difficulty
and expense of eradicating established populations, prevention is paramount. Public education, exemplified
by campaigns like Clean, Drain, Dry, promotes responsible practices for cleaning recreational equipment.
Early detection and targeted removal can be effective, but widespread establishment often necessitates
costly management strategies. Beyond ecological damage, invasive species can compromise infrastructure,
underscoring the importance of preventative action. Increased public awareness, including species
identification and understanding their environmental and infrastructural consequences, is essential. The
New Brunswick Invasive Species Council provides resources for identification and management strategies.
In the sections below, some invasive species of great concern are introduced. Other invasive species may
be present or introduced in the future. As such, invasive species should be noted when observed and
appropriate management actions taken.
5.1.6.1 Glossy Buckthorn (Frangula alnus)
This invasive shrub, introduced from Eurasia for landscaping, aggressively invades forests and open areas,
displacing native vegetation and forming dense thickets that reduce biodiversity (NBISC, n.d.). Its prolific
berry production, facilitated by bird dispersal (NCC, 2025), accelerates its spread. Effective control relies
on prevention and early intervention, as established populations are difficult to eradicate. Mechanical
removal and targeted herbicide application are often required for larger infestations. Public education,
emphasizing identification and responsible yard waste management, is crucial to limiting its spread and
protecting the watershed's ecological balance.
87
22
5.1.6.2 Japanese Knotweed (Reynoutria japonica, syn. Fallopia japonica)
Japanese knotweed is known for its rapid spread and ability to outcompete native vegetation. Its extensive
rhizome system allows it to regenerate from even small root or stem fragments, making eradication
extremely challenging. This species poses a serious threat to ecosystems by displacing native plants,
destabilizing riverbanks, and increasing erosion and sedimentation in waterways. It can also cause structural
damage to infrastructure, including pavement, foundations, and drainage systems. Manual removal is
difficult since even small remnants of the root system can lead to regrowth. Herbicide treatments are often
necessary for effective control. Given its resilience and capacity to spread rapidly, early detection and
prompt management are essential in preventing Japanese knotweed from further disrupting local
ecosystems.
5.1.6.3 Wild Parsnip (Pastinaca sativa)
Wild parsnip is an invasive plant species that poses both ecological and human health risks. Originally
introduced from Europe as a cultivated vegetable, it has since spread aggressively along roadsides, fields,
and disturbed areas, outcompeting native vegetation. Its deep taproot allows it to thrive in a variety of soil
conditions, making it difficult to eradicate once established. Wild parsnip is a significant concern due to its
toxic sap, which contains chemicals called furanocoumarins. When the sap comes into contact with skin
and is exposed to sunlight, it can cause severe burns, blisters, and long-lasting discoloration in a reaction
known as phytophotodermatitis. Control efforts involve a combination of manual and chemical methods.
Small infestations can be managed through hand-pulling or mowing before the plants go to seed, but
protective gear is essential to avoid sap exposure. Herbicide treatments are necessary for larger infestations,
particularly those in difficult-to-access areas. Public awareness and early intervention are key in preventing
wild parsnip from spreading further and reducing its impact on both native ecosystems and public health.
5.1.6.4 Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha)
Zebra mussels threaten freshwater ecosystems and infrastructure. Native to Eastern Europe, zebra mussels
were introduced to North America via ballast water and have since spread rapidly. Zebra mussels were
confirmed in the Wolastoq (St. John) River in 2023, with their current range extending to the Mactaquac
Dam in Fredericton (2024). These mussels reproduce quickly and multiple times a year, forming dense
colonies that clog water intake systems, disrupt native ecosystems by depleting plankton, and promote
excessive aquatic plant growth. Their sharp shells also pose hazards to swimmers and boaters.
Economically, they cause costly damage to municipal water supplies, hydroelectric stations, and industrial
facilities. Preventing their introduction is crucial, as eradication is nearly impossible once established.
Calcium levels within the Loch Lomond watershed is generally lower than what the minimum calcium level
zebra mussels have been found at, however this alone will not prevent colonization. They primarily spread
through contaminated boats and gear, making public awareness and preventative measures—such as
cleaning, draining, and drying watercraft—essential to protecting New Brunswick’s waterways.
5.1.6.5 Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea)
Reed canary grass poses a significant threat to wetlands, riparian areas, and disturbed sites. Although it is
native to parts of North America, the aggressive strains found in many regions are believed to be of
88
23
European origin. It spreads rapidly through both seeds and extensive rhizome networks and outcompete
native vegetation which reduces biodiversity. It thrives in moist environments, making it particularly
problematic in wetlands, along riverbanks, and in ditches where it can alter hydrology and degrade habitat
for wildlife. Its rapid growth and thick root system also make it difficult to control, as it can quickly re-
establish even after removal efforts. Mowing or cutting before it produces seeds will reduce its spread,
while covering infested areas with heavy mulch will suppress growth over time. Targeted herbicide
applications are necessary where mechanical removal is impractical. Restoration efforts, such as planting
native species to compete with reed canary grass, can also improve long-term control and ecosystem
recovery. Preventing further spread through early detection and rapid response is crucial to minimizing its
impact on New Brunswick's natural areas.
5.1.7 Infrastructure
The LLW water levels are regulated by city infrastructure, including six dams, approximately 185 stream
crossings, 11 bridges, and roughly 300 kilometers of roads and trails (Figure 6). Consistent, annual
monitoring and maintenance of these structures are needed to detect and address minor degradation before
it escalates. Proactive management safeguards the integrity of these critical infrastructure components,
preventing potentially significant disruptions to the watershed's lake levels.
89
24
Figure 6. Geonb road network and trails identified through desktop analysis and infield work, as well as dam locations in the Loch Lomond Watershed.
90
25
5.2 Natural Pressures
Along with human caused risks, there are several natural occurring phenomena that can impact water
quality and overall watershed health. Some of these pressures can be managed while others are climatic and
cyclical events that can be prepared for. The following sections identify and address the risks posed by
natural disturbance.
5.2.1 Forest Composition
Forests play an essential role in watersheds by slowing and filtering runoff, preventing erosion, and trapping
sediment. The species composition and diversity within a forest influences its effectiveness in maintaining
forest health and, by extension, water quality. Several factors can heighten the risk that forest stands pose
to water quality. For instance, the lifespan of tree species affects the frequency of die-off events, leading to
canopy openings that expose the forest floor. Windthrow, or blowdown, is another factor to consider, as
certain species are more prone to it, resulting in coarse woody debris accumulation that can increase fuel
loads for potential wildfires. The risk of fire is further exacerbated in stands dominated by softwood species
compared to hardwoods. Additionally, the variation in age and species diversity within a stand contributes
significantly to its resilience against disturbances. Identifying and assessing the key risks to forest stands
and water quality across the watershed is vital to prioritize management efforts for the highest-risk areas.
The forest stands layer from GeoNB was used to map and pinpoint these areas of concern. Balsam fir, the
most prevalent species in the watershed and considered the greatest risk to both forest and water quality
(Johnson, W. 1986), was chosen as an indicator species for the ranking. Balsam fir is classified as high risk
due to its relatively short maturity age, its tendency to outcompete other species, and its contribution to
even-aged, near-monoculture forest compositions. These stands are particularly vulnerable to mass die-offs
as trees mature simultaneously, which increases susceptibility to windthrow, blowdown, disease, and fire.
This ranking system serves as a proxy for identifying high-risk areas, though individual stand assessments
will still be needed to determine appropriate management actions.
Three metrics associated with high risk were selected and ranked on a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 representing
the highest risk and 1 indicating low risk. The scores for each metric were combined to generate a total risk
score out of 15. To account for proximity to sensitive areas, a modifier was applied: stands located within
the 75-meter buffer zone (Zone B) received an additional point, raising the total risk score to a maximum
of 16. Stands within the catchment area of Latimer Lake also received an additional point due to the
heightened risk posed by disturbances that could affect the water quality at the lake. Since disturbances
closer to the water supply intake have a greater impact on the treatment facility, these stands are considered
to carry a higher level of risk.
The three metrics used to assess risk for the entire LLW were as follows:
1. Stand Area: Larger, relatively uniform stands in terms of age and species composition were
deemed higher risk compared to smaller, more diverse stands. A size scale was created using
Natural Breaks (Jenks) in QGIS, ensuring that stand sizes within the watershed were compared
relative to each other, offering a spatially consistent classification.
91
26
2. Balsam Fir Mean Age: Older balsam fir stands are associated with poor forest health, as these
trees are more vulnerable to disease, blowdown, and fire. The mean age of balsam fir within a stand
was determined from the GeoNB forest stands layer
3. Percentage of Balsam Fir Composition: High percentages of balsam fir, particularly in the
dominant layer, increase the risk of disease, pests, and other disturbances. A high proportion of a
single, undesired species reduces the forest's resilience to environmental stressors.
The highest risk rating within the watershed was 12, with the highest risk stands accounting for 10.1% of
the total forest area (Figure 7). These stands are predominantly located in the northeastern section of the
watershed, where forest management actions could be most effective in reducing the risks associated with
species composition. Notably, a substantial portion of the lakefront and riparian forest stands fall into the
low or medium-low risk categories, which is advantageous for maintaining water quality due to their
healthier and more resilient state.
Latimer Lake was ranked as low to moderately low risk using the modified rating system. However, because
of its proximity to the intake, disturbances affecting these forests would have a more significant impact on
water quality. Additionally, two stands with a 40% balsam fir composition in the dominant layer received
a low risk ranking due to their small area within the watershed. These stands would have ranked higher if
their full extent had been included, as the boundary was cut off at the watershed catchment line. Further
work is planned to assess forests within the Latimer Lake catchment area and small areas of higher risk
should be addressed even though the area as a whole has low to moderately low risk. Figure 8 shows the
forest risk areas for City of Saint John owned lands.
92
27
Figure 7. Forest stand risk rankings the the Loch Lomond watershed where blue represents low risk, yellow indicates medium risk, and red signifies high risk.
93
28
Figure 8. Forest stand risk rankings on City of Saint John owned lands where blue represents low risk, yellow indicates medium risk, and red signifies high risk
94
29
5.2.2 Pests and Disease
Forest insects that cause tree damage, often termed "pests" within the forest industry, can be either native
or non-native, the latter frequently referred to as "invasive." Recent field assessments within the watershed
have not indicated significant pest or disease outbreaks.
However, several potential threats exist, notably the Spruce Budworm (SBW). SBW, which preferentially
feeds on balsam fir and secondarily on spruce, particularly white spruce, targets buds and foliage, with a
preference for new growth. Severe defoliation over multiple years can lead to tree mortality. While current
SBW populations are concentrated in northwestern New Brunswick and are closely monitored provincially,
the watershed's high density of balsam fir and spruce makes it vulnerable to potentially devastating
outbreaks.
Another concern is the invasive Balsam Woolly Adelgid (BWA), prevalent in southern New Brunswick but
not yet detected within the watershed. BWA damages balsam fir treetops and can cause tree death in severe
infestations. Continued monitoring for BWA damage during routine field assessments is crucial.
The Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), a destructive pest of ash trees, poses a lesser risk due to the watershed's
limited ash population. While an EAB outbreak could occur, its impact on overall water quality would
likely be minimal.
Preventative measures against pests and disease risks center on promoting forest diversity. Monocultures
or areas with high densities of degraded single-species stands are particularly susceptible to infestations.
Maintaining a diverse forest composition is therefore essential for watershed resilience.
5.2.3 Climate Change
Climate change is already impacting New Brunswick, manifesting in increased temperatures, sea-level rise,
intensified precipitation events, more frequent high-intensity wind and ice storms, exacerbated inland and
coastal flooding, accelerated coastal erosion, and land loss. These changes will continue to negatively affect
the City of Saint John without proactive adaptation.
Since 1990, New Brunswick's average annual temperature has risen by 1.1°C, with projections indicating
a further increase of 3.5°C by 2080 (Roy and Huard, 2016). In the Greater Saint John Area, hotter summers
and milder winters are anticipated. Mean annual summer temperatures could rise by 3.4°C by 2071-2100,
increasing the number of hot days (above 25°C) from 9.5 to 70. Average winter temperatures are expected
to increase from -5.4°C to -1°C by 2071-2100, resulting in more freeze-thaw cycles, peaking mid-century
(2011-2040).
Precipitation patterns are more variable than temperature, making predictions challenging. Climate change
models suggest New Brunswick will experience extended dry periods and more frequent heavy
precipitation events, resulting in a net increase in mean annual precipitation (NBEDLG, 2018; Roy &
Huard, 2016). This will lead to increased stormwater runoff and a higher potential for flooding. Seasonal
precipitation types in the Greater Saint John Area are also expected to shift. As temperatures rise, the
number of snow days will decrease, correlating with an increase in rainfall and potentially more frequent
95
30
flooding. River flows will become more variable, with earlier spring peak flows and lower summer
minimum flows. This can impact lake levels, water availability for treatment, nutrient, organic matter, and
bacteria concentrations, water chemistry, and the timing of ice-out and lake turnover. Increased periods of
low or zero river flow during summer months can have significant ecological consequences (NBDELG,
n.d.b), potentially leading to water quality and availability issues, and necessitating water conservation
measures.
Forest ecosystems will experience significant climate change impacts, with some species adapting and
others exceeding their tolerance limits. To assess the current forest's resilience, the project team utilized
"Forests of the Future in the Fundy Biosphere Reserve: Climate Change Resiliency of Tree Species in the
Fundy Biosphere Reserve Region" (Fundy Biosphere Reserve, 2015) 2041-2070 predictions to rank tree
species. These rankings were compared with GeoNB stand composition data to create a resilience map,
categorizing stands as "disappear," "decline," "persevere," "prosper," or "proliferate". Figure 9 illustrates
climate change resiliency ranks for the entire Loch Lomond watershed while Figure 10 demonstrates
climate change resiliency ranks on only City of Saint John owned lands.
Overall, most of the watershed falls within the "persevere" category, indicating that while some species will
experience stress, the forest stand will remain. No stands ranked as "disappear" or "proliferate," suggesting
the forest structure is unlikely to change dramatically in the next 50 years.
While climate mapping indicates forest stands within the watershed are unlikely to disappear by 2070 due
to species diversity, mapping comparative climate change risk is crucial for prioritizing management
efforts. Stands identified as high-risk, signified by the colour red in Figure 11 and Figure 12 below, should
be compared with the stand composition risk map illustrated above in Figure 8 to identify areas requiring
focused assessment and management to enhance resilience. Individual stand assessments are essential for
developing tailored management prescriptions with a climate resilience focus.
The interconnectedness of water quality and the surrounding land base makes it highly susceptible to
climate change impacts. Increased risks of pests and diseases, forest fires, wind damage, and blowdowns
can elevate tree mortality and reduce mature forest cover. Trees play a vital role in regulating water
temperature by providing shade, stabilizing banks to reduce sedimentation, and absorbing excess rainfall to
minimize runoff. With more frequent disturbances and fewer mature trees, streams become vulnerable to
increased sedimentation and runoff, potentially carrying nutrients, bacteria, organic carbon, and other
contaminants. This, coupled with intensified precipitation patterns, can create conditions conducive to the
proliferation of bacteria, aquatic plants, and algae, threatening the overall water quality of tributaries and
source water lakes. Conversely, altered precipitation patterns may also lead to extended periods of drought,
impacting water availability and potentially causing new erosion and sedimentation, increased nutrient
availability, and elevated water temperatures, further affecting water quality. Continued, long term
monitoring of both the lakes and tributaries within the watershed will be vital to understanding and tracking
the effects of climate change on water quality.
96
31
Figure 9. Climate change resiliency depicted for the entire Loch Lomond watershed.
97
32
Figure 10. Climate change resiliency depicted for City of Saint John owned land in the Loch Lomond watershed.
98
33
Figure 11. Climate change risk rankings throughout the Loch Lomond watershed where blue represents low risk, yellow signifies medium risk, and red indicates
high risk.
99
34
Figure 12. Climate change risk to forested stands illustrated on City of Saint John owned lands in the Loch Lomond watershed where blue represents low risk,
yellow signifies medium risk, and red indicates high risk..
100
35
5.2.4 Wildfires
On top of the burning of large areas of forest and the potential endangerment of homes and livelihoods,
forest fires can also negatively impact water quality. Fires can increase runoff and erosion by removing
vegetation, there can be an increase in sedimentation from the large quantities of ash, and there is a potential
for an increase in water levels as there is less vegetation to absorb rainwater. The more severe the fire is,
the more severe the effects on the water quality will be. The watershed is more at risk to forest fires in areas
where there is a higher percentage of softwood trees, in areas where there are a lot of dead and downed
trees that create fuel for a forest fire, and in areas that are popular with the public for bonfires. Forests in
close proximity to roads and active ATV trails also have an increased fire risk as sparks created by engines
or discarded cigarettes have the potential to start a fire. Having less fuel in the form of dead and downed
trees by cleaning up areas where whole stands have blown down will help to reduce the severity and risk
of a forest fire, as will conducting forestry operations that break up large high risk stands into smaller areas
of high risk with lower risk areas in between. Increasing the amount of hardwood found in the forest
composition will also reduce the risk of wildfires, and limiting public access especially to areas of the
watershed with higher risk for fire will reduce the potential for ignition. While a forest fire anywhere within
the watershed has the potential to negatively affect the water quality, the closer in proximity to the intake
at Latimer Lake that a fire occurs, the greater the negative impact would be.
6. Forest Management
Throughout 2023 and 2024, desktop and field-based surveys were conducted to evaluate the current forest
conditions within the LLW. To support forest health and water quality, proactive management strategies—
such as thinning or stand treatments—will be utilized. These efforts will primarily target high-risk stands
to mitigate potential risks. A recommended review cycle of 5 years for actively managed areas and 20 years
for unmanaged stands will ensure ongoing monitoring and adaptation. Given the dynamic nature of human
and climate change-related risks, more frequent reviews may be necessary to address emerging challenges
effectively.
A comprehensive Forest Operations Plan (FOP), outlining specific stand treatments over the next 5 years,
is under development and should be followed once complete. The overarching goal of forest management
within the LLW is to prioritize water quality over timber value by restoring and maintaining forest
conditions that benefit the watershed. Long-term objectives include fostering diverse, resilient stands with
varied species composition and age structure. Collaboration with private landowners, in addition to
managing city-owned lands, will be crucial to achieving watershed-wide management goals and promoting
best practices for water quality preservation.
6.1 Restorative Forestry Operations
The primary goal of forest management in the Loch Lomond watershed is to protect and enhance water
quality for the City of Saint John by prioritizing ecological resilience over timber production. Key
challenges include the dominance of balsam fir, an aging forest structure, and the increasing impacts of
climate change. Addressing these issues requires promoting biodiversity, diversifying species composition
and tree ages, and strengthening forest resilience against disturbances and climate change. A key strategy
101
36
is transitioning toward hardwood, mixed-wood, and long-lived coniferous stands, which are more beneficial
for water quality than softwood-dominated landscapes, particularly those with high balsam fir presence.
This report outlines strategies to address these issues through Best Management Practices (BMPs), targeted
silviculture to promote biodiversity, and a shift toward climate-resilient mixed-wood, hardwood, and long-
lived coniferous species. Specific measures for mature stands will further enhance forest resilience.
Expected outcomes include improved water quality, reduced risks from pests, fire, and windthrow, and a
more adaptive, sustainable forest ecosystem.
Forests are essential to watershed health, particularly in ensuring clean drinking water. Well-managed
forests store and filter water, reduce surface runoff, and mitigate flooding risks. They regulate water
quantity and quality by intercepting precipitation, enhancing soil infiltration, and minimizing erosion. This
strong connection between forest health and water quality highlights the need for effective management
practices in watersheds that supply drinking water.
While some forest stands within the watershed are healthy and pose minimal risk to water quality, a
significant portion of city-owned lands would benefit from targeted silviculture treatments. These
treatments aim to reduce risks to water quality while maintaining, improving, or restoring the long-term
health and resilience of the forest.
6.1.1 Ideal Forest Stand Characteristics for Water Quality
When managing for water quality some key characteristics to look for in a forest include high biodiversity
and significant variability in species composition and tree age. This diversity helps buffer against
disturbances by preventing large-scale die-offs, reducing susceptibility to species-specific pests and
diseases, and lowering the risk and severity of forest fires. In a changing climate, species diversity also
increases the likelihood of maintaining stable forest cover, even as environmental conditions shift.
Across the watershed, hardwood and mixed-wood stands generally pose less risk to water quality than
softwood-dominated forests, particularly those with high balsam fir presence. Softwood stands are more
vulnerable to fire and windthrow, while hardwood offers greater structural stability. Deep-rooted species
such as sugar maple, white pine, and yellow birch enhance soil stability and resistance to windthrow.
Additionally, longer-lived species like red spruce, sugar maple, red maple, eastern white cedar, white pine,
and yellow birch contribute to a more stable forest canopy, reducing the need for frequent regeneration.
Collectively, these characteristics foster a resilient forest ecosystem that provides more consistent and
higher-quality water resources.
6.1.2 Impacts of Balsam Fir Dominance on Water Quality
The dominance of mature balsam fir in the Loch Lomond watershed presents significant challenges to water
quality management. Highly susceptible to disturbances such as windthrow, fire, and spruce budworm
outbreaks, balsam fir creates an unstable forest cover that can increase erosion and runoff, negatively
impacting water quality. Additionally, balsam fir is poorly suited to a changing climate. Research in New
Brunswick indicates rising mortality rates due to drought and higher summer temperatures, with projections
suggesting a northward shift in its growing range. This climate vulnerability underscores the need to
diversify the forest with species better adapted to future conditions.
As a short-lived species, balsam fir undergoes frequent cycles of die-off and regeneration, leading to lower
structural diversity and prolonged periods of forest vulnerability. Its tendency to self-perpetuate further
limits the establishment of more resilient species, maintaining an elevated risk to water quality. Because
102
37
balsam fir-dominated stands are particularly prone to large-scale disturbances, they pose a heightened risk
of soil erosion, surface runoff, and sedimentation in water bodies. Their increased flammability further
exacerbates these threats. Given that balsam fir makes up the largest portion of the Loch Lomond
watershed’s forest, its susceptibility to ecological stressors represents an ongoing risk to the city's drinking
water supply.
6.1.3 Best Practices for Watershed Forest Management
Effective forest management in a watershed, where water quality is the primary concern, depends on the
strategic implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). These guidelines minimize the impact of
forestry activities on water resources by reducing soil erosion, surface runoff, and disturbances to natural
hydrologic processes. BMPs also help regulate water temperatures along shorelines and streambanks by
preserving shade-providing vegetation and maintaining nutrient balances in forest soils. Their goal is to
control or eliminate nonpoint source pollutants resulting from forestry operations. BMPs must be integrated
into forest management plans and applied before, during, and after interventions to ensure consistency and
effectiveness.
Specific BMPs relevant to watershed forestry operations include the careful planning and layout of forest
roads, skid trails, and log landings to minimize their potential to impact water quality. Log landings, for
example, should ideally be located at a distance of at least 60 meters from any water bodies. When
constructing roads and trails, it is important to avoid steep slopes and poorly drained soil types. Minimizing
the number of stream crossings is another critical BMP. Proper management of logging debris, such as
slash, is necessary to prevent it from entering streams, lakes, or wetlands. In areas where soil disturbance
is unavoidable, the implementation of erosion control measures, such as the use of weed-free straw bales
and silt fencing, is essential. Maintaining adequate riparian management zones, also known as buffer zones,
along all watercourses is a cornerstone of protecting aquatic ecosystems and water quality. In New
Brunswick, regulations require a minimum 30-meter buffer zone along watercourses. Conducting forestry
operations during dry or frozen ground conditions can significantly minimize soil disturbance and the risk
of sediment runoff. For any necessary stream crossings, proper design, installation, and ongoing
maintenance are vital. Finally, a fundamental BMP is to absolutely avoid felling trees directly into running
streams, as this can severely disrupt aquatic habitats and water flow.
Successfully protecting water quality in a managed watershed requires a proactive and adaptive approach
that starts with thorough planning. Conducting a comprehensive watershed analysis before any management
activities helps identify potential impacts on water yield and sedimentation, allowing for the development
of targeted mitigation strategies. Additionally, continuous monitoring of silvicultural activities is essential
for assessing the effectiveness of implemented BMPs and ensuring the long-term integrity of water quality
within the watershed.
6.1.4 Strategies for Reducing Balsam Fir and Promoting Climate-Resilient Species
A key objective in improving forest quality within the Loch Lomond watershed is to reduce the dominance
of balsam fir and promote the growth of tree species that are more resilient to ecological disturbances and
climate change. Several strategies can be implemented to shift forest composition toward more desirable
species.
103
38
During thinning operations, priority should be given to the selective removal of balsam fir trees, which will
create more space and light for other species. Balsam fir trees that show signs of heavy pest or disease
infestation should also be targeted for removal. In areas with high levels of infestation, sanitation harvests
can help remove affected trees, preventing the spread of pests and diseases while encouraging the
regeneration of less susceptible species.
To support the growth of more desirable species, management practices should focus on creating canopy
conditions that favor their regeneration. This can be achieved by opening the forest canopy to allow
sufficient light for shade-tolerant and climate-resilient species like red spruce, hemlock, red oak, and red
maple. In areas where these species are already present in advance regeneration, methods like irregular
shelterwood cutting and group selection can be employed to release these young trees and promote their
growth. Additionally, protective measures such as tree tubes can be used to safeguard seedlings, especially
those vulnerable to browsing by herbivores.
When natural regeneration of desired species is insufficient, enrichment planting should be considered. This
involves planting climate-resilient species such as red spruce, white pine, sugar maple, and red oak in
canopy openings or areas where regeneration has failed. If natural seed sources are lacking, artificial
regeneration using seeds or seedlings from outside the stand may be necessary.
Successful regeneration, whether natural or artificial, requires proper site preparation. Creating scarified
seedbeds, which involve removing the top layer of organic matter to expose mineral soil, can benefit species
like red spruce. Managing competing vegetation, including herbaceous plants, shrubs, and less desirable
hardwoods, through mechanical or chemical methods can also improve the survival and growth of target
species.
Ultimately, reducing balsam fir dominance and promoting climate-resilient species requires a long-term,
gradual transition. Over time, the goal will be to decrease the proportion of short-lived and less climate-
resilient species like balsam fir, while increasing the abundance of long-lived, shade-tolerant, and climate-
resilient species such as red maple, yellow birch, red spruce, eastern white cedar, and sugar maple. This
gradual approach will lead to a more diverse, stable, and resilient forest ecosystem in the Loch Lomond
Watershed.
6.1.5 Managing Mature and Overmature Forest Stands
The presence of a significant proportion of mature and overmature forest stands within the Loch Lomond
watershed presents unique management challenges and risks. These stands are more vulnerable to natural
die-off due to their age and face an increased likelihood of being impacted by ecological disturbances such
as windthrow, forest fires, and pest outbreaks. For example, insect outbreaks like the spruce budworm can
lead to widespread mortality in mature balsam fir and, to a lesser extent, red spruce. The accumulation of
dead trees in overmature stands also heightens the risk of fire, further complicating management efforts. As
such, proactive management is essential to mitigate these risks and protect water quality.
Several silvicultural treatments can be employed to manage mature and overmature forest stands in the
watershed. Shelterwood and group selection harvesting are effective methods that involve the gradual
removal of the mature overstory over one or more stages, allowing for the regeneration of desired species
under the protective canopy of remaining trees. This approach is particularly valuable when successful
104
39
regeneration through other methods is uncertain. Alternatively, clearcutting with reserves may be
considered, where all trees in a designated area are removed in a single harvest, but some individual or
small groups of trees are intentionally left behind to serve as wildlife habitat or provide seed sources for
future regeneration.
6.1.6 Enhancing Forest Resilience to Disturbances
Enhancing the resilience of the Loch Lomond watershed forest to various disturbances is necessary to
ensure long-term protection of water quality. One key factor in achieving this resilience is the promotion
of biodiversity. A diverse array of tree species within a forest stand reduces the risk of widespread damage
from pests and diseases, as these often target specific species. Research shows that increased species
diversity contributes to greater resilience against insect outbreaks. A forest rich in biodiversity is generally
more capable of withstanding and recovering from environmental stressors, providing a natural buffer that
maintains the health and functionality of the ecosystem, which directly supports consistent water quality.
Another important aspect of forest resilience is variability in age structure. A forest stand with a range of
tree ages is less likely to suffer from simultaneous die-off during a disturbance. By maintaining a mix of
ages, tree sizes, and canopy positions, the risk of vulnerability to specific stressors that may
disproportionately affect certain age groups is reduced. Promoting multiple age cohorts across the
watershed ensures that even if one age group is impacted, others will remain to maintain forest cover and
ecological functions, which helps the forest recover and thrive over time.
Considering ongoing climate change, promoting climate-resilient tree species is essential for the long-term
stability of the watershed. Increasing the diversity of tree species, including those predicted to thrive under
future climate conditions, will help maintain forest cover even as currently dominant species decline due to
warming temperatures.
Afforestation and restoration aim to restore resilient forest ecosystems to protect water quality through
planting native mix-wood stands. Throughout the watershed there are areas where forest land has been
transformed for other human uses or degraded through human impacts. Sites such as old farmland, past
single species plantations, vacant land, and disturbed sites such as gravel pits and quarries are all examples
of where restoration could transform the area, reduce human impacts, and promote healthy forest habitat.
Through this management plan priority will be given to replanting city-owned land; however private
landowners should be encouraged to promote restoration on their lands as well. A preliminary list of city-
owned sites has been generated, and replanting has begun on three sites (Third Lake, Braydon Rd, and the
old community centre) in the watershed. Going forward, a more comprehensive list of both city-owned and
potential privately owned sites will be generated to prioritize sites that would have the most impact to water
quality and begin engaging with private landowners.
It is important to maintain the overall health and vigor of the forest as healthy, well-managed forests are
better equipped to withstand a variety of stressors such as wind, ice, pests, and diseases. Silvicultural
treatments like thinning can improve the health of remaining trees, making them more resistant to
defoliation and other stress-related impacts. By focusing on practices that promote forest health, managers
can enhance the forest's ability to recover from disturbances.
105
40
Proactive and adaptive forest management is vital for maintaining and improving the quality of drinking
water in the Loch Lomond watershed. The dominance of balsam fir and the prevalence of mature and
overmature stands call for a strategic shift towards a more diverse, climate-resilient forest ecosystem. By
implementing the strategies outlined in this report, the City of Saint John can transition from a system
overly reliant on balsam fir to one that is more capable of withstanding ecological disturbances and adapting
to climate change. These long-term management strategies will ensure a sustainable and high-quality
drinking water supply for the city while demonstrating a commitment to responsible stewardship of this
valuable natural resource.
6.2 Forestry Operations
The city-owned forested lands within the Loch Lomond Watershed are a vital natural resource, providing
Saint John, New Brunswick, with its primary source of drinking water. In recognition of the importance of
this resource, an Operations Plan is being developed to establish a comprehensive framework for the
sustainable management of these lands. This plan will outline recommended forestry treatments tailored to
the current conditions of individual forest stands, with a focus on long-term health, productivity, resilience,
and water quality. A key objective is to ensure all forestry operations are conducted in a way that preserves
the watershed's ecological integrity, particularly safeguarding the overarching goal of water quality in the
Loch Lomond and Latimer Lake watersheds. Additionally, the plan aims to enhance the forest’s long-term
resilience to environmental stressors, including the escalating challenges posed by climate change. To
facilitate clarity and focused management, the forested city land within the watershed has been divided into
distinct management units, as depicted in Figure 13. This division allows for the development of tailored
management strategies that address the unique characteristics and sensitivities of each area.
6.2.1 Management Unit Framework
The division of forested city-owned land within the Loch Lomond Watershed into management units, as
shown in Figure 13 establishes a structured framework for implementing the Operations Plan. This
approach acknowledges that different areas within the watershed have distinct ecological characteristics,
sensitivities, and management priorities.
Management Unit 1 includes the forests surrounding Latimer Lake and Robertson Lake, which are critical
for water quality protection due to their proximity to the water intakes. Management Unit 2 consists of the
area to the North of First Lake, where most stands are classified as low to moderately low risk. By
delineating management units, the Operations Plan enables a more tailored approach to forestry planning.
This ensures that recommended forestry operations align with the specific conditions of each unit while
contributing to the overall health, resilience, and sustainability of the watershed.
106
41
Figure 13. Management Units for forestry operations occuring in the Loch Lomond watershed.
107
42
6.2.1.1 Specific Recommendations for Forestry Operations within Management Units
Based on the available information, specific forestry recommendations can be made for Management Unit
1 and Management Unit 2. Detailed recommendations for additional management units would require
further analysis based on Figure 13 above, and a comprehensive assessment of each unit’s unique
characteristics and management objectives.
6.2.1.1.1 Management Unit 1 (Latimer Lake and Robertson Lake)
Clear cutting is strictly prohibited in MU1 due to its proximity to water intakes, ensuring the protection of
water quality. Forestry operations must prioritize maintaining continuous forest cover and minimizing soil
disturbance. Suitable harvesting methods include single tree selection to preserve canopy structure and
group selection with careful patch placement to prevent sedimentation or nutrient runoff. Shelterwood
cutting may be appropriate in select stands to encourage regeneration while maintaining canopy cover.
Additionally, pre-commercial thinning and crop tree release can enhance stand health and species
composition with minimal disturbance. These restrictions are essential to prevent soil erosion,
sedimentation, and water quality degradation in this critical drinking water source.
6.2.1.1.2 Management Unit 2 (First Lake North)
No new roads will be permitted for forestry operations in MU2 to limit public access and associated risks
such as unauthorized harvesting, fire hazards, and wildlife disturbances. As most stands are classified as
low to moderately low risk, forestry activities should leverage existing access routes. Recommended
methods include single tree selection and group selection, provided they do not require additional
infrastructure. Strip cutting may be considered if carefully planned. Pre-commercial thinning and crop tree
release are also encouraged to improve stand resilience without significant access modifications. The
overall goal is to sustain responsible forestry while preserving the unit’s low-risk status.
6.2.2 Overview of Forestry Management Approaches
Effective forest management depends on the application of silvicultural systems that guide the growth,
composition, structure, and function of forest stands. Two primary approaches—even-aged and uneven-
aged management—offer distinct benefits and can be applied within the Loch Lomond Watershed,
depending on specific stand conditions and management objectives.
Even-aged management aims to create stands with trees of the same age or within a narrow age range. This
approach often uses harvesting methods that remove the overstory in a single operation, such as clearcutting
or shelterwood cutting. Once regeneration is established, further removal of mature trees may occur. While
clearcutting is restricted in Management Unit 1 due to its proximity to water intakes at Robertson and
Latimer Lakes, the principles of even-aged management could be considered in other watershed areas. It is
particularly effective for regenerating tree species that thrive in full sunlight or for stands, such as those
dominated by mature balsam fir, that are at risk of disturbances. However, even-aged stands generally
exhibit less structural diversity, which can impact wildlife habitat and biodiversity, particularly in the short
term after harvest. To mitigate these potential effects, strategies such as retention islands can be
incorporated into the management plan.
108
43
Uneven-aged management, on the other hand, aims to maintain forest stands with a variety of tree ages and
sizes. This approach typically employs selection cutting, where individual or small groups of trees are
periodically removed, creating space for regeneration and the growth of diverse tree ages. This method is
ideal for areas within the watershed where continuous forest cover is essential, particularly around the lake
intakes in Management Unit 1. Additionally, uneven-aged management promotes ecological stability and
resilience by fostering a more complex forest structure. Stands managed this way tend to have greater
structural diversity, supporting a broader range of plant and animal species. The presence of multiple age
classes can also enhance the stand's resistance to disturbances like insect outbreaks or wind damage. While
uneven-aged management can be more complex to implement and may result in lower short-term timber
yields, it offers significant long-term benefits for watershed protection and ecological integrity, making it
a valuable approach for many areas within the Loch Lomond Watershed.
6.2.3 Harvesting Methods Applicable to the Watershed
A variety of harvesting methods can be employed to achieve the management objectives within the Loch
Lomond Watershed, each with its own characteristics and suitability for different stand conditions and
management goals.
6.2.3.1 Clear Cutting
Clearcutting involves the removal of the entire overstory of trees in a single harvest. While this method is
restricted in Management Unit 1, it may be considered in other areas of the Loch Lomond Watershed under
specific conditions. Clearcutting may be an appropriate option when less intensive methods are not viable,
such as in stands dominated by mature balsam fir with abundant balsam fir regeneration (Figure 14). In
these situations, clearcutting followed by site preparation could be the most effective way to reduce the
future prevalence of balsam fir in the stand composition.
Site preparation is a crucial step post-harvest, aimed at improving seedling survival and growth by removing
logging debris and reducing competing vegetation. This may involve mechanical treatments like disking,
chopping, or raking, as well as reducing competing vegetation. Herbicide application will not be permitted
on City-owned land, so mechanical methods will be used. The appropriate site preparation method will
depend on site conditions, the desired future species, and the need to manage potential impacts like erosion.
Even in clear-cut areas, the retention of patches of desired species, known as retention islands, is
recommended. These islands serve as seed sources and help increase structural and biodiversity within the
regenerating stand. The long-term goal for clearcut sites is to manage regeneration using smaller, more
precise operations like group selection, strip cuts, crop tree release, or thinning. This approach aims to
maintain forest cover and a healthy stand without requiring another clearcut for 80 to 100 years.
It is important to note that clearcut harvesting is not permitted in the management units surrounding Latimer
and Robertson Lakes (Management Unit 1) due to their proximity to water intakes, underscoring the priority
of protecting water quality in this sensitive zone.
109
44
Figure 14. A profile of a clearcut silviculture system in a conifer-dominated stand depicting conditions directly after
harvest. Illustrations by Jodi Hall.
6.2.3.2 Single Tree Selection Cut
Single tree selection involves the removal of individual trees more or less uniformly throughout the stand.
When employing this method, it is crucial to avoid "high grading," which refers to removing only the best
quality trees and leaving behind poor-quality ones. High grading can significantly degrade the genetic
quality and overall health of the future forest. To meet the objectives within the watershed, the
recommended approach is to retain healthy, high-quality trees of desired species while selecting poorer
quality trees of less desired species for removal (Figure 15).
Figure 15. A profile of an individual selection silviculture system depicting stand conditions after a cut with
llustrations by Jodi Hall.
110
45
This method requires careful assessment of individual trees and a clear understanding of the long-term
management goals for the stand. Skilled forestry professionals are essential for effectively implementing
single tree selection, ensuring that the remaining stand consists of healthy, vigorous trees with good growth
potential. Due to the complexity of this technique, it should only be considered where suitable stand
conditions exist. It is anticipated that this technique will be used infrequently, except in sensitive areas such
as water intakes in Management Unit 1, WSDO buffers, and buffers along watercourses and wetlands.
6.2.3.3 Group Selection Cut
Group selection is a harvesting method where patches of trees are removed, creating small openings
scattered throughout the stand (Figure 16). The size of these cut patches can vary depending on the light
requirements of the tree species desired for regeneration. Typically, the diameter of the cut area ranges from
one to two and a half times the height of the surrounding trees. Larger openings allow more sunlight to
reach the forest floor, making them suitable for regenerating shade-intolerant species. Smaller openings, on
the other hand, create more shaded conditions that favor the regeneration of shade-tolerant species. This
method can lead to a more diverse stand structure and species composition by creating a mosaic of different
light environments within the forest. Careful planning of the size, shape, and distribution of the cut groups
is necessary to achieve the desired regeneration outcomes and maintain overall forest health.
Figure 16. An aerial view of a group selection harvest in a tolerant hardwood stand depicting an initial harvest
illustrated by Jodi Hall.
6.2.3.4 Strip Cut
The strip cut method harvests trees in narrow strips, leaving sections between the strips uncut to encourage
natural regeneration and minimize soil disturbance (Figure 17). The width of these strips is typically
dependent on the height of the trees, influencing the amount of light that reaches the regenerating area. The
111
46
stated goal for strip cutting within the watershed is to "target oldest worst first" with the aim of improving
the overall condition of the stand. This suggests that strip cutting will be employed to remove older,
potentially less vigorous trees, thereby creating space and light for new regeneration and enhancing the
health and productivity of the remaining stand. The orientation and width of the strips are important
considerations as they can affect seed dispersal, seedling establishment, and windthrow risk.
Figure 17. An aerial view of a strip cut silviculture system depicting first removal cut with residual mature seed
trees retrieved from www.gov.bc.ca.
6.2.3.5 Shelterwood Cut
The shelterwood cut is a harvesting method where a portion of the forest canopy is removed to create
conditions suitable for the establishment of regeneration underneath (Figure 18). This method is often
employed in stands where desired species are already present and natural regeneration is the primary goal.
However, planting can also be done under a shelterwood cut to introduce or increase the proportion of
specific species in the regenerating stand. The amount of canopy removed is determined by the light
requirements of the desired regeneration species. Once the new generation of trees is well-established, the
remaining overstory canopy is typically removed. However, in some cases, a portion of the mature canopy
may be left in place to provide additional age diversity to the stand, potentially enhancing habitat
complexity and resilience.
112
47
Figure 18. A profile of a uniform shelterwood silviculture system depicting first removal cut with illustrations by
Jodi Hall.
6.2.3.6 Other Relevant Intermediate Treatments
Intermediate treatments such as thinning and crop tree release play a crucial role in enhancing the health
and productivity of forest stands within the Loch Lomond Watershed.
Pre-commercial thinning (PCT) involves removing trees in young stands before they reach commercial
value. The primary goal is not financial return but to reduce tree density, allowing the remaining trees better
access to light, water, and nutrients. This improves growth rates, tree vigor, and resistance to pests and
diseases while also enhancing stand composition by removing less desirable or poorly formed trees. The
cut material is left on-site to decompose, enriching the soil. PCT is generally applied to stands under 20
years old, where trees are typically less than 6 inches in diameter. Methods include manual cutting, mowing,
disking, chopping, or prescribed burning. Implementing PCT in overstocked young stands can prevent
stagnation and promote healthy, productive forests.
Commercial thinning (CT) is conducted in stands that have reached merchantable size, typically around 30
years old or older. It generates revenue while improving the growth and quality of the remaining trees by
reducing competition. CT also helps capture volume that might otherwise be lost to mortality, enhances
stand stability, and increases resilience to disturbances such as wildfires. The timing and intensity of CT
require careful planning based on stand age, density, species composition, and management objectives.
Crop tree release (CTR) focuses on improving the growth and vigor of selected "crop trees" by removing
competitors that limit their crown development. Crop trees are chosen based on management goals, such as
timber production, wildlife habitat (e.g., mast-producing species), or aesthetics. Healthy, well-formed trees
of desired species are prioritized; while competing trees that overtop or crowd them are removed. CTR can
be applied in stands of various ages, either as a pre-commercial or commercial operation, to concentrate
site resources on high-potential trees, leading to faster growth, larger size, and improved overall stand
health.
113
48
The use of a mulching or grinding head, such as those that are used to clear ditches and the side of the road,
could be a form of alternative treatment for small stands of non-merchantable wood. Stands that have a lot
of dead or rotten trees, blown down areas with minimal standing timber, or stands with small diameter trees
where the live crown ratios are not suitable for PCT are often not viable for traditional harvesting operations.
In these cases, using a mulching head to remove the unmerchantable trees and then work to regenerate the
stand, either naturally through nearby seed sources or through planting, may be the best option for the site.
6.2.3.7 Stand Regeneration
Prior to conducting any harvesting operations, thought needs to be given to how the stand will be
regenerated after the harvest. Advanced regeneration, or regeneration that is present in the stand prior to
harvest, should be assessed to determine if there is a high percentage of desired species that are evenly
distributed within the stand that could be preserved. In cases where retaining naturally ocurring regeneration
is desired, the harvesting method should be chosen such that the current regeneration can be protected. If
the regeneration is made up of undesirable species, the harvesting plan should include a method of removing
it either during the harvest, or after the harvest is complete with a form of site preparation.
Natural regeneration should be utilized where possible either through preserving desirable regeneration
during the harvest or through the use of retention trees/islands and other nearby seed sources. Mature trees
of desired species found within the harvested stand should appear windfirm if they are being retained as
individual trees. Groups or islands of desired species should be retained both as seed source and to add age
and structure diversity to the stand.
Planting can be used to supplement natural regeneration or to replace it if there are no desirable species to
use as a seed source. Softwood seedlings can be sourced from the local marketing board and subsidies are
often available to offset costs.
6.2.4 Criteria for Prioritizing Stands for Forestry Treatment
Effective forestry operations within the Loch Lomond Watershed require clear criteria for prioritizing
which stands will receive treatment and in what order. Stands located closest to Latimer Lake and Robertson
Lake should be given the highest priority to proactively manage potential risks to the primary drinking
water source. Treatments in these areas should focus on removing diseased or stressed trees that could
threaten water quality and implementing measures to enhance forest stability and resilience.
Proximity to other water bodies and wetlands within the watershed is also a key factor in prioritization.
Wetlands and riparian zones play a crucial role in maintaining water quality, regulating water flow, and
supporting diverse habitats. Forestry operations in these sensitive areas should aim to preserve or enhance
their ecological functions by improving forest health, managing invasive species, or restoring natural
vegetation patterns.
The condition of individual forest stands is another critical determinant in setting treatment priorities.
Stands with an overabundance of less resilient or less desirable species, such as balsam fir, should be
targeted to promote a more diverse and climate-adapted species mix. Areas at high risk of wildfire should
be prioritized for thinning operations to reduce tree density and flammable understory vegetation,
mitigating the potential for severe fires. Additionally, the resilience of stands to climate change must be
114
49
considered. Stands with low predicted resilience—based on species diversity, age structure, and site
conditions—should be prioritized for adaptive management strategies that enhance their ability to withstand
changing environmental conditions, such as increasing species diversity or adjusting stand density.
6.2.5 Long Term Objectives for Forest Stands After Treatment
The long-term objective for the forest stands within the Loch Lomond Watershed, following forestry
treatments, should focus on the health and sustainability of the ecosystem. These objectives include
maintaining a healthy and diverse forest cover across the entire watershed to ensure ecological function and
resilience, enhancing the resilience of forest stands to environmental stressors such as climate change, pest
outbreaks, and diseases, and improving the overall ecological integrity of the watershed to support
biodiversity and natural processes.
At a stand level this looks like conducting small operations potentially more frequently in order to help the
stand stay healthy and encourage natural regeneration, while still conserving forest cover that is crucial for
maintaining good water quality. These small operations should steer the stand toward a more resilient,
diverse species composition and an overall stand condition that is lower risk to water quality. Ideally a stand
that has been clearcut once due to high balsam fir content and poor stand conditions should not get to the
state where it needs to be clearcut again.
These objectives will guide the selection and implementation of forestry treatments within the Operations
Plan, emphasizing a balanced approach that prioritizes ecological health and watershed protection while
considering sustainable resource use where appropriate.
6.2.6 Post Treatment Monitoring
Periodic assessments will be conducted on managed stands every five years to evaluate their condition and
address any emerging issues. High-risk stands should receive on-the-ground site visits, particularly after
major storms, to determine whether salvage operations are necessary due to blowdown. Unmanaged or low
risk stands should be reassessed every 20 years, aligning with the renewal of the management plan.
Recently harvested or planted stands require more frequent monitoring in the first, second, and fifth years
following intervention to ensure successful regeneration. Early assessments focus on determining whether
desirable species are establishing successfully or if they face excessive competition from less desirable
species. This proactive approach allows for timely corrective actions, such as managing competition before
it threatens regeneration success. For example, a clear-cut stand that was site-prepped and planted may still
experience significant balsam fir regeneration, which could outcompete planted stock if not controlled.
Beyond the initial monitoring period, continued assessments every five years help determine the need for
treatments such as thinning to maintain stand health and, later, to evaluate the timing of potential harvest
operations to support long-term regeneration goals.
6.2.7 Recommended Operational Constraints
The Loch Lomond Watershed is protected under the Watershed Protected Area Designation Order
(WPADO), which sets clear guidelines for forestry operations. Clear-cutting is limited to 25 hectares, and
stricter rules apply to Zone B (within 75 m of a watercourse), where only selection cutting is permitted,
115
50
with a maximum removal of 30% of trees. Harvesting in Zone B is restricted to January 1–March 31, with
varying buffer distances depending on proximity to the intake. Since provincial watercourse designations
may not reflect actual conditions, a 15- or 30-m no-harvest buffer is recommended for all watercourses.
Additional constraints include a 15-m "no-track" buffer around wetlands to prevent soil disturbance, with
limited selective harvesting assessed on a site-by-site basis. Operations should be scheduled outside bird
breeding and nesting periods (recommended window: September 1 – April 15). New road construction
should be minimized, with mandatory decommissioning after use. Pre-operation surveys should identify
species at risk, and herbicide or pesticide use should be prohibited on city lands.
Best management practices established by other municipalities for forestry operations within drinking water
watersheds, such as Halifax Water, should be consulted and implemented as seen fit. Some of the
recommended constraints to follow include maintaining a maximum harvested area of no more than 1% per
year of the total forested city land within the watershed, with the total forest cover of the watershed being
maintained >55% of the total land base and no more than 50% of the forested area being less than 50 years
old. It is also recommended that clear cut harvesting is used minimally in order to maintain a high
percentage of forest canopy cover.
7. Water Quality Monitoring
Monitoring water quality within the Loch Lomond Watershed is imperative to understanding the long-term
trends and determining any potential issues or hot spots. Monitoring can be categorized into three programs
- lake monitoring, tributary monitoring, and forest operation monitoring. All three programs will help in
ensuring this valuable resource remains healthy for future generations.
7.1 Lake Monitoring
Lake monitoring is conducted by SJW staff at long established sites within the watershed. Based on
recommendations from the project team, this monitoring has expanded to include the addition of
phosphorus and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) to the analysis. Additionally, the project team
recommended and implemented temperature monitoring through loggers during ice free months at the first
four lakes within the system, visual surveys for cyanobacteria presence, and the deployment of algae tracker
buoys. These buoys provide real-time monitoring for phycocyanin, chlorophyll-a, temperature and other
parameters to better understand cyanobacteria growth. Together these monitoring actions provide valuable
data on present day water quality and allows for tracking over long term and understanding the impact of
climate change on water quality.
Going forward, this program could be expanded from seasonally to monthly during ice free months for
nutrients, organics, and bacteria in the lakes closer to the intake to better understand how these might
fluctuate, especially during warmer months and runoff impacts during the spring and fall.
7.2 Tributary Monitoring
To better understand how land use and potential sources of nutrients, carbon, and bacteria are affecting the
water quality within the watershed, water quality monitoring within priority tributaries was implemented
throughout ice-free months beginning in 2022 by the project team. To achieve this, the following parameters
116
51
are collected - nutrients (orthophosphate, total phosphorus, nitrate/nitrite), organics (dissolved organic
carbon, total organic carbon), bacteria (E. coli, total coliforms, fecal coliforms, heterotrophic plate count)
and in-field parameters (temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, conductivity, pH). In total eight sites were
chosen to represent major inputs, different land use areas, and to capture as many subwatersheds as possible
that have ease of access (Table 3; Figure 19). Given that Ratcliffe Brook is the largest sub-watershed and
has the most wetland area, priority was given to this subwatershed and three of the eight sites are located
within it. Two additional sites are monitored in the Latimer Lake area (Sites 9 and 10) with Site 10 only
being monitored during rain events to get a better understanding of runoff into the lake.
The continuation of this monitoring program is needed to develop a baseline of normal concentrations,
temporal changes, investigate any issues within the subwatersheds, and provide insights into future potential
impacts to water quality. It is recommended that this monitoring continues as is until a baseline is
established (2-3 years depending on variability) then the sampling frequency and site selections should be
reevaluated.
Table 3. Tributary water quality monitoring sites within the Loch Lomond watershed. Sites 1-9 are monitored
monthly, whereas Site 10 is only monitored during rain events.
Site Code Site Name Site Description
1 Ratcliffe Brook at Otter Lake Rd Stream at bridge crossing
2 Ratcliffe Brrok at Upper Quaco Rd Stream at bridge crossing
3 Ratcliffe Brook at Church Rd Stream at ATV bridge crossing
4 Unnamed tributary Stream culvert crossing
5 McBrien Brook Stream confluence point with First Lake
6 Terro Brook Stream confluence with Second Lake
7 Unnamed tributary Stream culvert crossing
8 Unnamed tributary Stream at bridge crossing
9 Unnamed tributary Stream/ditch culvert crossing
10 Stormwater ditch Culvert crossing
117
52
Figure 19. Tributary water quality monitoring sites within the Loch Lomond watershed. Sites 1-9 are monitored monthly, whereas Site 10 is only monitored
during rain events.
118
53
7.3 Forestry Operation Monitoring
To determine any impacts from city-implemented forestry operations, a water quality monitoring plan
should be created and implemented to correspond with block specific operations that are planned in
proximity to a watercourse. Since the forestry operation will be taking place within a drinking water
watershed, ensuring little to no impacts from these operations is critical to ensuring the long-term water
quality. To accomplish this, sites should be chosen in any watercourses surrounding the block and be
monitored prior to, during, and after operations. A YSI Multimeter can be used to measure water
temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), conductivity, total dissolved solids, salinity, and pH, and a handheld
turbidity meter can be used to collect turbidity data. In addition to in-field parameters, water samples should
be collected for phosphates, nitrates, and organic carbon. These parameters will provide insight into changes
in stream temperature, potential nutrient loading, and sedimentation due to increased runoff associated with
removing the tree canopy and exposing the forest floor. If large changes in turbidity and nutrient loading
are observed during the operation, the operation should be halted, and additional water quality protections
should be put in place.
8. Priority of Land Acquisitions
Acquiring parcels of land within the watershed will allow the city to manage on a landscape level which
leads to better overall ecosystem management and function. When acquiring properties there are certain
characteristics to look for that can have a greater effect on the water quality and ecosystem function. There
are many considerations to be made when deciding if a property is worth trying to acquire such as its
proximity to the intake, watercourses, or proximity to already city-owned parcels, as well as parcels that
are large in size, forest condition (degraded or healthy), and older development that has not been renovated
significantly. First and foremost, the land’s proximity to the intake, source water lake, or watercourses
should be considered. These parcels would be deemed high priority since this can help directly protect these
watercourses and lakes and the closer to the intake, the greater the importance of protection.
Acquiring land next to already owned parcels will have a greater overall impact to the ecosystem function.
Filling in property gaps will not only aid in the management of single parcel forests but the forest matrix as
a whole. Certain forests function better when they are contiguous and require larger reaches being
undisturbed. This can be seen on the North Side of the lake where the majority of the land is owned by the
city with no gaps where limited land use has led to a lower risk healthier forest.
Purchasing parcels with stands shown as having high risk is also valuable as these stands are likely to be
degraded or starting to degrade and require proper management to be restored. On the other hand, it is also
extremely important to purchase parcels that are healthy, low risk or pristine with high conservation value
as these areas are already playing an important role in maintaining the health of the ecosystem and water
quality. It is more cost and time effective to acquire these lands that are already functioning properly to
insure they remain that way, than to acquire them after they are degraded or cleared and require restorative
actions. There is also an opportunity for land which would serve as conservation land to be left in trust or
acquired to one of the land trusts instead of purchasing it directly. Discussing these options with landowners
could be considered. On the other hand, surplus land, specifically land that extends beyond the watershed
boundary could be subdivided with a buffer put in place past the watershed boundary and sold off. A 25-
119
54
30 m buffer is recommended to aid in preventing possible encroachment into the catchment area.
Additionally, city owned land should be looked at from a conservation perspective and conservation
easements and/or designations should be investigated with proper organizations such as the Nature
Conservancy of Canada or the New Brunswick Nature Trust. Currently Saint John Water is exploring
designating city-owned lands within the Loch Lomond Watershed as conservation land through the Other
Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECM) program with the support of NCC.
9. Outreach & Communications
Outreach and communication is vital to watershed management at this scale, especially considering that not
all lands within the watershed are owned by the city or are designated conservation lands. Working with
the landowners, stakeholders, and public will be important to build awareness and educate others on ways
to help protect this watershed.
9.1 Education
Public education about the importance of protecting the source water and its watershed is an important
aspect to ensuring that the public, both landowners within the watershed and the greater Saint John
community, understands why this work is being done and how everyday actions can help. A multi-format
approach to raise awareness of the watershed and educate about important topics is encouraged to broaden
the reach of any educational campaign that is not targeted at a specific group. These initiatives should
include website development, social media content, videos, direct targeted print media, signage, and school
programming. Along with different educational outputs, there are a multitude of topics that could be
covered to help improve citizen’s understanding of watershed management including general watershed
information, aspects of water quality, nutrient management, best practices for land management - buffers,
forestry, trails, etc., reducing wildfire risks, cyanobacteria, invasive species, and climate risks. Tailoring
messages across these topics to different audiences will both promote the ongoing work the City of Saint
John is undertaking but will also provide landowners, citizens, and engaged community members to
broaden their understanding and encourage behaviour changes were needed.
9.2 Advisory Committee
An advisory committee for the watershed is recommended to help better understand the uses and activities
within the watershed, communicate among stakeholders, address community concerns and ultimately
protect the watershed. The committee should be overseen by Saint John Water or the City of Saint John and
have representatives from stakeholder groups active within the watershed as well as seats for community
members. By meeting a few times a year, Saint John Water can inform the committee of their work and
concerns while also giving members the opportunity to share what they are doing within the watershed and
together the committee can work on addressing watershed issues that fall beyond solely under the control
of the City. Stakeholder groups could include rural municipalities within the watershed, Fundy Regional
Service Commission, Department of Transportation and Infrastructure, Department of Natural Resources
and Energy Development, Saint John Airport Authority, Department of Environment, ATV associations,
First Nations, and community members.
120
55
9.3 Community Engagement
Engaging the community in the work that is being done in the watershed is a great way to build awareness
and education about watershed management, the watershed, and water quality. This engagement can be
simple events such as cleanups, tree plantings, or larger more formal education-based events such as open
houses and community meetings. Together, these engagement opportunities can help citizens and
community members to feel more connected to the watershed and understand the importance of protecting
it.
10. Recommendations
Table 4 below summarizes all actions recommended through this updated management plan. A status has
been given for actions that the project team has implemented already or that are ongoing throughout the
management process.
121
56
Table 4. List of recommendations proposed. A status has been given for recommendations that have been implemented recently or actions that are currently
ongoing. Timeline indicates the time commitment of actions through the span of this management plan; Shortterm 0-5 years; Midterm 0-15 years; and longterm
0-25 years.
Recommendations Actions Timeline Priority to begin
implementation
Notes
Water
Maintain vegetated riparian areas
to reduce erosion, sediment inflow,
and runoff of nutrients and
organics.
Replant degraded riparian areas
on CoSJ land (e.g., Third Lake
plantation, Second Lake lookout)
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain 30 m watercourse and
wetland buffer on CoSJ lands
Longterm 1 – 2 years
Encourage private landowners to
maintain 30 m buffer
Longterm 3 – 5 years
Initiate program to help private
landowners restore degraded
riparian areas
Longterm 5 - 10 years ACAP could
lead program
Update lake water quality
monitoring program
Add phosphorus and DOC to
lake monitoring program
Longterm Implemented in 2022
Increase SJW the frequency of
lake monitoring in Latimer,
Roberston, and First Lakes to
every two months during ice-free
months for nutrients and bacteria
Longtern
Add temperature data loggers to
monitor temperatures at the
surface, mid, and bottom to track
changes over time and
stratification
Longterm Ongoing begun in 2023
in Latimer,
Robertson,
First, and
Second Lakes
Add algaetracker buoys to
Latimer, Robertson, and First
Lake to collect realtime
Longterm Ongoing Implemented in
Latmier and
Robertson
122
57
cyanobacteria, temperature, and
algae data
Lakes in
2023/2024
Implement tributary water quality
monitoring program
Select sites in larger
subwatersheds to track inputs
and explore hot spots
Midterm to
Longterm
Ongoing Implemented fall
2022
Monitor the condition and
changes in water quality,
especially after heavy rainfall
events
Midterm Ongoing begun spring
2023
Understand and map out
watercourses and wetlands within
the watershed
Use LiDAR modeling to further
assess unmapped watercourses
and wetland cover
Shortterm Ongoing Implemented in
2022
Investigate sources of bacteria,
nutrients, and organics in
subwatersheds with elevated
concentrations
Use tributary monitoring program
to determine subwatersheds with
elevated bacteria, nutrient, or
organic loading
Midterm Ongoing begun 2024
Conduct stream assessments in
priority subwatersheds to
determine potential inputs
Midterm Ongoing begun 2024
Implement restoration actions
where possible to mitigate
bacteria, nutrient, or organic
inputs
Longterm 3 – 10 years
Forestry
Keep water quality preservation
and improvement at the forefront of
all forestry decisions and actions
within the watershed.
Silviculture/harvesting operation
decisions are based on improving
forest structure for water quality
not timber volume
Longterm Ongoing
All regulations found within the
Watershed Protected Area
Designation Order (WPADO) are
followed
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain proper forest cover across
watershed
A maximum of 1% of total city
owned forest area is harvested
annually
Longterm Ongoing
123
58
Forest cover on city land is
maintained at >55% of the total
landbase
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain tree age diversity by
ensureing that no more than 50%
of city owned forests are less
than 50 years old
Longterm Ongoing
Clear cut harvesting used
minimally on city lands in order to
maintain a high percentage of
forest canopy cover
Longterm Ongoing
Protect important habitats, sensitive
areas, and species at risk
City forestry operations within
Zone C (according the WPADO)
are only conducted between
Sept. 1 – April 15 to minimize
impacts to bird migration,
breeding, and nesting times
Longterm Ongoing
Species at risk surveys
completed priort to any city
forestry operations
Longterm Ongoing
To minimize soil disturbance and
sediment runoff, forestry
operations are conducted during
dry or frozen ground conditions
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain proper buffers to protect
water quality and minimize organic
and nutrient inputs
Maintain a 15m (>1km from the
intake) or 30m (<1km from the
intake) no-cut buffer on all
watercourses during forestry
operations on city lands as
required by the WPADO
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain a 30m no-track buffer
on all watercourses according to
New Brunswick regulations
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain a 15m no-track buffer
on all wetlands with reach-in
allowance for selective removal
Longterm Ongoing
124
59
of up to 30% of timber volume
while still maintaining forest
canopy cover during all forestry
operations on city land
Treatment areas should be
monitored before, during, and after
operations - for water quality and
effects of operation such as growth
and regeneration
Monitor water quality in adjacent
watercourses before, during, and
after city forestry operations
Longterm Ongoing Braydon Rd.
water quality
monitoring
began in winter
2024
After a city harvesting operation,
monitor the site for incoming
regeneration over at least the
next 2 years
Longterm Ongoing
Conduct forest surveys in all high
risk stands and those identified in
operation plan every 5 years to
assess if further treatments are
necessary
Longterm Ongoing began summer
2023
Manage high risk stands to
increase diversity of age structure
and species composition
Reduce balsam fir content on city
lands where feasible based on
stand conditions
Longterm Ongoing
Manage in favour of species that
are lower risk to disturbances
such as blowdown, pests,
wildfires, and climate change
(e.g., red maple, red oak, white
pine, etc.)
Longterm Ongoing
Maintain retention islands or
residual trees where desirable
species are found
Longterm Ongoing
Pesticide and herbicide use should
be restricted
Pesticide and herbicide use are
not be permitted on city lands
within the watershed
Longterm Ongoing
Work to restore degraded or
unforested sites
Proiritize restoration on sites that
would have the most impact to
water quality
Longterm Ongoing
125
60
Generate a list/map of potential
restoration sites
Shotterm 1 – 2 years
Engage with private landowners
to encourage restoration on their
lands
Longterm 3 – 5 years
Reduce the risk and severity of
potential forest fires
Prioritize forestry operations in
areas of high wildfire risk such as
known bonfire locations
Midterm
Transition softwood dominated
stands to hardwood or mixed-
wood stands where possible
Longterm
Maintain up to date management
and operation plans
Renew forest management plan
every 20 years with updated
current conditions, risks, best
practices, and recommendations.
Longterm 20 years Current edition
completed in
2025
Review forest management plan
every 10 years to ensure
alignment with operations plan
Longterm 10 years
Reassess stands with no active
management every 20 years to
assess current conditions for a
new management plan
Longterm 15 – 20 years
Develop a 10 year operations
plan with 5 year treatment
schedule. Review every 5 years.
Longterm Ongoing Started 2025,
partnering with
ACFOR
Forest roads, skid trails, and log
landing areas should be carefully
planned and laid out to minimize
their potential impact to water
quality
New road construction should be
limited on city land, and in
instances where a road is
required to conduct forestry
operations it should be
decommissioned/removed when
the operation is complete
Longterm Ongoing
No new road construction should
be permitted on city lands for the
Longterm Ongoing
126
61
purpose of forestry operations in
Management Unit 2
Log landing areas should be
located at least 60 m from any
water bodies or water courses
Longterm Ongoing
Watershed
Identify and prioritize areas of high
conservation value or habitat for
species at risk
Determine areas of high
conservation value for species at
risk
Midterm 1 - 2 years; ongoing
through Nature
Conservancy of
Canada (NCC)
Partner with
(NCC)
Conduct surveys for species at
risk in areas deemed high
conservation value
Midterm 3 – 5 years; ongoing by
Nature Conservancy of
Canada (NCC)
Partner with
(NCC)
Approach owners of high
conservation priority properities
to introduce the idea of land
purchases
Longterm 3 – 5 years; ongoing by
Nature Conservancy of
Canada (NCC)
Partner with
(NCC)
Block access to senstive areas Longterm 1 – 2 years
Work with ATV groups and
community members to build
awareness of the impacts of
sprawling trails, construct proper
stream crossings, and develop and
enforce trail use on city property
Build relationship with local ATV
groups
Longterm 1 – 2 years
Work with local ATV groups to
explore options to fundraise and
install proper stream crossings
Midterm 1 – 2 years
Stop trail sprawling by engaging
with ATV groups and users to
determine necessary and
unnecessary trails
Midterm 1 – 2 years
Explore blocking unnecessary
trails
Midterm 3 – 5 years
Monitor for unauthorized uses of city
land and enforce management
actions
Identify encampments and
remove any on city land
Longterm Ongoing Already
identified
encampments
have been
removed
127
62
Cleanup illegal dumpsites and
block access where possible to
reduce dumping in the future
Longterm Ongoing
Monitor for encroachment on city
land through aerial photos and
ground surveys
Longterm 1 – 2 years
Recitify encroachment issues
through legal as necessary or
directly with adjacent landowners
Longterm Ongoing
Update the entire watershed
management plan every 20 years.
Revist specific sections as
necessary
Explore alternate management
strategies as they become
available as a result of
developing technologies and
scientific research
Longterm 0 – 25 years
Deal with immerging issues as
needed
Longterm 0 – 25 years
Update entire management plan
including areas of focus/priorities
Longterm 20 years
Aquire land to protect water quality
and deal with high risk areas and
explore subdividing parcels that fall
beyond watershed boundary
Land in proximity to the intake,
lake or watercourse are highest
priority for aquisions
Longterm 0 – 25 years
Seek land next to already owned
parcels to have greater overall
impact to the ecosystem function
Longterm 0 – 25 years
Aquire high risk forest stands to
be able to implement forest
management actions
Longterm 0 – 25 years
Engagement
Build relationships with community
members and the public through
Host educational and hands-on
events in the watershed to build
awareness and understanding of
Longterm Ongoing ACAPSJ priority
to host more
128
63
direct engagement and education
initiatives
threats and actions they can take
to protect water quality (e.g.,
hikes, field tours, volunteer
opportunties, workshops,
community meetings, etc.)
events in
watershed
Implement school program to
build awareness of the watershed
and issues with youth
Longterm 1 – 2 years Program being
developed
Build awareness of invasive
species and how they are moved to
the public to reduce spread
Build invasive species social
media campagn. Promote clean
drain dry
Longterm 1 – 2 years
Share invasive species
information at events
Longterm 1 – 2 years
Install clean drain dry signage
throughout watershed
Shortterm Ongoing
Implement education and
awareness initiatives on high risk
topics such as ATV use, preventing
wildfires, fording, and watershed
issues.
Build social media campagns to
share information broadly
Longterm Ongoing
Create infographs and brochures
to share information at events
Longterm Ongoing
Create watershed website to
share specific information about
the watershed and actions
people can take to protect this
resource. Update frequently with
new information and what’s
happening in the watershed
Longterm Ongoing Content being
drafted
Promote best management
practices on private and public
land in the watershed (on
website, through handouts, social
media)
Longterm Ongoing
Design and install educational
signage in the watershed to
educate about threats and BMPs
Longterm 3-5 years
129
64
Engage with stakeholders that play
important role in planning, resource
use, and enforcement in the
watershed
Establish a watershed advisory
working group
Longterm 3 – 5 years
Publicize the work the City of Saint
John is doing in the watershed and
why watershed management is
important
Highlight work done and
underway on watershed website
Longterm Ongoing Drafting content
Host community meetings to
update community members on
work
Longterm Ongoing
130
65
11. References
British Columbia Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. (2020). B.C. Source Drinking
Water Quality Guidelines: Guideline Summary. Water Quality Guideline Series, WQG-01. Prov. B.C.,
Victoria B.C.
Environment Canada. (1994). Migratory Birds Convention Act. Government of Canada.
Fundy Biosphere Reserve. 2015. Forests of the Future in the Fundy Biosphere Reserve: Climate Change
Resiliency of Tree Species in the Fundy Biosphere Reserve Region.
Health Canada. (2021). Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: Guideline Technical Document
– Aluminum. Government of Canada.
Health Canada. (2019). Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: Guideline Technical Document
– Manganese. Government of Canada.
Health Canada. (2013). Guidance on the Use of Heterotrophic Plate Counts in Canadian Drinking Water
Supplies. Government of Canada.
Health Canada (1978). Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: Guideline Technical Document
– Iron. Government of Canada.
Johnson. W (1986). Manager’s Handbook for Balsam Fir in the Northern Central States. United States
Department of Agriculture.
NBDELG. (2012). Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Technical Guidelines. Province of New
Brunswick. Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
NBDELG. (2018). Climate Change Indicators. New Brunswick Department of the Environment and
Local Government.
NBDELG. (n.d.). Understanding the Law: A Guide to New Brunswick’s Watershed Protection
Designation Order. Province of New Brunswick.
NBDELG. (n.d.b). Summary of Predicted Impacts of Climate Change in New Brunswick. New
Brunswick Department of the Environment and Local Government.
Roy, P. and Huard, D. (2016). Future Climate Scenarios - Province of New Brunswick. Montreal:
Ouranos.
Saint John Water. (2020). Annual Report. City of Saint John.
131
66
University of New Brunswick (UNB). (2015). Loch Lomond Watershed: Dynamics of pH and TOC with
Management Recommendations. Environment and Natural Resources 4020 Senior Management
Practicum. University of New Brunswick.
UNB. (2014). Loch Lomond Watershed: Latimer Lake Management Plan. Faculty of Forestry and
Environmental Management. University of New Brunswick.
UNB. (2013a). Forest Management Plan: Loch Lomond Watershed. Forestry 4020 Senior Management
Practicum. University of New Brunswick
UNB. (2013b). Loch Lomond: Water Quality Analysis and Recommendations for the City of Saint John
Loch Lomond Watershed. HydroLogic. Environment and Natural Resources 4020 Senior Management
Practicum. University of New Brunswick.
UNB. (2013c). Wildlife and Conservation Management Plan for the Loch Lomond Watershed. 8 Point
Wildlife Consultants. Environment and Natural Resources 4020 Senior Management Practicum.
University of New Brunswick.
UNB. (2013d). Forest Operations Plan for the Loch Lomond Watershed. Forest Engineering 4995 Senior
Management Practicum. University of New Brunswick.
132
PID Area of PID Inside DWW (ha)% of PID Inside DWW Area of PID Outside DWW (ha)% of PID Outside DWW Total Area of PID (ha)
00274522 0.98 2.30 41.59 97.70 42.57
00286559 423.83 91.49 39.41 8.51 463.24
55230569 0.55 1.22 44.66 98.78 45.21
55230577 18.85 73.81 6.69 26.19 25.54
55230593 9.10 100.00 0.00 0.00 9.10
55230643 102.51 75.34 33.55 24.66 136.06
55230650 8.46 21.03 31.78 78.97 40.24
55230692 120.67 66.84 59.88 33.16 180.54
55231187 12.32 26.45 34.26 73.55 46.58
55231195 27.39 70.64 11.39 29.36 38.78
55231203 2.80 6.67 39.17 93.33 41.97
55231211 17.03 41.49 24.02 58.51 41.05
55231245 11.69 95.70 0.53 4.30 12.21
55231328 66.22 97.91 1.41 2.09 67.64
55231336 30.13 65.08 16.17 34.92 46.29
55231344 0.94 88.05 0.13 11.95 1.07
55231427 0.02 20.11 0.10 79.89 0.12
55231435 20.87 77.09 6.20 22.91 27.07
55231492 6.69 19.76 27.15 80.24 33.84
55231500 20.05 83.88 3.85 16.12 23.91
55109805 9.14 100.00 0.00 0.00 9.14
55230585 26.58 100.00 0.00 0.00 26.58
55230668 44.89 100.00 0.00 0.00 44.89
55230676 42.42 100.00 0.00 0.00 42.42
55230684 1.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.07
55230700 82.60 100.00 0.00 0.00 82.60
55231229 146.89 100.00 0.00 0.00 146.89
55231237 69.58 100.00 0.00 0.00 69.58
55231252 35.51 100.00 0.00 0.00 35.51
55231260 91.96 100.00 0.00 0.00 91.96
55231351 1.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.09
55231385 0.38 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.38
55231443 6.79 100.00 0.00 0.00 6.79
55231450 19.62 100.00 0.00 0.00 19.62
55231468 41.97 100.00 0.00 0.00 41.97
Total Area of OECMs Inside DWW (ha)% of total PID area that falls inside DWW Total Area of PIDs Outside DWW (ha)
% of Total PID Area that fall
outside DWW Total Area of all PIDs (ha)
SUM 1521.60 78.29 421.93 21.71 1943.53
133
PID Area Within DWW (ha) % of PID Within DWW Area Outside DWW (ha)% of PID Outside of DWW Total PID Area003359197.56 55.69 6.01 44.31 13.57
00353557 29.83 99.00 0.30 1.00 30.13
00353946 34.08 60.18 22.55 39.82 56.6300354696139.19 28.63 346.89 71.37 486.08
00354720 175.91 90.11 19.31 9.89 195.2200354829138.47 89.08 16.98 10.92 155.45
00354837 121.66 96.73 4.12 3.27 125.78
00359075 32.21 68.48 14.82 31.52 47.03003902371.17 28.95 2.87 71.05 4.04
30139067 54.46 96.71 1.85 3.29 56.315500017846.73 97.35 1.27 2.65 48.00
55000566 0.19 42.42 0.25 57.58 0.44
55018261 0.80 4.37 17.54 95.63 18.34550234519.69 38.43 15.52 61.57 25.20
55029441 16.54 81.24 3.82 18.76 20.365506268116.13 47.47 17.85 52.53 33.98
55144620 3.49 11.62 26.56 88.38 30.06
55155022 0.08 1.67 4.89 98.33 4.975518897334.21 48.63 36.14 51.37 70.35
55189781 63.94 93.00 4.81 7.00 68.75000526620.33 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.33
00348920 0.44 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.44
00349100 0.26 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.26003492095.67 100.00 0.00 0.00 5.67
00349423 0.28 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.28003494980.13 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.13
00349613 0.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
00349704 0.15 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.15003499360.65 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.65
00349993 0.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09003500580.27 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.27
00350090 0.41 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.41
00350256 0.23 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.23003503890.20 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.20
00350462 0.06 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.06003506940.39 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.39
00350785 12.36 100.00 0.00 0.00 12.36
00351049 0.93 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.93003510980.01 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
00351130 16.78 100.00 0.00 0.00 16.780035115524.33 100.00 0.00 0.00 24.33
00351171 7.98 100.00 0.00 0.00 7.98
00351189 8.23 100.00 0.00 0.00 8.23003511979.58 100.00 0.00 0.00 9.58
00351387 0.31 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.31003514290.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09
00351494 0.43 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.43
00351783 0.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.07003518090.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09
00351916 319.38 100.00 0.00 0.00 319.380035198125.41 100.00 0.00 0.00 25.41
00351999 14.08 100.00 0.00 0.00 14.08
00352013 19.91 100.00 0.00 0.00 19.91003522860.11 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.11
00352294 0.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09003523020.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
00352344 0.05 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.05
00352351 0.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18003524680.14 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.14
00352492 8.23 100.00 0.00 0.00 8.23003527161.12 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.12
00352724 0.91 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.91
00353086 0.27 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.27003530940.12 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.12
00353128 0.32 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.32003531360.34 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.34
00353177 0.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09
00353441 0.74 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.740035353241.85 100.00 0.00 0.00 41.85
00353698 0.47 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.47003538210.36 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.36
00354043 0.24 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.24
00354092 14.63 100.00 0.00 0.00 14.63003541670.12 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.12
00354332 7.75 100.00 0.00 0.00 7.75003545140.12 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.12
00354704 5.32 100.00 0.00 0.00 5.32
00354712 274.10 100.00 0.00 0.00 274.1000354738128.76 100.00 0.00 0.00 128.76
00354746 13.26 100.00 0.00 0.00 13.260035475320.45 100.00 0.00 0.00 20.45
00354779 475.37 100.00 0.00 0.00 475.37
00354787 23.36 100.00 0.00 0.00 23.36003548520.12 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.12
00354860 0.20 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.20003549100.29 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.29
00355115 2.69 100.00 0.00 0.00 2.69
00355370 9.77 100.00 0.00 0.00 9.770036023093.58 100.00 0.00 0.00 93.58
00360248 37.75 100.00 0.00 0.00 37.75004276660.43 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.43
00427682 0.63 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.63
00427690 0.75 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.75004277240.60 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.60
00427732 0.13 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.13004277400.40 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
00427757 0.17 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.17
00427765 2.27 100.00 0.00 0.00 2.27004278723.51 100.00 0.00 0.00 3.51
00427880 0.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09004278983.03 100.00 0.00 0.00 3.03
00427963 0.09 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.09
134
00427971 0.06 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.06004283910.06 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.06
00437582 6.51 100.00 0.00 0.00 6.51
00445791 2.91 100.00 0.00 0.00 2.910044713622.35 100.00 0.00 0.00 22.35
00447144 21.80 100.00 0.00 0.00 21.80004478620.05 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.05
30211734 8.89 100.00 0.00 0.00 8.89
55008619 0.90 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.90550091381.05 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.05
55014625 0.02 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.02550146330.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
55021844 17.65 100.00 0.00 0.00 17.65
55031090 0.03 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.03550311080.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
55031124 0.06 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.06550311320.06 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.06
55031140 0.06 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.06
55034466 33.16 100.00 0.00 0.00 33.165503447484.24 100.00 0.00 0.00 84.24
55034482 83.29 100.00 0.00 0.00 83.295503810316.63 100.00 0.00 0.00 16.63
55041636 0.02 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.02
55042980 0.74 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.74550429980.01 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
55055578 0.46 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.46550555860.43 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.43
55055602 0.48 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.48
55055610 0.49 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.49550556280.47 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.47
55055644 0.38 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.38550556510.47 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.47
55087217 0.24 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.24
55087233 22.21 100.00 0.00 0.00 22.21550907400.46 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.46
55101349 32.41 100.00 0.00 0.00 32.415511376517.23 100.00 0.00 0.00 17.23
55118491 0.84 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.84
55118509 0.68 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.68551185250.45 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.45
55118533 0.27 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.27551414770.01 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
55144364 2.87 100.00 0.00 0.00 2.87
55144380 0.12 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.12551444220.23 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.23
55150163 0.29 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.29551501710.03 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.03
55153837 101.39 100.00 0.00 0.00 101.39
55188619 0.29 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.29552030874.24 14.05 25.96 85.95 30.20
55228258 1.36 31.29 2.99 68.71 4.365522858913.09 73.63 4.69 26.37 17.77
55228753 0.82 2.82 28.22 97.18 29.04
55228761 31.11 97.69 0.74 2.31 31.855522877934.19 95.68 1.54 4.32 35.73
55228787 1.93 45.61 2.30 54.39 4.23552287958.03 90.98 0.80 9.02 8.83
55228811 1.77 90.70 0.18 9.30 1.95
55228829 1.00 69.99 0.43 30.01 1.43552288451.32 9.30 12.84 90.70 14.15
55228860 14.28 76.74 4.33 23.26 18.615522887811.42 96.90 0.37 3.10 11.79
55228886 0.35 75.47 0.12 24.53 0.47
55228894 2.67 85.11 0.47 14.89 3.14552286050.35 72.44 0.13 27.56 0.49
55204044 0.31 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.315521364918.41 100.00 0.00 0.00 18.41
55213722 102.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 102.18
55223648 7.78 100.00 0.00 0.00 7.78552285970.37 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.37
55228613 0.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18552286210.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18
55228639 0.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18
55228647 0.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18552286540.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18
55228662 0.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18552286700.18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.18
55228803 5.35 100.00 0.00 0.00 5.35
55228837 0.10 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.10552288521.32 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.32
55233357 0.19 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.19003504470.16 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.16
00349647 0.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
Total Area of PIDS Inside of DWW (ha)Total % of Lands Inside DWW Total Area of PIDS Outside of DWW (ha)Total % of Lands Outside of DWW Total Area (ha)
SUM 3320.64 83.62 650.46 16.38 3971.10
135
From: City of Saint John, New Brunswick <webform-noreply@saintjohn.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2025 11:23 AM
To: Common Clerk <commonclerk@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Webform submission from: Request to Present to Council Form
[ 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 the IT
Service Desk.**
Submitted on Wed, 11/19/2025 - 11:16
Submitted by: Anonymous
Submitted values are:
About Person/Group Presenting
First Name:
Andres
Last Name:
Andrade
Address:
Saint John, New Brunswick. E2M 4B3
Canada
Day Time Phone Number:
Email
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:
Protect heritage infrastructure
Purpose for Presentation (what is the ask of Council):
136
Approve measures to protect Uptown Saint John’s heritage infrastructure by reducing
heavy truck traffic in the core.
Background Information:
Uptown Saint John is home to historic buildings that define the city’s identity and attract
visitors year-round. However, current logistics practices allow heavy trucks to travel
through the Uptown core, creating risks for underground utilities and heritage building
foundations.
* Construction Trucks: Their impact is sporadic, linked to specific projects, and can be
managed through temporary permits and routing.
* Food and Retail Deliveries: These occur daily and consistently, making them the
primary source of heavy traffic stress on heritage infrastructure. Addressing this
category should be a priority for long-term preservation.
Proposed Solution:
Establish a centralized logistics hub outside the Uptown core where large trucks unload.
Smaller, low-impact vehicles would handle final deliveries into Uptown. This approach
would:
* Reduce heavy traffic in heritage areas
* Lower operational costs for businesses
* Improve delivery efficiency
* Reinforce Saint John’s image as a city that values both economic growth and heritage
preservation
Are you making a request for funding?
No
File Upload
Protect heritage infrastructure.pdf (58.83 KB)
137
Dear Members of the Common Council,
Following my previous concern regarding heavy truck traffic in Uptown Saint John, I would
like to propose a strategic solution that addresses both heritage preservation and
operational efficiency for local businesses.
Uptown is home to invaluable historic buildings that define our city’s identity and attract
visitors. However, the frequent presence of large trucks—such as those observed on
Princess Street last week—poses risks to underground infrastructure and the structural
integrity of these buildings.
A potential solution is the development of a centralized food logistics hub located
outside the Uptown core. Large trucks could unload at this hub, and final deliveries to
restaurants and businesses could be made using smaller vehicles (vans or light trucks).
This approach would:
• Reduce heavy traffic in heritage areas.
• Lower operational costs for businesses (fuel, maintenance, staffing).
• Improve delivery efficiency and sustainability.
• Strengthen Saint John’s image as a city that values both economic growth and
heritage conservation.
I encourage the Council to consider initiating a feasibility study and engaging with logistics
operators and local businesses to explore this model.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I would be happy to provide further input or
participate in discussions to help advance this initiative.
Best regards,
Andres Andrade
138
From: City of Saint John, New Brunswick <webform-noreply@saintjohn.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 4:11 PM
To: Common Clerk <commonclerk@saintjohn.ca>
Subject: Webform submission from: Request to Present to Council Form
[ 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 the IT
Service Desk.**
Submitted on Tue, 11/18/2025 - 16:11
Submitted by: Anonymous
Submitted values are:
About Person/Group Presenting
First Name:
Marie-Paule
Last Name:
Blanchard-LeBlanc
Name of Organization/Group (where applicable):
Alzheimer Society New Brunswick
Address:
320 Maple St #100
Fredericton, New Brunswick. E3A 3R4
Canada
Day Time Phone Number:
5068003149
Email
mpleblanc@alzheimernb.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
139
About your Request
Topic of Presentation:
Dementia Friendly Communities
Purpose for Presentation (what is the ask of Council):
Dementia friendly communities initiative is designed to create a welcoming and
supportive environment for individuals living with dementia and their care partners.
These communities foster inclusivity through practical changes in public spaces, service
areas, and social settings to promote dignity and engagement for all.
When community members understand dementia and are aware of its challenges, it can
reduce anxiety, stigma, and frustration for those affected. With the right support, people
with dementia can continue to live at home, maintain a high quality of life, and stay
connected to their communities.
Background Information:
The Alzheimer Society of New Brunswick is the leading not-for-profit health organization
in the province dedicated to improving the quality of life for people living with dementia.
Since 1987, we've provided help and support to people living with Alzheimer's disease
and other dementias, their families and their caregivers.
Are you making a request for funding?
No
140
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS: the United Nations has designated December 3rd as the International
Day of Persons with Disabilities to promote understanding of
disability issues and to mobilize support for the dignity, rights, and
well-being of persons with disabilities around the world; and
WHEREAS: the theme for this year’s observance, “Fostering disability inclusive
societies for advancing social progress,” reminds us of the
importance of inclusion, accessibility, and equality in every aspect
of community life; and
WHEREAS: the City of Saint John values diversity and recognizes that persons
with disabilities are integral members of our community,
contributing their skills, talents, and perspectives to our city’s social,
cultural, and economic vitality; and
WHEREAS: the City of Saint John is committed to building an inclusive
community by supporting accessibility initiatives, removing
barriers, and ensuring that all residents have equal opportunities to
participate fully in civic life; and
WHEREAS: this day serves as an important reminder of the ongoing work
required to create a community where every person is respected,
included, and empowered to reach their full potential;
NOW THEREFORE: I, Mayor Donna Noade Reardon, of Saint John, on behalf
of the members of Common Council, do hereby proclaim December 3, 2025 as
International Day of Persons with Disabilities in the City of Saint John, and
encourage all residents, organizations, and businesses to join in promoting
understanding, acceptance, and inclusion of persons of all abilities.
In witness whereof, I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Mayor of
the City of Saint John.
141
Staff Recommendation for Council Resolution
Annual Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
Public Hearing, 1st and 2nd Reading: December 1, 2025
Item Required:
(Y/N)
Recommendation
Municipal Plan
Amendment
No
Zoning By-Law
Amendment
Yes That Common Council give 1st and 2nd reading to By-Law
Number C.P. 111-211 a Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
the City of Saint John.
Tentative 3rd Reading: December 15, 2025
Item: Required:
(Y/N)
Recommendation
Municipal Plan
Amendment
No
Zoning By-Law
Amendment
Yes That Common Council give 3rd reading to By-Law Number
C.P. 111-211 a Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of the City
of Saint John.
Recission of
Previous s. 39/s.
59 Conditions
Section 59
Conditions
Section 59
Agreement
Section 131
Agreement
Subdivision
Other No
142
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Page 1 of 1
November 20, 2025
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Zoning By-Law Amendments - Annual Housekeeping
Amendments
On November 3, 2025, Common Council referred the above matter to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee
considered the attached report at its November 18, 2025 meeting.
Roseann George, Planner, and Jennifer Kirchner, Manager, with Growth and
Community Services, provided an overview of the application via a PowerPoint
presentation.
No letters were received in favour or opposition regarding the application.
The Committee unanimously adopted the Staff Recommendation to Common
Council presented below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council adopt the attached By-Law amendment entitled, “By-
Law No. C.P. 111-211, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of
Saint John.”
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Mitchell
Chair
Attachments
143
Page 1 of 5
Report Date: November 13, 2025
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting Date: November 18, 2025
SUBJECT
Applicant: The City of Saint John
Application Type: Zoning By-Law Amendment
Jurisdiction: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning
Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law. Common Council will consider the Committee’s
recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, December 1, 2025. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community Planning Staff have initiated the next set of annual housekeeping amendments to
the Zoning By-Law, which seek to clarify existing By-Law standards, address contemporary
planning issues and to support planning best practice. This series of amendments will continue
streamline the approval process, reduce red tape, and to provide better customer service to the
citizens of Saint John through clarification and flexibility associated with different planning and
development topics.
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Common Council adopt the attached by-law amendment entitled “By-law No.
C.P. 111-211, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John.”
ANALYSIS
Background
On December 15, 2014, Common Council adopted the current Zoning By-Law (ZoneSJ). This
Zoning By-Law was the first deliverable of the One-Stop Development Shop, grounded in best
practices in land use planning and entrenching our community standards as promoted by Saint
John’s 2012 Municipal Development Plan (PlanSJ).
144
City of Saint John Zoning By-Law: Administrative Amendments November 13, 2025
Page 2 of 5
Since adoption, there have been amendments to the By-Law focused on three areas:
• Response to development applications,
• Provincial and Federal legislative changes such as cannabis legalization, and
• Staff-initiated amendments.
Staff initiated amendments, often referred to as “Housekeeping Amendments,” focus on issues
such as operationalizing the implementation of the One-Stop Development Shop and as a
means of continuous improvement responding to trends in urban planning and land
development. This included the 2024-2025 Zoning Reform project which was focused on
residential and housing-based amendments. These amendments, which are informed by a
jurisdictional scan of current best practices across different Canadian municipalities, represent
the regular commitment to evolving the Zoning By-Law to meet the needs of the City, residents
and developers.
City Staff have prepared additional amendments for adoption that seek to streamline the review
of development applications and address key areas involving the updating of home occupations,
site design changes in certain zones, garbage collection and the twinning of driveways, among
other amendments that have been laid out elaborately in the attached table. The proposed
series of amendments align with Council’s Strategic priorities of Perform, Grow and Belong.
Staff will continue to assess the City’s Zoning By-Law and will move forward with additional
amendments that address emerging planning issues.
An overview of some of the proposed amendments is provided below: A detailed table of the
proposed amendments are provided as an attachment to this report.
Home Occupations
Over the past couple of years, staff has seen a growing number of planning enquiries
requesting to establish home occupations within accessory buildings as opposed to the dwelling
unit. Currently, home occupations must be developed within a dwelling unit. The proposed
amendment will enable home occupations to be developed within either the dwelling unit or an
associated accessory building, providing new options for residents to operate home occupations
on their properties.
The amendment will include conditions to ensure that the establishment of a home occupation
within an accessory building will not alter the main use of the property or negatively impact the
surrounding neighbourhood. This includes a requirement that the placement of a home
occupation in an accessory building be permitted only if it does not result in the loss of required
onsite parking and that the home occupation can be accessed independently of the dwelling
unit.
The amendments to the Home Occupation use will provide greater flexibility to residents within
the City, providing new opportunities to establish home-based businesses based on their
operational needs and space available on the property. This amendment will balance
145
City of Saint John Zoning By-Law: Administrative Amendments November 13, 2025
Page 3 of 5
development flexibility while also maintaining the overall neighbourhood character of the
surrounding area.
Garbage Enclosures
The existing standards associated with garbage enclosures, only requires multi-unit residential
buildings (5 or more units) to provide enclosures for their outdoor garbage storage. The
standards associated with garbage enclosures ensures that screening is in place to reduce the
visual impact of garbage storage on the neighbouring properties.
This amendment would require that rooming houses (with ten rooms), commercial, institutional
and industrial developments align with these standards for onsite garbage storage. This would
thereby ensure a level of consistency across the City for a variety of uses. In addition,
clarification is also provided to ensure that the garbage enclosure requirements also pertain to
onsite storage of recycling and composting materials.
Access for Residential Purposes
There have been a number of planning applications that request for variances to be granted for
independent accesses to be provided. The proposed amendment will outline specific criteria
such as topographic constraints or on-street parking limitations, where the requirement of
adjoining of accesses or the twinning of driveways for dwelling units be waived.
There will still be requests that will need to be subject to a variance application which will
consider feedback from various Service Areas including Infrastructure and Parking to assess
the impact of the request on infrastructure and street parking.
Local Commercial Zone
The proposed amendment would establish new Conditions of Use that would require
commercial land uses to form a portion of the site development. This includes standards for
minimum ground floor commercial land uses and standards that support multi-building
development on a single property. The standards will ensure that Local Commercial sites are
either developed as a commercial development or a mixed-use commercial and residential
development.
For those interested in developing a purely residential development on a Local Commercial
property, a rezoning to a residential zone would be required. This would ensure that the
proposed development is subject to residential development standards including landscaping,
parking, site design and amenity space, which differs from commercial development
standards.
Billboard
An Electronic Message Board is a form of signage intended to advertise events and information
connected to a specific property, such as a school or arena. A Billboard Sign, however, is third
party signage, advertising information that is not associated with the property it is situated on.
146
City of Saint John Zoning By-Law: Administrative Amendments November 13, 2025
Page 4 of 5
This has traditionally involved static, non-electronic signage types. Recently, the City has been
receiving requests to integrate electronic message board technology into Billboard Signage.
The proposed amendments would address the trend to establish billboard signs that incorporate
full screen electronic messaging for 3rd party advertisement. New conditions of use will establish
criteria that establishes separation distances between billboards and signalized intersections,
crosswalks and rail crossings. Through standard separation distances, it will help eliminate
possible safety risks for road users. In addition, the amendment will formalize the requirement
for a Traffic Impact Study to be submitted as part of the application, which would assess the
signage in relation to pedestrian, vehicular and rail traffic routes, ensure feasibility, and help
alleviate safety concerns. The results of the Study will help determine the suitability of the
proposal and support the Planning Advisory Committee in rendering a decision or establishing
conditions for the approval.
Medium Industrial Use
The current definition of Medium Industrial use in the Zoning By-Law needed to be clarified
further in that it only stated that it included uses that did not fit under the other definitions
including Light or Heavy Industrial uses. The proposed approach would be to enhance the
Medium Industrial Use definition to incorporate some of the light industrial components
regarding manufacturing that would thereby establish the ability to undertake activities outdoors,
wherein nuisance or risk factors do not extend beyond the boundaries of the lot. The definition
would also indicate that the Medium Industrial uses thereof would not be subject to the
restrictions of the light industrial uses.
Service Area Review
The proposed amendments were undertaken with feedback from other Service Areas including
Building, Infrastructure, Traffic, and Parking. Feedback provided was integrated into the
proposed amendments presented in this report.
Conclusion
The proposed amendments conform to the general policy direction in the Municipal Plan,
supporting planning best practice. Through the undertaking of these amendments, the Zoning
By-Law continues to evolve to meet the changing needs of the community and to address
emerging development trends including the development of home occupations and billboard
signage.
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No other alternatives have been considered. It should be noted that any further changes to the
Zoning By-Law would require consideration by both the Planning Advisory Committee and
Common Council as required by the Community Planning Act.
ENGAGEMENT
City
The public hearing notice was posted on the City of Saint John website on November 6, 2025.
The public hearing will be held on Monday, December 1, 2025 at 6:30PM.
147
City of Saint John Zoning By-Law: Administrative Amendments November 13, 2025
Page 5 of 5
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Manager Director Commissioner
Jennifer Kirchner RPP, MCIP Pankaj Nalavde RPP, MCIP Amy Poffenroth P.Eng., MBA
Contact: Roseann George
Telephone: (506) 639-6376
Email: Roseann.George@saintjohn.ca
APPENDIX
Attachment 1: By-law No. C.P. 111-211, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of
Saint John
Attachment 2: Zoning By-Law Housekeeping Amendments
148
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-211
A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
ARRÊTÉ NO C.P. 111-211 ARRÊTÉ
MODIFIANT L’ARRÊTÉ DE ZONAGE
DE 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:
Lors d’une réunion du conseil
communal, The City of Saint John a décrété
ce qui suit :
L’Arrêté de zonage de The City of Saint John, décrété le 15 décembre 2014, est ainsi modifié :
1. Section 2.8 is amended by deleting 2.8(6)
and replacing it with the following:
“Pursuant to paragraph 55(2) of the
Community Planning Act, the Committee
may, subject to any term or condition that
it considers fit, permit a variance from the
requirements of the Zoning By-Law.
Unless otherwise identified with the
Zoning By-Law, variances shall not be
considered for standards or regulations
established within the Sections
establishing the Permitted Uses;
Prohibited Uses; Conditional Uses; and
Conditions of Use.”
2. Section 2.9 is amended by deleting 2.9(3)
and replacing it with the following:
“Pursuant to paragraph 55(2) of the
Community Planning Act, the
Development Officer may, subject to the
terms or conditions that they consider fit,
permit a variance from the requirements
of the Zoning By-Law. Unless otherwise
identified with the Zoning By-Law,
variances shall not be considered for
standards or regulations established
within the Sections establishing the
Permitted Uses; Prohibited Uses;
Conditional Uses; and Conditions of Use.”
149
3. Section 3.1 is amended by deleting “home
occupation” and replacing it with the
following:
““home occupation” means a secondary
use in a portion of a dwelling unit or accessory building where a home business is conducted by the occupant of the dwelling unit.” 4. Section 3.1 is amended by deleting
“medium industrial use” and replacing it
with the following:
““Medium industrial use” means any use of land, building, or structure, involving a manufacturing process whether or not a finished article is produced, and may include the repairing and or servicing of a vehicle, machinery, or building where the manufacturing process occurs or the
material is used or stored, and the transportation of material, goods, or commodities to and from the premises.
The use can involve outdoor storage or activities, but any nuisance or risk factor generally does not extend beyond the
boundaries of the lot.”
5. Section 4.1(1) is amended by 4.1(1)(g)
and replacing it with the following:
“An access for a dwelling unit in a semi-
detached dwelling or townhouse dwelling
shall be developed together with the
access of the adjoining dwelling unit
unless such adjoining access is not
possible due to the odd number of total
dwelling units in the building. The
requirement for the adjoining of accesses
shall be waived if the proposed
development aligns with one of the three
conditions established below:
(i) The lot is located on a street that
does not permit on-street parking;
(ii) The site design incorporates a
garage and/or extended driveway
150
which can provide a minimum of two
parking spaces per dwelling unit; or
(iii) Site conditions including
infrastructure and topography limit
the ability to adjoin the accesses.”
6. Section 5.4 is amended by deleting
Section 5.4 and replacing it with the
following:
“Except as otherwise provided by this By-
law, when outdoor storage of garbage,
recycling and compost is developed on a
lot in any zone involving a building with
five or more dwelling units, a rooming
house with more than ten rooms, or a
building containing a commercial,
community or industrial use, the storage
of garbage, recycling and compost shall
be in accordance with the following:
(a) The enclosure shall be completely
surrounded by a wooden fence or a
chain-link fence entirely covered by
filler strips woven into the mesh or a
walled structure, or any combination
thereof, which may also include a gate;
(b) The enclosure required by paragraph
5.4(a), including any gate, shall have a minimum height of 1.5 metres, but in no case shall garbage, recycling or compost be higher than the enclosure; and (c) The enclosure shall not occupy any
required front or flankage yard or any
area required for amenity or parking.”
7. Section 7.5 is amended by deleting
Section 7.5 and replacing it with the
following:
“A billboard sign, including those that incorporate an electronic message board, may be placed, erected, or displayed subject to the following requirements:
151
(a) A billboard sign shall only be permitted in a CC, CR, IL, IM, IH, PQ, or RU zone; (b) A billboard sign shall not exceed a sign face having a length greater than 10 metres or a height greater than four metres. (i) Notwithstanding 7.5(b), a billboard sign incorporating electronic
message boards shall be subject to the size and operational criteria established in Section 7.10(2).
Variances to these standards will be subject to review by the Planning Advisory Committee.
(c) A billboard sign shall not be located in any required front, flankage, side, or rear yard; (d) A billboard sign shall not be located closer than 300 metres from any other billboard sign, except two billboards may be located together as a unit if the total sign face length does not exceed 15 metres;
(e) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), the sign face of a billboard may be increased to a maximum height of six metres provided the width does not exceed four metres in the case of a single panel or eight metres in the case of two
panels located together as a unit; (f) A billboard sign shall not be placed, erected, or displayed within 100 metres of and oriented towards the Provincial Highway Nos. 1 or 7 but excluding their access ramps; (g) A billboard sign shall not be placed, erected, or displayed within 100 metres of a rail crossing, signalized intersection or pedestrian crossing.
(h) An application for the creation of a
billboard sign that incorporates an
electronic message board sign, shall
submit a Traffic Impact Statement that
assesses the proposed signage in
152
relation to the functionality and safety of
pedestrian, vehicular and rail traffic
routes.”
8. Section 7.7 is amended by renaming
Section 7.7 as “Ground and Roof Signs”
9. Section 7.7(a) is amendment by replacing
the words “ground sign” with the words
“ground and roof signs”
10. Section 9.5 is amended by deleting
subsection 9.5(a) (vi) and replacing it with
the following:
“No bed and breakfast, home occupation, neighbourhood day care, supportive housing or supportive facility is permitted in any building on the lot.”
11. Section 9.5 is amended by deleting
subsection 9.5(b) (viii) and replacing it
with the following:
“No bed and breakfast, home occupation, home day care, supportive housing or supportive facility is permitted
in any building on the lot.”
12. Section 9.9(1) is amended by deleting
subsection 9.9(1)(a) and replacing it with
the following:
(a) Where permitted by this By-law, a one-unit dwelling, two-unit dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, townhouse dwelling, mobile or mini-home, or
associated accessory building, may also contain one of the following home occupations as a secondary
use subject to the requirements of subsection 9.9(2): (i) Artist or Craftsperson Studio; (ii) Business Office; (iii) Catering Business, subject to the additional requirements of subsection 9.9(3); (iv) Clothing Maker; (v) Medical Clinic; (vi) Instructional Service involving a maximum of four students at any one time; or
153
(vii) Personal Service, subject to the
additional requirements of subsection 9.9(4) for pet grooming. 13. Section 9.9(2) is amended by deleting
subsection 9.9(2)(b) and replacing it with
the following:
“The area devoted to the home
occupation shall not exceed:
(i) 30 percent of the total floor area of the
dwelling unit; or
(ii) 70 percent if located in an accessory
building, subject to the home occupation
not restricting the use of the accessory
building for required onsite parking.”
14. Section 9.9(2) is amended by deleting
subsection 9.9(2)(e) and replacing it with
the following:
“All equipment and material associated
with the home occupation shall be kept
exclusively in the dwelling unit or
accessory building as identified in the
development permit;”
15. Section 9.9(2) is amended by deleting
subsection 9.9(2)(i) and replacing it with
the following:
“No bed and breakfast, home day care,
neighbourhood day care, supportive
housing or supportive facility is permitted
in any building on the lot.”
16. Section 9.9(2) is amended by adding
subsection 9.9(2)(j) as follows:
“(j) A Home Occupation shall only be
permitted within an Accessory Building,
subject to the following requirements:
(i) The accessory building is not
located in the required front yard;
(ii) Access to the accessory building is
located from the front of the lot and
154
does not require access through a
dwelling unit.”
17. Section 10.4(2) is amended by deleting
subsection 10.4(2)(a) and replacing it the
with following:
“(a) Minimum Lot Area:
One-Unit Dwelling, Two-Unit Dwelling, or
Semi-Detached Dwelling – 225 square
metres
Dwelling Group/Cluster Townhouse, per
unit – 75 square metres
Multiple Dwelling, per unit - 75 square
metres
Townhouse Dwelling For each Dwelling
unit therein – 140 square metres”
18. Section 11.1(1) is amended by deleting
the words “Private Club”;
19. Section 11.1(2) is amended by adding the
words “Private Club” immediately after the
words “Parking Structure;”
20. Section 11.3(1) is amended by deleting
the words “Private Club”;
21. Section 11.3(2) is amended by adding the
words “Private Club” immediately after the
words “Parking Structure;”
22. Section 11.5(1) is amended by deleting
the words “Private Club”;
23. Section 11.5(2) is amended by adding the
words “Private Club” immediately after the
words “Parking Structure;”
24. Section 11.7(1) is amended by deleting
the words “Private Club”;
25. Section 11.7(2) is amended by adding the
words “Private Club” immediately after the
words “Parking Structure;”
26. Section 11.8(1) is amended by deleting
the words “Private Club”;
155
27. Section 11.8(2) is amended by adding the
words “Private Club” immediately after the
words “Parking Structure;”
28. Renumbering subsection 11.8(2)
Conditions of Use to 11.8(3) Conditions of
Use.
29. Renumbering subsection 11.8(3) Zone
Standards to 11.8(4)
30. Adding subsection 11.8(2) as follows:
11.8(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the following subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Committee:
• Private Club
31. Section 11.11(1) is amended by deleting
the words “Private Club”;
32. Section 11.11(2) is amended by adding
the words “Private Club” immediately after
the words “Parking Lot, Commercial,
subject to paragraph 11.11(3)(e);”
33. Section 11.9(2) is amended by deleting
subsection 11.9(2)(b) and replacing it the
with following:
(b) Site Development involving a single building is subject to the following: (i) The main use of the building shall
be for commercial uses. (ii) The first storey of the building shall be include commercial uses along
all street-facing facades and shall occupy a minimum of 50% of the floor area.
(iii) A Dwelling Unit, as permitted in subsection 11.9 (1), shall not share an internal hallway or entrance with any commercial use in the building.
34. Section 11.9(2) is amended by adding
subsection 11.9(2)(c) as follows:
156
(c) Site Development involving a multiple
building development is subject to the following: (i) The submission of a site concept plan, for review and approval by the Development Officer, that illustrates the internal road network, parking, landscaping, amenity space, building locations and the proposed first floor uses of each building. (ii) The main use of the site shall be for commercial uses.
(iii) All buildings that feature street-facing facades shall be developed with first storey commercial uses
along the street-facing facades, which shall occupy a minimum of 50% of the floor area.
(iv) Buildings that do not have street-facing facades, may be developed with ground floor Dwelling Units. (v) A Dwelling Unit, as permitted in subsection 11.9 (1), shall not share an internal hallway or entrance with any commercial use in the building.
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 XXXXXXX, A.D. 2025 and signed by:
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le présent arrêté le X XXXXXXX 2025, avec les
signatures suivantes :
_______________________________________
Mayor/Mairesse
__________________________________________
City Clerk/ Greffier de la municipalité
First Reading - X
Second Reading - X
Third Reading - X
Première lecture - X
Deuxième lecture - X
Troisième lecture - X
157
Zoning By-Law Housekeeping Amendments
Topic Saint John – Current Saint John – Proposed Rationale
Variances 2.8 Powers of the Committee
2.8(6) VARIANCES
Pursuant to paragraph 55(2)(b) of the Community
Planning Act, the Committee may, subject to any term
or condition that it considers fit, permit such
reasonable variance from the requirements of this By-
law authorized by paragraph 53(2)(a) of the
Community Planning Act as, in its opinion, is desirable
for the development of a parcel of land or a building or
structure and is in accord with the general intent of
this By-law and The City of Saint John Municipal
Development Plan.
2.9 Powers of the Development Officer
2.9(3) VARIANCES
Pursuant to subsection 55(2) of the Community
Planning Act, the Development Officer may, subject to
the terms and conditions that he or she considers fit,
permit a reasonable variance from the requirements of
this By-law authorized by subparagraph 53(2)(a)(i), (iii),
(iv), (v), (vii), (ix), or (xiii) of the Community Planning Act
if the Development Officer is of the opinion that the
variance is desirable for the development of a parcel of
land or a building or structure and accords with the
general intent of this By-law and The City of Saint John
Municipal Development Plan.
3.1 Definitions
“variance” means a variance granted by the
Development Officer or Committee, as the case may
be, as authorized by the Community Planning Act.
2.8 Powers of the Committee
2.8(6) VARIANCES
Pursuant to paragraph 55(2)(b) of the Community
Planning Act, the Committee may, subject to any term
or condition that it considers fit, permit such
reasonable variance from the requirements of this By-
law authorized by paragraph 53(2)(a) of the
Community Planning Act as, in its opinion, is desirable
for the development of a parcel of land or a building or
structure and is in accord with the general intent of
this By-law and The City of Saint John Municipal
Development Plan permit a variance from the
requirements of the Zoning By-Law. Unless otherwise
identified within the Zoning By-Law, variances shall not
be considered for standards or regulations established
within the Sections establishing the Permitted Uses;
Prohibited Uses; Conditional Uses; and Conditions of
Use.
2.9 Powers of the Development Officer
2.9(3) VARIANCES
Pursuant to subsection paragraph 55(2) of the
Community Planning Act, the Development Officer
may, subject to the terms and conditions that he or
she they considers fit, permit a reasonable variance
from the requirements of this By-law authorized by
subparagraph 53(2)(a)(i), (iii), (iv), (v), (vii), (ix), or (xiii) of
the Community Planning Act if the Development
Officer is of the opinion that the variance is desirable
for the development of a parcel of land or a building or
structure and accords with the general intent of this
By-law and The City of Saint John Municipal
Development Plan permit a variance from the
requirements of the Zoning By-Law. Unless otherwise
identified within the Zoning By-Law, variances shall not
be considered for standards or regulations established
within the Sections establishing the Permitted Uses;
The proposed amendment would
provide clarification regarding the
consideration of variances and would
eliminate the ability for applicants to
request variances to all elements of
the Zoning By-Law.
The additional language would
prevent variances to the established
uses and conditions of use. For
example, an applicant would not be
able to apply to vary the permitted
uses of a zone to allow something that
is explicitly not permitted (eg. Car
Wash in a Park zone).
Variances will be able to be sought for
other elements of the Zoning By-Law
including variances to required
setbacks, lot coverage, and other site
design criteria.
158
Prohibited Uses; Conditional Uses; and Conditions of
Use.
3.1
Definitions
“home occupation” means a secondary use in a
portion of a dwelling unit where a home business is
conducted by the occupant of the dwelling unit.
“home occupation” means a secondary use in a
portion of a dwelling unit or accessory building where a
home business is conducted by the occupant of the
dwelling unit.
The updated definition will enable
home occupations to be developed
within the dwelling unit or an
accessory building. This will provide
flexibility in the establishment of
home occupations and enable the
use of an accessory building as an
alternative.
4.1 (1)
Access for
Residential
Purposes
4.1 (1) (g)
An access for a dwelling unit in a semi-detached
dwelling or townhouse dwelling shall be developed
together with the access of the adjoining dwelling unit
unless such adjoining access is not possible due to
the odd number of total dwelling units in the building.
4.1 (1) (g)
An access for a dwelling unit in a semi-detached
dwelling or townhouse dwelling shall be developed
together with the access of the adjoining dwelling unit
unless such adjoining access is not possible due to
the odd number of total dwelling units in the building.
The requirement for the adjoining of accesses shall be
waived if the proposed development aligns with one of
the three conditions established below:
(i) The lot is located on a street that does not
permit on-street parking;
(ii) The site design incorporates a garage and/or
extended driveway which can provide a
minimum of two parking spaces per dwelling
unit; or
(iii) Site conditions including infrastructure and
topography limit the ability to adjoin the
accesses.
The proposed amendment will
outline specific criteria where the
adjoining of accesses for dwelling
units will not be required. This will
enable applications aligning with
specific criteria to move forward with
independent accesses without the
consideration of a variance.
Other requests will be subject to a
variance application which will
consider feedback from various
Service Areas, including
Infrastructure and Parking, to assess
the impact of the request on
infrastructure and on-street parking.
5.4 Garbage
Enclosures
5.4 Garbage Enclosures
Except as otherwise provided by this By-law, when
outdoor storage of garbage is developed on a lot in any
zone involving a building with five or more dwelling
units, the storage of garbage shall be in accordance
with the following:
(a) The enclosure shall be completely surrounded by a
wooden fence or a chain-link fence entirely covered by
filler strips woven into the mesh or a walled structure,
or any combination thereof, which may also include a
gate;
5.4 Garbage Enclosures
Except as otherwise provided by this By-law, when
outdoor storage of garbage, recycling and compost is
developed on a lot in any zone involving a building with
five or more dwelling units, a rooming house with more
than ten rooms, or a building containing a commercial,
community or industrial use, the storage of garbage,
recycling and compost shall be in accordance with the
following:
(a) The enclosure shall be completely surrounded by a
wooden fence or a chain-link fence entirely covered by
filler strips woven into the mesh or a walled structure,
The Zoning By-Law currently only
establishes standards for garbage
enclosures for multi-unit residential
buildings with 5 or more dwelling
units.
The update would prescribe the same
standards for rooming houses (with
more than ten rooms), commercial,
community and industrial uses which
would be required to provide onsite
garbage and recycling collection. This
will ensure a consistent standard
across the City for a variety of uses.
159
(b) The enclosure required by paragraph (a), including
any gate, shall have a minimum height of 1.5 metres,
but in no case shall garbage be higher than the
enclosure; and
(c) The enclosure shall not occupy any required front
or flankage yard or any area required for amenity or
parking.
or any combination thereof, which may also include a
gate;
(b) The enclosure required by paragraph (a), including
any gate, shall have a minimum height of 1.5 metres,
but in no case shall garbage, recycling or compost be
higher than the enclosure; and
(c) The enclosure shall not occupy any required front
or flankage yard or any area required for amenity or
parking.
7.7 Ground
Signs
7.7 Ground Signs
A ground sign may be placed, erected, or displayed
subject to the following requirements:
(a) A ground sign shall only be permitted in the
following zones with the following maximum sign
face areas:
7.7 Ground and Roof Signs
A ground or roof sign may be placed, erected, or
displayed subject to the following requirements:
(a) A ground or roof sign shall only be permitted in the
following zones with the following maximum sign
face areas:
Roof Signs are currently established
as a permitted sign typology within
the City’s Zoning By-Law and are
subject to the maximum sign face
sizes that are established for Ground
Signs. The proposed amendment to
7.7 Ground Signs would clarify the
development standards and embed
the standards into a specific section
within the By-Law.
9.5 Day Care 9.5 (a) (vi)
No bed and breakfast, home occupation, garden suite,
neighbourhood day care, secondary suite, supportive
housing or supportive facility is permitted in any
building on the lot.
9.5 (a) (vi)
No bed and breakfast, home occupation, garden suite,
neighbourhood day care, secondary suite, supportive
housing or supportive facility is permitted in any
building on the lot.
Follow up to the Zoning Reform
project. This will permit a site to
contain both a home day care and
either a secondary or garden suite.
9.5 (b) (viii)
No bed and breakfast, home occupation, garden suite,
neighbourhood day care, secondary suite, supportive
housing or supportive facility is permitted in any
building on the lot.
9.5 (b) (viii)
No bed and breakfast, home occupation, garden suite,
neighbourhood home day care, secondary suite,
supportive housing or supportive facility is permitted in
any building on the lot.
Follow up to the Zoning Reform
project. This will permit a site to
contain both a neighbourhood day
care and either a secondary or
garden suite. It also fixes a typo that
was intended to prevent both a home
day care and a neighbourhood day
care from operating in the same
building.
9.9 Home
Occupations
9.9 Home Occupations
9.9(1) PERMITTED USES
(a) Where permitted by this By-law, a one-unit
dwelling, two-unit dwelling, semi-detached
dwelling, townhouse dwelling, or mobile or mini-
home may also contain one of the following home
9.9 Home Occupations
9.9(1) PERMITTED USES
(a) Where permitted by this By-law, a one-unit
dwelling, two-unit dwelling, semi-detached
dwelling, townhouse dwelling, mobile or mini-
home, or associated accessory building, may
also contain one of the following home
The changes would permit a home
occupation to be developed within an
accessory building for properties
containing a one-unit, two-unit, semi-
detached, townhouse or
mobile/mini-home. These building
types would be most likely to have an
accessory building that is not located
160
occupations as a secondary use subject to the
requirements of subsection 9.9(2):
(i) Artist or Craftsperson Studio;
(ii) Business Office;
(iii) Catering Business, subject to the additional
requirements of subsection 9.9(3);
(iv) Clothing Maker;
(v) Medical Clinic;
(vi) Instructional Service involving a maximum of
four students at any one time; or
(vii) Personal Service, subject to the additional
requirements of subsection 9.9(4) for pet
grooming.
(b) Where permitted by this By-law, a dwelling unit in a
multiple dwelling or a dwelling unit in a commercial
building may also contain one of the following
home occupations as a secondary use subject to
the requirements of subsection 9.9(2):
(i) Artist or Craftsperson Studio not involving a
non-resident employee or customer traffic;
or
(ii) Business Office not involving a non-resident
employee or customer traffic.
9.9(2) GENERAL PROVISIONS
All home occupations shall satisfy the following
requirements:
(a) The dwelling unit shall be the principal residence of
the operator;
(b) The area devoted to the home occupation shall not
exceed the greater of:
(i) 25 percent of the total floor area of the dwelling
unit; or
(ii) 47 square metres;
(c) The home occupation shall not involve more than
two non-resident employees, but as stipulated by
paragraph 9.9(1)(b) a non-resident employee is not
permitted for a home occupation in a multiple
dwelling or a dwelling unit in a commercial building;
occupations as a secondary use subject to the
requirements of subsection 9.9(2):
(viii) Artist or Craftsperson Studio;
(ix) Business Office;
(x) Catering Business, subject to the additional
requirements of subsection 9.9(3);
(xi) Clothing Maker;
(xii) Medical Clinic;
(xiii) Instructional Service involving a maximum of
four students at any one time; or
(xiv) Personal Service, subject to the additional
requirements of subsection 9.9(4) for pet
grooming.
(b) Where permitted by this By-law, a dwelling unit in a
multiple dwelling or a dwelling unit in a commercial
building may also contain one of the following
home occupations as a secondary use subject to
the requirements of subsection 9.9(2):
(iii) Artist or Craftsperson Studio not involving a
non-resident employee or customer traffic;
or
(iv) Business Office not involving a non-resident
employee or customer traffic.
9.9(2) GENERAL PROVISIONS
All home occupations shall satisfy the following
requirements:
(a) The dwelling unit shall be the principal residence of
the operator;
(b) The area devoted to the home occupation shall not
exceed the greater of:
(i) 25% 30 percent of the total floor area of the
dwelling unit; or
(ii) 47 square metres 70 percent if located in an
accessory building, subject to the home
occupation not restricting the use of the
accessory building for required onsite parking.
(c) The home occupation shall not involve more than
two non-resident employees, but as stipulated by
paragraph 9.9(1)(b) a non-resident employee is not
on shared property and is for the sole
use of a specific dwelling unit.
The amendment is a response to a
growing number of inquiries regarding
the use of an accessory building for a
home occupation, rather than the
existing requirement of it being
confined to the dwelling unit.
The amendment will provide flexibility
for home occupations to utilize a
garage or accessory structure to
operate. For some applicants, this
will enable them to operate a home
occupation without the loss of living
space needed for the occupants. For
other applications, such as dog
grooming or artisans, it will enable
them to utilize a space that may be
more suitable to the needs of the
business.
We are also proposing a slight
increase to the maximum size of a
home occupation, allowing up to 30%
of the floor area of the dwelling unit.
In addition, 70% of the accessory
building can be used for a home
occupation, provided that is does not
result in the loss of required onsite
parking.
161
(d) Except as provided by the home occupation, goods
or services shall not be sold from the lot;
(e) All equipment and material associated with the
home occupation shall be kept exclusively in the
dwelling unit;
(f) No more than one commercial vehicle or equipment
or vehicle bearing a sign with respect to the home
occupation can be parked on the lot except in a
wholly enclosed garage;
(g) Except for a sign permitted in Part 7, there shall not
be any change to the exterior appearance of the
building that would indicate a home occupation is
in the building;
(h) In accordance with Part 4, there shall be at least
two on-site parking spaces provided for the home
occupation in addition to those required for any
other uses of the lot, except that no additional
parking is required for a home occupation
permitted in a converted or multiple dwelling;
(i) No bed and breakfast, garden suite, home day care,
neighbourhood day care, secondary suite,
supportive housing or supportive facility is
permitted in any building on the lot.
permitted for a home occupation in a multiple
dwelling or a dwelling unit in a commercial building;
(d) Except as provided by the home occupation, goods
or services shall not be sold from the lot;
(e) All equipment and material associated with the
home occupation shall be kept exclusively in the
dwelling unit or accessory building as identified in
the development permit;
(f) No more than one commercial vehicle or equipment
or vehicle bearing a sign with respect to the home
occupation can be parked on the lot except in a
wholly enclosed garage;
(g) Except for a sign permitted in Part 7, there shall not
be any change to the exterior appearance of the
building that would indicate a home occupation is
in the building;
(h) In accordance with Part 4, there shall be at least
two on-site parking spaces provided for the home
occupation in addition to those required for any
other uses of the lot, except that no additional
parking is required for a home occupation
permitted in a converted or multiple dwelling;
(i) No bed and breakfast, garden suite, home day care,
neighbourhood day care, secondary suite,
supportive housing or supportive facility is
permitted in any building on the lot.
(j) A Home Occupation shall only be permitted within
an Accessory Building, subject to the following
requirements:
(i) The accessory building is not located in the
required front yard;
(ii) Access to the accessory building is located from
the front of the lot and does not require access
through a dwelling unit.
10.4 Low-
Rise
10.4(2) Zone Standards
(a) Minimum Lot Area:
10.4(2) Zone Standards
(a) Minimum Lot Area:
Follow up to the Zoning Reform
project. The update will add a
minimum lot area per unit for
162
Residential
(RL) zone
One-Unit Dwelling, Two-Unit Dwelling, or Semi
Detached Dwelling – 225 square metres
Dwelling Group/Cluster Townhouse, per unit – 75
square metres
Townhouse Dwelling For each Dwelling unit therein –
140 square metres
One-Unit Dwelling, Two-Unit Dwelling, or Semi
Detached Dwelling – 225 square metres
Dwelling Group/Cluster Townhouse, per unit – 75
square metres
Multiple Dwelling, per unit - 75 square metres
Townhouse Dwelling For each Dwelling unit therein –
140 square metres
Multiple Dwellings. Currently this is
missing from the zone standards.
Definitions
of Light,
Medium and
Heavy
Industrial.
“Light industrial use” means any use of land, building,
or structure, involving a manufacturing process
whether or not a finished article is produced, and may
include the repairing and or servicing of a vehicle,
machinery, or building where the manufacturing
process occurs or the material is used or stored, and
the transportation of material, goods, or commodities
to and from the premises that will not cause injury to
or prejudicially affect the amenity of the locality by
reason of the following restrictions:
(a) Water usage being restricted to employee
washrooms, indirect cooling and pressure testing of
equipment, cleaning of vehicles and or equipment,
and similar uses ancillary to the manufacturing
process;
(b) No effluent discharge or contaminant which may
contribute to the biological, chemical, physical, or
aesthetic pollution of land, water, and or air; and
(c) No manufacturing processes or activities, other
than outdoor storage, parking, and loading, shall take
place outside of a building.
A cannabis production facility is not included.
“Medium industrial use” means an industrial use other
than a Light Industrial Use, a Heavy Industrial
Use, or a Special Industrial Use, which may involve
outdoor storage or activities, but where any nuisance
or risk factor generally does not extend beyond the
boundaries of the lot.
“Medium industrial use” means an industrial use other
than a Light Industrial Use, a Heavy Industrial
Use, or a Special Industrial Use, means any use of
land, building, or structure, involving a manufacturing
process whether or not a finished article is produced,
and may include the repairing and or servicing of a
vehicle, machinery, or building where the
The current definition of a Medium
Industrial Use is ambiguous, with the
definitions simply indicating that it is
for uses that do not fit under the
other industrial definitions including
Light or Heavy Industrial uses.
Comparative Analysis between
different municipalities:
• Moncton has nothing concrete
pertaining to Light, Medium and
Heavy Industrial Uses.
• Fredericton combines light and
medium manufacturing within the
Manufacturing – Light definition,
and does not demarcate between
the two per se.
• Edmonton has zones that permit
Major and Minor Industrial uses
within Medium and Heavy
Industrial Use Zones, and the
Business Employment Zone.
Major and Minor Industrial uses
have been defined with activities
that are categorized into either of
An amendment to the Medium
Industrial Use is proposed, which
would provide clarity around the
intended use. The new definition will
incorporate some of the light
industrial language surrounding
manufacturing process, will establish
163
“Heavy industrial use” means any use of land,
building, or structure for any of the following:
(a) A “volatile industrial use” where the type of
material used, produced, or stored and or the
type of manufacturing process involved may be
harmful or detrimental to a person’s health and
or property due to the potential of fire,
explosion, or the accidental release of toxic
gases, fumes, or otherwise, and without limiting
the generality of the foregoing, shall include,
but not be limited to, a chemical plant, crude
import, and or export terminal, fertilizer
manufacture and storage, liquefied natural gas
terminal, petro-chemical plant, or petroleum
refinery, but not a nuclear power plant, nuclear
storage facility, or a nuclear enrichment plant;
and
An “offensive industrial use” where the type of
manufacturing process involved or the type of material
used, produced, or stored may cause a dangerous gas
or fume, dust, objectionable odour, noise or vibration,
or the unsightly storage of goods, wares, merchandise,
salvage, junk, waste, or other material to a condition
that could be hazardous or injurious as regards to a
person’s health or safety, or which prejudices the
character of the surrounding neighbourhood, or could
interfere with the normal enjoyment of any land,
building, or structure, and shall include, but not be
limited to, a brewery, pulp and paper mill, or a scrap or
salvage yard.
manufacturing process occurs or the material is used
or stored, and the transportation of material, goods, or
commodities to and from the premises. The use can
which may involve outdoor storage or activities, but
where any nuisance or risk factor generally does not
extend beyond the boundaries of the lot.
the ability to undertake activities
outdoors and will indicate that is not
subject to the restrictions of the light
industrial related to water usage.
Electronic
Billboards
7.5 Billboard Signs
A billboard sign may be placed, erected, or displayed
subject to the following requirements:
(a) A billboard sign shall only be permitted in a CC, CR,
IL, IM, IH, PQ, or RU zone;
7.5 Billboard Signs
A billboard sign, including those that incorporate an
electronic message board, may be placed, erected, or
displayed subject to the following requirements:
A billboard sign, as per the Zoning By-
Law, is utilized for 3rd Party
advertisement and may not be
associated with the main use of the
site. An Electronic Message Board,
however, is a form of signage that is
used on a property and is directly tied
164
(b) A billboard sign shall not exceed a sign face having
a length greater than 10 metres or a height greater than
four metres;
(c) A billboard sign shall not be located in any required
front, flankage, side, or rear yard;
(d) A billboard sign shall not be located closer than 300
metres from any other billboard sign, except two
billboards may be located together as a unit if the total
sign face length does not exceed 15 metres;
(e) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), the sign face of a
billboard may be increased to a maximum height of six
metres provided the width does not exceed four
metres in the case of a single panel or eight metres in
the case of two panels located together as a unit; and
(f) A billboard sign shall not be placed, erected, or
displayed within 100 metres of and oriented towards
the Provincial Highway Nos. 1 or 7 but excluding their
access ramps.
7.10(2) ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD SIGNS
(a) A billboard sign shall only be permitted in a CC, CR,
IL, IM, IH, PQ, or RU zone;
(b) A billboard sign shall not exceed a sign face having
a length greater than 10 metres or a height greater than
four metres;.
(i) Notwithstanding 7.5(b), a billboard sign
incorporating electronic message boards shall be
subject to the size and operational criteria
established in Section 7.10(2). Variances to these
standards will be subject to review by the
Planning Advisory Committee.
(c) A billboard sign shall not be located in any required
front, flankage, side, or rear yard;
(d) A billboard sign shall not be located closer than 300
metres from any other billboard sign, except two
billboards may be located together as a unit if the total
sign face length does not exceed 15 metres;
(e) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), the sign face of a
billboard may be increased to a maximum height of six
metres provided the width does not exceed four
metres in the case of a single panel or eight metres in
the case of two panels located together as a unit; and
(f) A billboard sign shall not be placed, erected, or
displayed within 100 metres of and oriented towards
the Provincial Highway Nos. 1 or 7 but excluding their
access ramps;
(g) A billboard sign shall not be placed, erected, or
displayed within 100 metres of a rail crossing,
signalized intersection or pedestrian crossing.
(h) An application for the creation of a billboard sign
that incorporates an electronic message board sign,
shall submit a Traffic Impact Statement that assesses
the proposed signage in relation to the functionality
and safety of pedestrian, vehicular and rail traffic
routes.
to the use of the site. Examples
include an electronic message board
at arenas, schools and community
centres, which advertise events being
hosted at the specific facility.
The proposed changes would
address the trend of establishing
billboard signs that incorporate full
screen electronic messaging for 3rd
party advertisement.
Additional language would establish
new criteria that ensures separation
distances between billboards and
signalized intersections, crosswalks
and rail crossings, which will help to
eliminate possible safety risks.
A new condition is the requirement
for a TIS to be prepared for
applications to install a billboard
involving electronic messaging. The
TIS would assess the signage in
relation to pedestrian, vehicular and
rail traffic routes.
Clarification has also been added
that billboards incorporating
electronic messaging will be subject
to the design requirements of the
Electronic Message Board section
and that any variances will be
considered through PAC.
165
Notwithstanding paragraph 7.4(c), an electronic
message board sign with a maximum total sign face
area of 3.5 square metres may be placed, erected, or
displayed in a Community Facility, Industrial, or
Commercial zone other than a CL zone, subject to the
following requirements:
(a) Only one electronic message board sign shall be
permitted for each lot;
(b) Messages shall be limited to static images
displayed for at least ten seconds;
(c) Messages transitions shall not be animated, flash,
or scroll; and
(d) The maximum brightness of the electronic message
board sign shall be 5,000 nits during daytime and 500
nits during nighttime.
Private Club 11.1 Uptown Commercial (CU) Zone
11.1(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.3 Campus Research Commercial (CRC) Zone
11.3(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.1 Uptown Commercial (CU) Zone
11.1(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.1(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the
purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the
following subject to such terms and conditions as may
be imposed by the Committee:
• Parking Lot, Commercial, subject to paragraph
11.1(3)(c);
• Parking Structure.;
• Private Club
11.3 Campus Research Commercial (CRC) Zone
11.3(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.3(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the
purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the
following subject to such terms and conditions as may
be imposed by the Committee:
Staff are proposing to amend all
zones that permit Private Clubs,
establishing them as conditional
uses. This change will shift the
approval to PAC jurisdiction and
require the establishment of new
clubs to be subject to review and
conditions based on the details of the
proposed operation.
166
11.5 Corridor Commercial (CC) Zone
11.5(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.7 General Commercial (CG) Zone
11.7(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.8 Mixed Commercial (CM) Zone
11.8(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
• Parking Lot, Commercial, subject to paragraph
11.3(3)(d);
• Parking Structure.;
• Private Club
11.5 Corridor Commercial (CC) Zone
11.5(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.5(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the
purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the
following subject to such terms and conditions as may
be imposed by the Committee:
• Parking Lot, Commercial, subject to paragraph
11.5(3)(g);
• Parking Structure.;
• Private Club
11.7 General Commercial (CG) Zone
11.7(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.7(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the
purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the
following subject to such terms and conditions as may
be imposed by the Committee:
• Parking Lot, Commercial, subject to paragraph
11.7(3)(f);
• Parking Structure.;
• Private Club
11.8 Mixed Commercial (CM) Zone
11.8(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.8(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the
purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the
following subject to such terms and conditions as may
be imposed by the Committee:
167
11.11 Rural General Commercial (CRG) Zone
11.11(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
• Private Club
Renumber
11.8(2) Conditions of Use to 11.8(3)
11.8(3) Zone Standards to 11.8(4)
11.11 Rural General Commercial (CRG) Zone
11.11(1) Permitted Uses
Private Club
11.11 Rural General Commercial (CRG) Zone
11.11(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be used for the
purposes of, and for no other purpose than, the
following subject to such terms and conditions as may
be imposed by the Committee:
• Parking Lot, Commercial, subject to paragraph
11.11(3)(e).;
• Private Club
Local
Commercial
Zone
11.9(2) Conditions of Use
(b) A Dwelling Unit permitted in subsection 11.9(1)
shall not share an internal hallway or entrance
with any commercial use in the building.
11.9(2) Conditions of Use
(b) A Dwelling Unit permitted in subsection 11.9(1)
shall not share an internal hallway or entrance with
any commercial use in the building.
(b) Site Development involving a single building is
subject to the following:
(i) The main use of the building shall be for
commercial uses.
(ii) The first storey of the building shall be include
commercial uses along all street-facing facades
and shall occupy a minimum of 50% of the floor
area.
(iii) A Dwelling Unit, as permitted in subsection 11.9
(1), shall not share an internal hallway or
entrance with any commercial use in the
building.
(c) Site Development involving a multiple building
development is subject to the following:
(i) The submission of a site concept plan, for review
and approval by the Development Officer, that
illustrates the internal road network, parking,
The existing CL zone is intended for
primarily commercial land uses;
however, the zone lacks conditions
that prevent the construction of
purely residential buildings.
The proposed Conditions of Use
would establish commercial uses as
the main use of the lot, providing
minimum ground floor commercial
requirements. Additional language
would support a multi-building
development, indicating where
ground floor commercial uses may
be flexible.
The proposed amendments will guide
and support mixed use development
within the City. For those interested in
purely residential development, a
rezoning to a residential zone would
be required, which would ensure the
site is designed to meet the
residential requirements of the
168
landscaping, amenity space, building locations
and the proposed first floor uses of each building.
(ii) The main use of the site shall be for commercial
uses.
(iii) All buildings that feature street-facing facades
shall be developed with first storey commercial
uses along the street-facing facades, which shall
occupy a minimum of 50% of the floor area.
(iv) Buildings that do not have street-facing facades,
may be developed with ground floor Dwelling
Units.
(v) A Dwelling Unit, as permitted in subsection 11.9
(1), shall not share an internal hallway or
entrance with any commercial use in the
building.
Zoning By-Law including site design,
landscaping and parking
requirements.
169
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-211
A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW
OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
ARRÊTÉ NO C.P. 111-211 ARRÊTÉ
MODIFIANT L’ARRÊTÉ DE ZONAGE
DE 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:
Lors d’une réunion du conseil
communal, The City of Saint John a décrété
ce qui suit :
L’Arrêté de zonage de The City of Saint John,
décrété le 15 décembre 2014, est ainsi
modifié :
1. Deleting subsection 2.8(6) and replacing
it with the following:
(6) Pursuant to subsection 55(2) of the
Community Planning Act, the Committee
may, subject to any term or condition that
it considers fit, permit a variance from the
requirements of the Zoning By-Law.
Unless otherwise identified in the Zoning
By-Law, variances shall not be
considered for standards or regulations
established within the sections
establishing the Permitted Uses;
Prohibited Uses; Conditional Uses; and
Conditions of Use.
2. Deleting subsection 2.9(3) and replacing
it with the following:
(3) Pursuant to subsection 55(2) of the
Community Planning Act, the
Development Officer may, subject to the
terms or conditions that they consider fit,
permit a variance from the requirements
of the Zoning By-Law. Unless otherwise
identified with the Zoning By-Law,
variances shall not be considered for
standards or regulations established
within the Sections establishing the
Permitted Uses; Prohibited Uses;
Conditional Uses; and Conditions of Use.
3. Deleting the definition of “home
occupation” at section 3.1 and replacing it
with the following:
“home occupation” means a secondary
use in a portion of a dwelling unit or
accessory building where a home
business is conducted by the occupant of
the dwelling unit.
4. Deleting the definition of “medium
industrial use” at section 3.1 and
replacing it with the following:
1. Par suppression du paragraphe 2.8(6)
et son remplacement par ce qui suit :
(6) Conformément au
paragraphe 55(2) de la Loi sur
l’urbanisme, le comité peut, sous
réserve des modalités et des
conditions qu’il juge appropriées,
autoriser une dérogation aux
prescriptions de l’Arrêté de zonage.
Sauf indication contraire dans l’Arrêté
de zonage, les dérogations ne sont
pas prises en considération pour les
normes ou les règles établies dans les
articles établissant les usages permis,
les usages interdits, les usages
conditionnels et les conditions
régissant les usages.
2. Par suppression du paragraphe 2.9(3)
et son remplacement par ce qui suit :
(3) Conformément au
paragraphe 55(2) de la Loi sur
l’urbanisme, l’agent d’aménagement
peut, sous réserve des modalités et
conditions qu’il juge appropriées,
autoriser une dérogation aux
prescriptions de l’Arrêté de zonage.
Sauf indication contraire dans l’Arrêté
de zonage, les dérogations ne sont
pas prises en considération pour les
normes ou les règles établies dans les
articles établissant les usages permis,
les usages interdits, les usages
conditionnels et les conditions
régissant les usages.
3. L’article 3.1 est modifié par
suppression de la définition de
« activité professionnelle à domicile »
et son remplacement par ce qui suit :
« activité professionnelle à domicile »
Usage secondaire exercé dans une
partie d’un logement ou d’un bâtiment
accessoire où l’occupant du logement
exploite une entreprise à domicile.
4. L’article 3.1 est modifié par
suppression de la définition de
« usage d’industrie moyenne » et son
remplacement par ce qui suit :
170
“Medium industrial use” means any use of
land, building, or structure, involving a
manufacturing process whether or not a
finished article is produced, and may
include the repairing and or servicing of a
vehicle, machinery, or building where the
manufacturing process occurs or the
material is used or stored, and the
transportation of material, goods, or
commodities to and from the premises.
The use can involve outdoor storage or
activities, but any nuisance or risk factor
generally does not extend beyond the
boundaries of the lot.
5. Deleting paragraph 4.1(1)(g) and
replacing it with the following:
(g) An access for a dwelling unit in a
semi-detached dwelling or townhouse
dwelling shall be developed together with
the access of the adjoining dwelling unit
unless such adjoining access is not
possible due to the odd number of total
dwelling units in the building. The
requirement for the adjoining of accesses
shall be waived if the proposed
development aligns with one of the three
conditions established below:
(i) The lot is located on a street that
does not permit on-street parking;
(ii) The site design incorporates a
garage and/or extended driveway
which can provide a minimum of two
parking spaces per dwelling unit; or
(iii) Site conditions, including
infrastructure and topography. limit
the ability to adjoin the accesses.
6. Deleting section 5.4 and replacing it with
the following:
5.4 Except as otherwise provided by this
By-law, when outdoor storage of garbage,
recycling and compost is developed on a
lot in any zone involving a building with
five or more dwelling units, a rooming
house with more than ten rooms, or a
building containing a commercial,
community or industrial use, the storage
of garbage, recycling and compost shall
be in accordance with the following:
« usage d’industrie moyenne » Usage
de terrains, de bâtiments ou de
constructions ayant recours à un
procédé de fabrication, peu importe
qu’un article fini soit produit ou non, et
pouvant comprendre la réparation ou
l’entretien de véhicules, de machines
ou de bâtiments où ont lieu le procédé
de fabrication ou l’utilisation ou
l’entreposage du matériel, ainsi que le
transport, jusqu’aux lieux et à partir de
ceux-ci, de matériaux, de biens ou de
produits. L’usage peut comporter un
entreposage en plein air ou autres
activités en plein air, mais les facteurs
de risque ou la nuisance afférents ne
s’étendent pas normalement au-delà
des limites du lot.
5. Par suppression de l’alinéa 4.1(1)g) et
son remplacement par ce qui suit :
g) L’accès à un logement dans une
habitation jumelée ou une habitation
en rangée est aménagé de façon à
être contigu à l’accès du logement
attenant, sauf si cela est impossible
en raison du nombre impair de
logements dans le bâtiment.
L’exigence relative à la contiguïté des
accès est levée si l’aménagement
proposé est conforme à l’une des trois
conditions établies ci-bas :
i) Le lot est situé sur une rue qui ne
permet pas le stationnement sur
rue;
ii) La conception de l’emplacement
incorpore un garage ou une voie
d’accès étendue qui peut offrir au
moins deux emplacements de
stationnement par logement;
iii) Les conditions du site, y compris
les infrastructures et la
topographie, limitent la possibilité
de joindre les accès.
6. Par suppression de l’article 5.4 et son
remplacement par ce qui suit :
5.4 Sauf disposition contraire du
présent arrêté, lorsqu’une aire
d’entreposage à l’air libre d’ordures, de
recyclage et de compost est aménagée
sur un lot dans toute zone comportant
un bâtiment avec au moins cinq
logements, une maison de chambres
comportant plus de dix chambres, ou
un bâtiment comportant un usage
commercial, communautaire ou
industriel, l’aire d’entreposage
d’ordures, de recyclage et de compost
est subordonnée aux conditions
suivantes :
171
(a) The enclosure shall be completely
surrounded by a wooden fence or a
chain-link fence entirely covered by
filler strips woven into the mesh or a
walled structure, or any combination
thereof, which may also include a gate;
(b) The enclosure required by
paragraph 5.4(a), including any gate,
shall have a minimum height of
1.5 metres, but in no case shall
garbage, recycling or compost be
higher than the enclosure; and
(c) The enclosure shall not occupy any
required front or flankage yard or any
area required for amenity or parking.
7. Deleting section 7.5 and replacing it with
the following:
7.5 A billboard sign, including those that
incorporate an electronic message board,
may be placed, erected, or displayed
subject to the following requirements:
(a) A billboard sign shall only be permitted
in a CC, CR, IL, IM, IH, PQ, or RU zone;
(b) A billboard sign shall not exceed a
sign face having a length greater than
10 metres or a height greater than four
metres.
(i) Notwithstanding paragraph 7.5(b),
a billboard sign incorporating
electronic message boards shall be
subject to the size and operational
criteria established in
subsection 7.10(2). Variances to
these standards will be subject to
review by the Planning Advisory
Committee.
(c) A billboard sign shall not be located in
any required front, flankage, side, or rear
yard;
(d) A billboard sign shall not be located
closer than 300 metres from any other
billboard sign, except two billboards may
be located together as a unit if the total
sign face length does not exceed
15 metres;
(e) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), the
sign face of a billboard may be increased
to a maximum height of 6 metres provided
a) elle est complètement entourée
d’une clôture en bois, d’une clôture
à mailles losangées entièrement
recouverte de bandes entrelacées
dans les mailles, d’une construction
fermée ou de toute combinaison de
ces éléments, qui peuvent aussi
comprendre un portail;
b) la hauteur minimale de l’enceinte
prescrite par l’alinéa 5.4a), y
compris de tout portail, est de
1,5 mètre, étant entendu que les
ordures, le recyclage ou le compost
ne sont en aucun cas empilés plus
haut que l’enceinte;
c) l’enceinte n’occupe pas une cour
avant obligatoire, une cour de flanc
obligatoire ou une aire d’agrément
ou de stationnement prescrite.
7. Par suppression de l’article 7.5 et son
remplacement par ce qui suit :
7.5 Il est permis de placer, d’édifier ou
d’installer un panneau d’affichage, y
compris ceux qui intègrent un
panneau à messages électroniques,
sous réserve des conditions
suivantes :
a) les panneaux d’affichage ne sont
permis que dans les zones CC,
CR, IL, IM, IH, PQ et RU;
b) leur face est d’une longueur
maximale de 10 mètres et d’une
hauteur maximale de quatre
mètres;
(i) malgré l’alinéa 7.5b), un
panneau d’affichage qui
intègre un panneau à
messages électroniques est
subordonné aux critères de
taille et d’exploitation établis
au paragraphe 7.10(2). Les
dérogations à ces normes
seront soumises à l’examen
du comité consultatif en
matière d’urbanisme.
c) ils ne peuvent être situés dans une
cour avant obligatoire, une cour de
flanc obligatoire, une cour latérale
obligatoire ou une cour arrière
obligatoire;
d) ils ne sont pas situés à moins de
300 mètres d’un autre panneau
d’affichage, sauf que deux
panneaux d’affichage peuvent
être aménagés ensemble en un
bloc publicitaire si la longueur de
leur face totale n’est pas
supérieure à 15 mètres;
e) malgré l’alinéa b), la face d’un
panneau d’affichage peut avoir
172
the width does not exceed 4 metres in the
case of a single panel or 8 metres in the
case of two panels located together as a
unit;
(f) A billboard sign shall not be placed,
erected, or displayed within 100 metres of
or oriented towards the Provincial
Highway Nos. 1 or 7 but excluding their
access ramps;
(g) A billboard sign shall not be placed,
erected, or displayed within 100 metres of
a rail crossing, signalized intersection or
pedestrian crossing;
(h) An application for the creation of a
billboard sign that incorporates an
electronic message board sign, shall
include a Traffic Impact Statement that
assesses the proposed signage in
relation to the functionality and safety of
pedestrian, vehicular and rail traffic
routes.
8. Renaming section 7.7 by deleting the
words “Ground Signs” and replacing them
with:
Ground and Roof Signs
9. Deleting the words “ground signs” at
paragraph 7.7(a) and replacing them with
the words “ground and roof signs”.
10. Deleting subparagraph 9.5(a)(vi) and
replacing it with the following:
(vii) No bed and breakfast, home
occupation, neighbourhood day care,
supportive housing or supportive facility is
permitted in any building on the lot.
11. Deleting subparagraph 9.5(b)(viii) and
replacing it with the following:
(viii) No bed and breakfast, home
occupation, home day care, supportive
housing or supportive facility is permitted
in any building on the lot.
12. Deleting paragraph 9.9(1)(a) and
replacing it with the following:
(a) Where permitted by this By-law, a
one-unit dwelling, two-unit dwelling,
semi-detached dwelling, townhouse
dwelling, mobile or mini-home, or
une hauteur maximale de six
mètres, à condition que sa largeur
ne soit pas supérieure à quatre
mètres dans le cas d’un panneau
simple ou à huit mètres dans le
cas d’un bloc publicitaire composé
de deux panneaux;
f) ils ne sont pas placés, édifiés ou
installés à moins de 100 mètres
des routes provinciales no 1 ou 7,
à l’exclusion des bretelles d’accès,
ou orientés vers celles-ci;
g) ils ne sont pas placés, édifiés ou
installés à moins de 100 mètres
d’un passage à niveau, d’une
intersection avec feux de
signalisation ou d’un passage
pour piétons;
h) une demande pour la création
d’un panneau d’affichage qui
intègre un panneau à messages
électroniques inclut une étude
d’impact sur la circulation qui
évalue l’affichage proposé par
rapport à la fonctionnalité et à la
sécurité des voies de circulation
piétonnières, routières et
ferroviaires.
8. L'article 7.7 est renommé par suppression
des mots « Enseignes au sol » et leur
remplacement par :
Enseignes au sol et sur toit
9. L’alinéa 7.7a) est modifié par suppression
des mots « enseignes au sol » et leur
remplacement par « enseignes au sol et
sur toit ».
10. Par suppression du sous-alinéa 9.5a)(vi)
et son remplacement par :
(vii) les gîtes touristiques, activités
professionnelles à domicile, garderies de
quartier, logements avec services de
soutien ou établissements de soutien ne
sont permis dans aucun bâtiment situé sur
le lot.
11. Par suppression du sous-alinéa 9.5b)(viii)
et son remplacement par :
(viii) les gîtes touristiques, activités
professionnelles à domicile,
foyers-garderies, logements avec services
de soutien ou établissements de soutien
ne sont permis dans aucun bâtiment situé
sur le lot.
12. Par suppression de l’alinéa 9.9(1)a) et son
remplacement par :
a) Là où le présent arrêté le permet,
une des activités professionnelles
à domicile qui suivent peut être
exercée en tant qu’usage
173
associated accessory building, may
also contain one of the following home
occupations as a secondary use
subject to the requirements of
subsection 9.9(2):
(i) Artist or Craftsperson Studio;
(ii) Business Office;
(iii) Catering Business, subject to the
additional requirements of
subsection 9.9(3);
(iv) Clothing Maker;
(v) Medical Clinic;
(vi) Instructional Service involving a
maximum of four students at any
one time; or
(vii) Personal Service, subject to the
additional requirements of
subsection 9.9(4) for pet
grooming.
13. Deleting paragraph 9.9(2)(b) and
replacing it with the following:
(b) The area devoted to the home
occupation shall not exceed:
(i) 30 percent of the total floor area of the
dwelling unit; or
(ii) 70 percent, if located in an accessory
building, subject to the home occupation
not restricting the use of the accessory
building for required on-site parking.
14. Deleting paragraph 9.9(2)(e) and
replacing it with the following:
(e) All equipment and material associated
with the home occupation shall be kept
exclusively in the dwelling unit or
accessory building as identified in the
development permit;
15. Deleting paragraph 9.9(2)(i) and replacing
it with the following:
(i) No bed and breakfast, home day
care, neighbourhood day care, supportive
housing or supportive facility is permitted
in any building on the lot.
16. Adding the following paragraph 9.9(2)(j),
immediately after paragraph 9.9(2)(i):
(j) A home occupation shall only be
permitted within an accessory building,
subject to the following requirements:
(i) The accessory building is not
located in the required front yard; and
secondaire dans les habitations
unifamiliales, les habitations
bifamiliales, les habitations
jumelées, les habitations en
rangée, les maisons mobiles et les
mini-maisons, et les bâtiments
accessoires, sous réserve des
conditions énoncées au
paragraphe 9.9(2) :
(i) bureau d’affaires;
(ii) clinique médicale;
(iii) couturier;
(iv) entreprise de traiteur, sous
réserve des conditions
supplémentaires énoncées au
paragraphe 9.9(3);
(v) service d’enseignement
dispensé à un maximum de
quatre élèves à la fois;
(vi) services personnels, sous
réserve des conditions
supplémentaires énoncées au
paragraphe 9.9(4) dans le cas
du toilettage d’animaux
familiers.
(vii) studio d’artiste ou d’artisan;
13. Par suppression de l’alinéa 9.9(2)b) et son
remplacement par ce qui suit :
b) l’aire consacrée à l’activité professionnelle
à domicile ne dépasse pas la plus grande des
valeurs suivantes :
(i) 30 pour cent de l’aire de plancher totale du
logement;
(ii) 70 pour cent si elle est située dans un
bâtiment accessoire, sous réserve que
l’activité professionnelle à domicile ne
restreigne pas l’utilisation du bâtiment
accessoire pour les emplacements de
stationnement sur les lieux obligatoires.
14. Par suppression de l’alinéa 9.9(2)e) et son
remplacement par ce qui suit :
e) tout l’équipement et le matériel rattaché à
l’activité professionnelle à domicile est gardé
entièrement à l’intérieur du logement ou du
bâtiment accessoire tel qu’indiqué dans le
permis d’aménagement;
15. Par suppression de l’alinéa 9.9(2)i) et son
remplacement par ce qui suit :
i) les gîtes touristiques, foyers-garderies,
garderies de quartier, logements avec
services de soutien et les établissements de
soutien ne sont permis dans aucun bâtiment
situé sur le lot.
16. Par adjonction de l’alinéa 9.9(2)j)
immédiatement après l’alinéa 9.9(2)i) :
j) Une activité professionnelle à domicile n’est
permise que dans un bâtiment accessoire,
sous réserve des conditions suivantes :
(i) Le bâtiment accessoire n’est pas situé
dans une cour avant obligatoire;
174
(ii) Access to the accessory building is
located from the front of the lot and
does not require access through a
dwelling unit.
17. Deleting paragraph 10.4(2)(a) and
replacing it the with following:
(a) Minimum Lot Area:
One-Unit Dwelling, Two-Unit Dwelling, or
Semi-Detached Dwelling – 225 square
metres
Dwelling Group/Cluster Townhouse, per
unit – 75 square metres
Multiple Dwelling, per unit - 75 square
metres
Townhouse Dwelling For each Dwelling
unit therein – 140 square metres
18. Deleting the words “Private Club;” from
subsection 11.1(1);
19. Adding the words “Private Club;” to the list
at subsection 11.1(2) in alphabetical
order;
20. Deleting the words “Private Club;” from
subsection 11.3(1);
21. Adding the words “Private Club;” to the list
at subsection 11.3(2) in alphabetical
order;
22. Deleting the words “Private Club;” from
subsection 11.5(1);
23. Adding the words “Private Club;” to the list
at subsection 11.5(2) in alphabetical
order;
24. Deleting the words “Private Club;” from
subsection 11.7(1);
25. Adding the words “Private Club;” to the list
in subsection 11.7(2), in alphabetical
order;
26. Deleting the words “Private Club;” from
subsection 11.8(1);
27. Deleting subsections 11.8(2) and 11.8(3)
and replacing them with the following:
11.8(2) Conditional Uses
Any land, building, or structure may be
used for the purposes of, and for no other
purpose than, the following subject to
(ii) L’accès au bâtiment accessoire est
situé à l’avant du lot et ne nécessite pas
l’accès par un logement.
17. Par suppression de l’alinéa 10.4(2)a) et
son remplacement par ce qui suit :
a) Superficie de lot minimale :
Habitation unifamiliale, habitation bifamiliale
ou habitation jumelée – 225 mètres carrés
Complexe d’habitations/ensemble
d’habitations en rangée, par logement –
75 mètres carrés
Habitation multifamiliale, par logement –
75 mètres carrés
Habitation en rangée
Pour chaque logement s’y trouvant –
140 mètres carrés
18. La liste du paragraphe 11.1(1) est
modifiée par suppression des mots « club
privé; »;
19. La liste du paragraphe 11.1(2) est
modifiée par adjonction en ordre
alphabétique des mots « club privé; »;
20. La liste du paragraphe 11.3(1) est
modifiée suppression des mots « club
privé; »;
21. La liste du paragraphe 11.3(2) est
modifiée par adjonction en ordre
alphabétique des mots « club privé; »;
22. La liste du paragraphe 11.5(1) est
modifiée par suppression des mots « club
privé; »;
23. La liste du paragraphe 11.5(2) est
modifiée par adjonction en ordre
alphabétique des mots « club privé; »;
24. La liste du paragraphe 11.7(1) est
modifiée par suppression des mots « club
privé; »;
25. La liste du paragraphe 11.7(2) est
modifiée par adjonction en ordre
alphabétique des mots « club privé; »;
26. La liste du paragraphe 11.8(1) est
modifiée par suppression des mots « club
privé; »;
27. Par suppression des paragraphes 11.8(2)
et 11.8(3) et leur remplacement par ce qui
suit :
11.8(2) Usages conditionnels
Les terrains, bâtiments et constructions ne
peuvent être affectés qu’aux fins
suivantes, sous réserve des conditions
imposées par le comité, le cas échéant :
175
such terms and conditions as may be
imposed by the Committee:
Private Club.
11.8(3) Conditions of Use
(a) A Business Office permitted in
subsection 11.8(1) shall not exceed
3,000 square metres in gross floor
area.
(b) A Dwelling Unit permitted in
subsection 11.8(1):
(i) Shall not be located below the
second storey of the building;
(ii) Shall have its main access
from inside the building at
ground level;
(iii) Notwithstanding
subparagraphs (i) and (ii), a
Dwelling Unit may be located
below the second storey and
the main access may be
directly from outside the
building at ground level when
the building is located on a lot
that is within 30 metres from a
Residential zone.
(c) Any commercial use permitted in
subsection 11.8(1):
(i) Shall be located below the
second storey of any building
oriented toward the street; and
(ii) Subject to paragraph (a), the
same commercial use
mentioned in subparagraph (i)
may be extended above the
first storey provided at least
one Dwelling Unit remains in
the building.
11.8(4) Zone Standards
(a) Minimum Lot Area: 370 square metres
(b) Minimum Lot Frontage: 12 metres
(c) Minimum Lot Depth: 30 metres
(d) Minimum Front Yard: nil metres
(e) Maximum Front Yard: 3 metres
(f) Minimum Rear Yard:
Abutting a Residential zone: 3 metres
Other: nil metres
(g) Minimum Side Yard:
Abutting a Residential zone:
1.5 metres
Other: nil metres
(h) Minimum Flankage Yard: 1.5 metres
(i) Minimum Building Height: 2 storeys
(j) Maximum Building Height: 18 metres
(k) Buildings shall have a prominent
entrance oriented toward a street.
(l) No parking or outdoor display area
shall be permitted within a required
setback.
club privé.
11.8(3) Conditions régissant les usages
a) L’aire de plancher brute des bureaux
d’affaires permis par le
paragraphe 11.8(1) n’est pas
supérieure à 3 000 mètres carrés.
b) Les logements permis par le
paragraphe 11.8(1) :
(i) ne sont pas situés à un niveau
inférieur au deuxième étage
du bâtiment;
(ii) ont leur accès principal à partir
de l’intérieur au niveau du sol;
(iii) peuvent, par dérogation aux
sous-alinéas (i) et (ii), être
situés à un niveau inférieur au
deuxième étage du bâtiment,
et leur accès principal peut se
faire directement à partir de
l’extérieur du bâtiment au
niveau du sol, si le bâtiment se
trouve sur un lot situé à moins
de 30 mètres d’une zone
résidentielle.
c) Les usages commerciaux permis
par le paragraphe 11.8(1) :
(i) sont situés au-dessous du
deuxième étage d’un
bâtiment faisant face sur la
rue;
(ii) Sous réserve de l’alinéa a),
le même usage commercial
que celui qui est mentionné à
l’alinéa (i) peut occuper le
bâtiment au-delà du premier
étage, pourvu qu’au moins
un logement demeure dans
ce bâtiment.
11.8(4) Normes applicables à la zone
a) Superficie de lot minimale :
370 mètres carrés
b) Façade de lot minimale : 12 mètres
c) Profondeur de lot minimale :
30 mètres
d) Cour avant minimale : néant mètre
e) Cour avant maximale : 3 mètres
f) Cour arrière minimale
Lot donnant sur une zone
résidentielle : 3 mètres
Autre : néant mètre
g) Cour latérale minimale
Lot donnant sur une zone
résidentielle : 1,5 mètre
Autre : néant mètre
h) Cour de flanc minimale : 1,5 mètre
i) Hauteur des bâtiments minimale :
2 étages
j) Hauteur des bâtiments
maximale 18 mètres
k) Les bâtiments comportent une entrée
bien en vue faisant face à une rue.
176
(m) Maximum Lot Occupancy: 50 percent
(n) Other Requirements: In accordance
with the General Provisions, Parts 4-9
28. Deleting paragraph 11.9(2)(b) and
replacing it the with the following:
(b) Site development involving a
single building is subject to the following:
(i) The main use of the building shall be
for commercial uses.
(ii) The first storey of the building shall
include commercial uses along all
street-facing façades and shall occupy a
minimum of 50% of the floor area.
(iii) A Dwelling Unit, as permitted in
subsection 11.9 (1), shall not share an
internal hallway or entrance with any
commercial use in the building.
29. Adding the following paragraph 11.9(2)(c)
immediately following
paragraph 11.9(2)(b):
(c) Site development involving a multiple
building development is subject to the
following:
(i) The submission of a site concept
plan, for review and approval by
the Development Officer, that
illustrates the internal road
network, parking, landscaping,
amenity space, building locations
and the proposed first floor uses of
each building.
(ii) The main use of the site shall be
for commercial uses.
(iii) All buildings that feature
street-facing façades shall be
developed with first storey
commercial uses along the
street-facing façades, which shall
occupy a minimum of 50% of the
floor area.
l) Aucune aire de stationnement ni aire
d’exposition extérieure n’est permise
dans une marge de retrait obligatoire.
m) Coefficient maximal d’occupation du
lot : 50 pour cent
n) Autres exigences : Conformément
aux dispositions générales énoncées
aux parties 4 à 9
28. Par suppression de l’alinéa 11.9(2)b) et
son remplacement par ce qui suit :
b) L’aménagement d’un emplacement
comprenant un seul bâtiment est
assujetti aux conditions suivantes :
(i) L’usage principal du bâtiment est
destiné à des usages
commerciaux.
(ii) Le premier étage du bâtiment
inclut des usages commerciaux le
long de toutes les façades donnant
sur la rue et occupe au moins
50 pour cent de l’aire de plancher.
(iii) Les logements permis par le
paragraphe 11.9(1) ne partagent
pas un corridor intérieur ou une
entrée avec un usage commercial
exercé dans le bâtiment.
29. Le paragraphe 11.9(2) est modifié par
adjonction de l’alinéa 11.9(2)c)
immédiatement après l’alinéa 11.9(2)b) :
c) L’aménagement d’un emplacement
comprenant plusieurs bâtiments est
assujetti aux conditions suivantes :
(i) La présentation d’un plan
conceptuel de
l’emplacement, pour
examen et approbation par
l’agent d’aménagement, qui
illustre le réseau routier
interne, le stationnement,
l’aménagement paysager,
les espaces d’agrément,
l’emplacement des
bâtiments et les usages
proposés pour le premier
étage de chaque bâtiment.
(ii) L’usage principal de
l’emplacement est destiné à
des usages commerciaux.
(iii) Tous les bâtiments
comportant des façades
donnant sur la rue sont
aménagés avec des usages
commerciaux au premier
étage le long des façades
donnant sur la rue qui
occupent au moins 50 pour
cent de l’aire de plancher.
177
(iv) Buildings that do not have
street-facing façades, may be
developed with ground floor
Dwelling Units.
(v) A Dwelling Unit, as permitted in
subsection 11.9(1), shall not share
an internal hallway or entrance
with any commercial use in the
building.
30. Deleting the words “Private Club;” from
the list of permitted uses in
subsection 11.11(1);
31. Adding the words “Private Club” in
alphabetical order to the conditional uses
at subsection 11.11(2).
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
XXXXXXX, A.D. 2025 and signed by:
(iv) Les bâtiments qui ne
comportent pas de façade
donnant sur la rue peuvent
être aménagés avec des
logements au
rez-de-chaussée.
(v) Les logements permis par le
paragraphe 11.9(1) ne
partagent pas un corridor
intérieur ou une entrée avec
un usage commercial exercé
dans le bâtiment.
30. Le paragraphe 11.11(1) est modifié par
suppression des mots « club privé; » de la
liste des usages permis;
31. Le paragraphe 11.11(2) est modifié par
adjonction en ordre alphabétique des
mots « club privé; » à la liste des usages
conditionnels.
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a
fait apposer son sceau communal sur le
présent arrêté le X XXXXXXX 2025, avec les
signatures suivantes :
_______________________________________
Mayor/Mairesse
__________________________________________
City Clerk/ Greffier de la municipalité
First Reading - X
Second Reading - X
Third Reading - X
Première lecture - X
Deuxième lecture - X
Troisième lecture - X
178
Common Council: Public Hearing
December 1, 2025 –18:30
By-Law Number: C.P. 111-211
Zoning By-Law
Text Amendments
179
Proposal
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
Purpose:
•To clarify existing By-Law standards
•To address contemporary planning issues and emerging development
trends
•To support planning best practice
180
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
•Allow home occupations to be within accessory buildings
•Will provide residents the ability to develop a home occupation in either a
dwelling unit or accessory building –depending on their business needs.
•Amendment will balance development flexibility while also maintaining the
neighbourhood character
•Development standards will ensure that home occupations can only be
developed in accessory buildings if the home occupation can be accessed
independent of the dwelling unit and it will not result in the loss of required
parking.
Home Occupations
181
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
Garbage Enclosures
•Existing standards associated with garbage enclosures is only required for
multi-unit residential buildings (5 or more units).
•Amendment would require that commercial, institutional and industrial
developments align with these standards for onsite garbage storage.
•The amendment will also indicate that the garbage enclosure requirements
also pertain to onsite storage of recycling and composting materials
182
Zoning By-Law Text AmendmentsAccess for Residential
Purposes
•Multi-unit residential buildings, such as townhouses, require the twinning or
adjoining of their driveway accesses.
•Variances are required for all development that does not meet this standard.
•The amendment will outline specific criteria in which this requirement can be
waived without a variance:
•Site features such as topographic constraints
•Sites where on-street parking is not permitted
183
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
Local Commercial Zone
•Local Commercial zone is intended to provide commercial uses that serve the
surrounding neighbourhood.
•While residential uses are permitted, the intention is that they are part of a
mixed-use development.
•The amendment would establish conditions that would require a commercial
land use as part of the development.
•A rezoning would be required for purely residential development. This would
ensure that the site is developed based on residential design standards such
as building design, landscaping, parking, and amenity space.
184
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
•Establish standards for the emerging trend of billboard signs that incorporate
electronic screens or message boards.
•Establish criteria for separation distances between billboards and signalized
intersections, crosswalks and rail crossings.
•Require the completion of a Traffic Impact Study to assess safety and site
suitability.
•Establish these types of Billboards as a PAC application, subject to
conditions.
Electronic Billboard
185
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
Medium Industrial Use
•Enhance the Medium Industrial Use definition to establish criteria
independent of the Light and Heavy Industrial Use definitions.
•New Definition:
•Clarifies operational components such as manufacturing.
•Indicates that operations can occur outdoors.
•Establishes that nuisance or risk factors do not extend beyond the
boundaries of the lot.
•Water can be utilized as part of the site operations.
186
Public Engagement
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
Mailout:Not Applicable
Letters Received:
Ad Posted on Website:
0
November 6, 2025
PAC Date:November 18, 2025
187
PAC & Staff Recommendation
That Common Council approve the attached by-law amendment
entitled, “By-Law No. C.P. 111-211, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John.”
Zoning By-Law Text Amendments
188
Staff Recommendation for Council Resolution
Property: 259 Foster Thurston Drive
Public Hearing, 1st and 2nd Reading: December 1, 2025
Item Required:
(Y/N)
Recommendation
Municipal Plan
Amendment
No
Zoning By-Law
Amendment
Yes That Common Council give 1st and 2nd reading to By-Law
Number C.P. 111-210 a Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
the City of Saint John.
Other No
3rd Reading: Tentative date of December 15, 2025
Item: Required:
(Y/N)
Recommendation
Municipal Plan
Amendment
No
Zoning By-Law
Amendment
Yes That Common Council give 3rd reading to By-Law Number
C.P. 111-210 a Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of the City
of Saint John.
Recission of
Previous s. 39/s.
59 Conditions
No
Section 59
Conditions
No
Section 59
Agreement
No
Section 131
Agreement
No
189
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Page 1 of 1
November 20, 2025
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Zoning By-Law Text Amendment - Addition of Business
Office Use in Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3)
On November 3, 2025, Common Council referred the above matter to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee
considered the attached report at its November 18, 2025 meeting.
Roseann George, Planner with Growth and Community Services, provided an
overview of the application via a PowerPoint presentation.
No letters were received in favour or opposition regarding the application.
The Committee unanimously adopted the Staff Recommendation to Common
Council presented below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council adopt the attached By-Law amendment entitled, “By-
Law No. C.P. 111-210, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of
Saint John.”
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Mitchell
Chair
Attachments
190
Page 1 of 5
Report Date: November 13, 2025
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting Date: November 18, 2025
SUBJECT
Applicant: Heart and Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick
Landowners(s): AND Sales Inc.
Location:
Civic Address: PID: Lot Size: 259 Foster Thurston Drive 00052704 554,832.47 m2
Plan Designation: Rural Resource, and Park and Natural Area
Zoning Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3) Zone
Application Type: Zoning By-Law Text Amendment
Jurisdiction: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law. Common Council will consider the Committee’s recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, December 1, 2025. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Heart and Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick has applied to amend the Zoning By-Law
by adding Business Office as a permitted use in the Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3). This zone was
established for PID 00052704, also known as 259 Foster Thurston Drive, to support the
development of a School (K-8).
The proposed amendment would establish the business office use, which would allow the
relocation of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick offices to 259 Foster Thurston
Drive. This would support their administrative operations, program delivery and patient support.
Staff are recommending approval of the application.
191
Heart and Stroke Foundation of NB 259 Foster Thurston Drive November 13, 2025
Page 2 of 5
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council adopt the attached by-law amendment entitled “By-law No. C.P. 111-
210, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John.
DECISION HISTORY
In 2018, an application was made to rezone the subject site to a special zone, to facilitate the
development of a Forest School. The application included Traffic and Stormwater Studies which
guided the location of the site access and site development.
Special Zone No. 3 was created based on the zone standards and uses established within the
Rural (RU) zone, with the addition of a School (K-8) as a permitted use. Section 59 conditions
were imposed that required for a detailed site plan with building permit application to be
submitted, and a clearing/maintenance area of 300 m2 to be provided for sight distance. The
rezoning and creation of Special Zone No.3 were approved as By-Law Amendment C.P. 111-62
in August 2018.
ANALYSIS
Proposal
The Heart and Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick applied to amend the Zoning By-Law to
establish Business Offices as a permitted use within the Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3) zone. The
applicant intends to relocate their offices to 259 Foster Thurston Drive. The offices would be
located within the existing lodge and would provide a location for administrative operations in
addition to program delivery and patient support.
The proposed amendment would establish Business Office as an additional permitted use for
the property.
The applicant has also submitted a subdivision application, which is being reviewed at the
Development Officer level.
Site and Neighbourhood
The subject site is located on Foster Thurston Drive in the North End of the City, outside the
Primary Development Area. The existing property contains a lodge, accessory buildings and a
parking area which were developed for a School (K-8) and are served by a private well and
septic system. The conversion of the lodge from a School (K-8) to a Business Office would be
undertaken through a Change of Use permit. No additional changes to the property are
anticipated to facilitate the change of use to Business Office.
The site is located adjacent to Rockwood Park and across the street from the Glenn Carpenter
Centre. The surrounding neighbourhood also contains rural residential development,
commercial and light industrial uses. The site is well served by the City’s road network, with
easy access to the Highway and the Saint John Regional Hospital. Due to the rural location, the
site would not benefit from connection to other forms of transportation including the broader City
pedestrian network, bicycle routes or public transit.
192
Heart and Stroke Foundation of NB 259 Foster Thurston Drive November 13, 2025
Page 3 of 5
Plan and Policy Alignment
Municipal Plan
The subject site is predominately designated Rural Resource within PlanSJ. A small area of
land at the northwest and southwest corners of the property are designated Park and Natural
Area, due to existing drainage and wetlands in the surrounding area. Any future site work in
those portions of the property would be subject to WAWA approval.
The Rural Resource designation is applied to lands outside of the Primary Development Area,
are intended to preserve the rural character of the area and facilitate the continued use of these
lands for resource related activities, and for limited residential and non-resource-based land
use. The subject site was rezoned to a special zone which promotes rural style development
with opportunities for other forms of land use within the rural context.
Policy LU-95 of the Municipal Plan requires that lands within the Rural Resource Area
designation predominantly remain in their natural undisturbed state.
The text amendment will have minimal impact on the site, preserving the area formerly intended
for the Forest School.
The site is existing and the land has already been developed as a designated Rural Resource
(as a result of the rezoning). The likelihood of the adjoining properties, namely the Rockwood
Park owned by the City and the YMCA Glen Carpenter Centre, to undertake activities within the
realm of resource extraction are very slim. The areas adjacent to Rockwood Park are
compatible with the Rural Resource area designation, and therefore, the potential for land use
conflicts to occur are almost none.
Policy LU-126 of the Municipal Plan encourages the reuse of existing schools, preferably for
other community uses to be in accordance with the relevant stipulations of the Zoning By-Law,
such as the proposed Business Office use in this case.
The text amendment will enable the adaptive reuse of a former private school, that will enable
the relocation of their offices to the subject site, providing a new location for service provision.
While Business Office is not strictly identified as a community use, the applicant, The Heart and
Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick, is a non-profit organization that provides health programs
and services to the community, that will help enhance the health and well-being of the patients.
Staff are of the opinion that the proposal to rezone the site for a business office use that will
engage with patients in a forest setting, will meet the intent of the Municipal Plan, as the
environment in which the offices will be located will be within a forested environment with
minimal disruption to the site. Staff note that a change of use will be undertaken, and future
lodges may be built, but that the nature of the site will remain unaltered. The proposed use as a
Business Office for heart and stroke patients within the natural surroundings, would only be
193
Heart and Stroke Foundation of NB 259 Foster Thurston Drive November 13, 2025
Page 4 of 5
considered complementary to the adjoining Rockwood Park, located to the south and west of
the site.
Zoning
The Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3) zone was developed to enable the property to be used for a
School (K-8) in addition to the range of uses permitted within the Rural (RU) zone. With the
closing of the School, the lodge and associated buildings and infrastructure have been
underutilized, and the property owner was considering the best use for the site moving
forward.
With the evolving nature of the surrounding properties, including the expansion of the adjacent
Glenn Carpenter Centre, there is an opportunity to consider a new land use for the property.
The proposed Business Office provides an opportunity to introduce a new land use that can be
supported by the private well and sanitary services, utilizes the existing structures and is
compatible with the uses found in the surrounding area.
Parking and site development requirements including setbacks and landscaping is established
through the SZ-3 zone and the Special Zone design requirements that are indicated within the
Zoning By-Law. A Change of Use permit will be required to facilitate the conversion of the
property to a Business Office. Any future changes to the property, including possible Supportive
Housing, will be subject to all Municipal and Provincial requirements.
Statements of Public Interest (SPIs)
The proposed text amendments to the Zoning By-Law align with the general intent of the
Provincial Statements of Public Interest, as it supports the use of an existing developed site
within a settlement area.
Service Area Review
Internal Service Areas Feedback
Infrastructure No concerns.
Building No concerns.
Fire & Emergency Management If new development were to be ‘proposed’, and
since it is in an unserved portion of the City in a
heavily treed area, Fire would have comments and
concerns.
Public Works & Transportation No concerns.
External Agencies Feedback
Department of Local Government and
Environment – WAWA
If new development were to occur at a later stage
in or within 30 metres of this area, the applicants
would need to reach out to the WAWA branch to
secure WAWA permits or wetland delineation.
The application was circulated to Internal and External Service Areas and Agencies for review
and feedback. No concerns were identified for the proposal.
194
Heart and Stroke Foundation of NB 259 Foster Thurston Drive November 13, 2025
Page 5 of 5
Conclusion
The proposed text amendment to establish Business Office as a permitted use in Special Zone
No. 3 (SZ-3) aligns with the City’s policy and land use directions in PlanSJ and the Zoning By-
Law. This amendment will facilitate the conversion of a former School (K-8) into a Business
Office and will enable the relocation of a Provincial organization.
Staff are in support of this recommendation.
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No alternatives were considered.
ENGAGEMENT
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 October 23 2025. As of the date of this
report, 0 letters were received including 0 in support and 0 in opposition to the application. The
public hearing notice was posted on the City of Saint John website on November 6, 2025. The
public hearing will be held on Monday, December 1, 2025 at 6:30PM.
The property owner undertook engagement with property owners within 100 metres of the
subject site. The engagement was undertaken through door to door engagement. The property
owners on Foster Thurston Drive and the CEO of the YMCA cited no concerns and were in
support of the proposal.
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Manager Director Commissioner
Jennifer Kirchner RPP, MCIP Pankaj Nalavde RPP, MCIP Amy Poffenroth P.Eng., MBA
Contact: Roseann George
Telephone: (506) 639-6376
Email: Roseann.George@saintjohn.ca
Application: 25-0227
APPENDIX
Map 1: Aerial Photography
Map 2: Future Land Use
Map 3: Zoning
Attachment 1: Site Photography
Attachment 2: Policy Review
Submission 1: Tentative Plan of Subdivision
195
Saint John Twy. E.FosterThurstonDr.AshburnRd.Aerial Context - 259 Foster Thurston Drive
Subject Property 0 230 460115 m
196
SaintJohnTwy.E.Glen n Ca rpenterLn.
FosterThurstonDr.AshburnRd.Subject Property
Future Land Use
Heavy Industrial
Light Industrial
Commercial Corridor
Rural Resource
Park and Natural Area
Urban Reserve
0 270 540135 m
Municipal Plan - 259 Foster Thurston Drive
197
IL
RU
IHIL
IL
IM
PQ
CC
P
CC
CC
RU
RU
SZ-3
SZ-3
RU
RU
RU
RU
RU
CFM
CFM
CFM
SaintJohnTwy.E.Glen n Ca rpenterLn.
FosterThurstonDr.AshburnRd.Subject Property
Zoning
Corridor Commercial (CC)
Light Industrial (IL)
Medium Industrial (IM)
Heavy Industrial (IH)
Pit and Quarry (PQ)
Major Community Facility (CFM)
Park (P)
Rural (RU)
Special Zones (SZ-)0 270 540135 m
Zoning - 259 Foster Thurston Drive
198
199
200
201
Policy Review
Municipal Plan Policy Text Amendment Assessment
The majority of the lands within the City’s
Rural Areas are located in the Rural
Resource Area designation. These lands
are intended to facilitate resource related
activities, where appropriate, such as
forestry operations, wind and solar energy
development, agriculture, fisheries, and
extraction activities, including pits and
quarries. Limited residential and other land
uses may be contemplated.
The text amendment is associated with a
Special Zone utilized on a singular property
within the Rural Resource Area. The site
was previously developed with a School (K-
8) use. The subject site is located in an
area with diverse land uses, where
resource-based development would be
limited due to the existing settlement
pattern. The conversion of the site to
contain a Business Office would not
impact the overall land uses permitted in
the area.
Policy LU-95
Create the Rural Resource Area
designation on the Future Land Use map
(Schedule B). Council intends that land
within the Rural Resource Area designation
shall generally remain in their natural state,
or, subject to regulation and required
approvals, be used for appropriate
resource uses including forestry
operations, wind and solar energy
development, agriculture uses including
livestock operations and the fishery, and
extraction activities, including pits and
quarries.
This amendment will facilitate the adaptive
reuse of the former school as an office.
While the designation encourages
resource-based uses, other uses are
permitted through land use zoning.
Due to the established settlement pattern
and surrounding land uses including
Rockwood Park, residential development
and the Glenn Carpenter Centre, limited
opportunities exist for resource-based land
uses.
Policy LU-126
Encourage the reuse of existing schools
and places of worship, preferably for other
community uses and in accordance with
the relevant requirements of the Zoning
Bylaw.
The text amendment will enable the
adaptive reuse of a former private school.
While Business Office is not strictly
identified as a community use, the
applicant, The Heart and Stroke
Foundation of New Brunswick, is a non-
profit organization that provides a health
programs and services to the community,
associate with health and well being. The
proposed text amendment will enable the
relocation of their offices to the subject
site, providing a new location for service
provision.
202
Statements of Public Interest
SPI Assessment
Settlement Patterns
SP.1 Promote efficient development and
land use patterns that are in the best
interests of the Province, local governments
and residents of the Province in the long-
term.
The proposed text amendment is associated
with a developed site previously utilized for a
School. While the site is located outside of
our Primary Development Area and is
privately serviced, the text amendment will
ensure the continued use of built
infrastructure in a location with an
established settlement pattern.
SP.2 Promote a range of housing options
such as size, type, density and design
throughout communities.
Not applicable.
SP.3 Support the provision of a range of
affordable housing options throughout
communities.
Not applicable.
SP.4 Avoid development and land use
patterns that may cause environmental or
health and safety issues.
The proposed text amendment will enable to
use of an existing developed property, which
contains a well and septic system.
SP.5 With respect to development that
occurs in a community with existing or
planned public infrastructure and services,
promote development in locations where
the public infrastructure and services are or
are planned to be available.
The proposed text amendment will enable to
use of an existing developed property, which
contains a well and septic system. The
associated site is located on a public street
and is in proximity to public infrastructure
and services.
SP.6 With respect to development that
occurs in a community with no existing or
planned public infrastructure or services,
promote development in locations with
previously constructed and actively
maintained roads.
Not applicable.
203
SP.7 Promote a range of transportation
options, including public, regional and active
transportation.
The text amendment is associated with a site
well served by public road infrastructure. Due
to the site location, it is not served by active
or public transit systems.
SP.8 Promote the use of green infrastructure,
including climate resilient lands.
Not applicable.
SP.9 Promote development in downtown
areas and urban cores through increased
density, infill and brownfield development.
The proposed text amendment facilitates the
use of an existing development site. It will not
impact development within the Primary
Development Area or the City’s urban core.
Agriculture
AA.1 Identify prime agricultural areas and
prioritize them for agricultural uses and
other compatible uses.
Not applicable.
AA.2 Identify current and future areas for
fishery use and aquaculture use and
prioritize them for those uses and other
compatible uses.
Not applicable.
AA.3 Consider set-backs, including
reciprocal setbacks if appropriate, between
areas with an agricultural use, fishery use or
aquaculture use and areas used for
incompatible purposes.
Not applicable.
Climate Change
CC.1 Promote energy conservation and
efficiency, improved air quality, climate
change mitigation and climate change
adaptation through development and land
use patterns.
Not applicable.
CC.2 Consider how the siting and design of
infrastructure can improve air quality and
energy conservation and efficiency,
minimize the health and public safety
Not applicable.
204
impacts of climate change and increase
climate resiliency.
Flood and Natural Hazard Areas
FH.1 Identify flood and natural hazard areas
using provincial flood hazard mapping,
provincial erosion mapping and other
resources.
A portion of the subject site contains
wetlands and drainage corridors. If future site
alterations were to occur, they would be
subject to a WAWA permit.
FH.2 Promote land use and development in
areas other than flood and natural hazard
areas.
Not applicable.
FH.3 Promote land use and development
that are not expected to increase the
impacts on safety and costs associated with
flooding and natural hazards.
Not applicable.
FH.4 Promote land use and development
that incorporate mitigation measures with
respect to flooding and natural hazards or
that are appropriate for areas subject to
natural hazards.
Not applicable.
Natural Resources
NR.1 Identify natural resource development
areas and environmentally sensitive areas.
Not applicable.
NR.2 Prioritize natural resource
development areas for natural resource
extraction and development.
Not applicable.
NR.3 Prioritize environmentally sensitive
areas for conservation and protection.
Not applicable.
NR.4 Consider set-backs, including
reciprocal setbacks if appropriate, between
natural resource development areas or
environmentally sensitive areas and areas
used for incompatible purposes.
Not applicable.
205
206
207
208
209
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-210
A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW
OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
ARRÊTÉ NO C.P. 111-210 ARRÊTÉ
MODIFIANT L’ARRÊTÉ DE ZONAGE
DE 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:
Lors d’une réunion du conseil
communal, The City of Saint John a décrété
ce qui suit :
L’Arrêté de zonage de The City of Saint John,
décrété le 15 décembre 2014, est ainsi
modifié :
1. Adding to section 14, the following words
in alphabetical order under the following
headings of Table 14-1:
Use Zone Permitted
Business Office SZ-3
2. Adding in alphabetical order to the list in
subsection 14.8(1) the words “Business
Office”.
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
XXXXXXX, A.D. 2025 and signed by:
1. L’article 14 est modifié par adjonction
en ordre alphabétique des mots
suivants sous les rubriques suivantes
du tableau 14-1 :
Usage Zone où permis
Bureau d’affaires SZ-3
2. La liste du paragraphe 14.8(1) est
modifiée par adjonction en ordre
alphabétique des mots « Bureau
d’affaires ».
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a
fait apposer son sceau communal sur le
présent arrêté le X XXXXXXX 2025, avec les
signatures suivantes :
_______________________________________
Mayor/Mairesse
__________________________________________
City Clerk/ Greffier de la municipalité
First Reading - X
Second Reading - X
Third Reading - X
Première lecture - X
Deuxième lecture - X
Troisième lecture - X
210
Common Council: Public Hearing
December 1, 2025 –18:30
By-Law Number: C.P. 111-210
259 Foster Thurston Drive
PID 00052704
211
Current: Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3)
Current Lot Size: 554,832.47 m²
•Adding “Business Office”use
as a permitted use in the
Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3)
zone.
•Amendment would allow the
relocation of offices of Heart
and Stroke Foundation, NB
Text Amendment
Proposal
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
212
City Context
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
213
Aerial Context
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
214
Site Photos
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
215
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
Site Photos
216
Municipal Plan
Current Designation
Rural Resource, and Park and
Natural Resource
The Rural Resource Area,
intended to preserve rural
character of area, applied to
unserviced lands outside of
the PDA.
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
217
•Requires that lands within the
Rural Resource Area designation
predominantly remain in their
natural undisturbed state
•The site is existing and land has
already been developed through a
rezoning to a special zone.
Policy LU-126
•Encourages the reuse of existing
schools, preferably for other
community uses to be in
accordance with the relevant
stipulations of the Zoning By-Law
•The text amendment will enable
the relocation of the Heart and
Stroke Foundation of New
Brunswick offices to the subject
site. This will support their
operations including community
outreach and patient support.
Policy Alignment
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
Policy LU-95
218
Zoning
PID #
00052704
Current Lot Size
554,832.47 m²
Current Zoning
Special Zone No. 3 (SZ-3)
SZ-3 was developed to
enable the property to be
used for a School (K-8) in
addition to the range of uses
permitted within the Rural
(RU) zone.
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
219
Mailout:
Public Engagement
October 23, 2025
Letters Received:
Ad Posted on Website:
0
November 6, 2025
PAC Date:November 18, 2025
Applicant Engagement: Yes
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
220
PAC & Staff Recommendation
259 Foster Thurston Drive (PID 00052704)
That Common Council approve the attached by-law amendment
entitled, “By-Law No. C.P. 111-210, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John.”
221
Staff Recommendation for Council Resolution
Property: 421 Woodward Avenue
Public Hearing, 1st and 2nd Reading: December 1, 2025
Item Required:
(Y/N)
Recommendation
Municipal Plan
Amendment
No
Zoning By-Law
Amendment
Yes That Common Council give 1st and 2nd reading to By-law No.
C.P. 111-212, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City
of Saint John.
Other No
3rd Reading: Tentative date December 15, 2025
Item: Required:
(Y/N)
Recommendation
Municipal Plan
Amendment
No
Zoning By-Law
Amendment
Yes That Common Council give 3rd reading to By-law No. C.P.
111-212, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of
Saint John.
Recission of
Previous s. 39/s.
59 Conditions
No
Section 59
Conditions
Yes That Common Council impose the following conditions on
land having an area of 16,355 m², located at 421 Woodward
Avenue, also identified as PID Number 55002109 pursuant to
section 59(1)(a)(ii) of the New Brunswick Community Planning
Act:
a. That the owner/developer will install a crosswalk with side-
mounted RA-4 signs and zebra markings to connect the
sidewalk on the south side of Boars Head Road to the
walkway through the development.
b. The building on the northern half of the property be
limited to 4-storey.
c. That the owner/developer install a fire hydrant at the
entrance of the site as per the specifications of the Fire Safety
Department.
222
Section 59
Agreement
No
Section 131
Agreement
No
Other – Optional
Section 59
Condition.
No That Common Council impose the following condition on
land having an area of 16,355 m², located at 421 Woodward
Avenue, also identified as PID Number 55002109 pursuant to
section 59(1)(a)(ii) of the New Brunswick Community Planning
Act:
d. Rock-Breaking shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m.
223
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Page 1 of 2
November 20, 2025
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
At the November 18, 2025 meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee, they
considered the attached report regarding the rezoning of the subject site.
Yeva Mattson, Planner with Growth and Community Services, appeared before
the Committee and provided an overview of the proposed rezoning and section
59 conditions.
Isaiah Reid, the applicant, presented the proposed development and noted
changes made in response to neighbour concerns, including a revised building
footprint and reducing the northern building to four storeys. He stated that rock
extraction would be a third of to the neighbouring site. He showed a video
illustrating the building’s scale from Woodward Avenue and a map of nearby mid-
rise and high-rise developments. He also summarized completed and ongoing
community engagement.
Committee members asked about site preparation. The applicant explained that
site prep would be roughly one-third of what occurred on the adjacent property
and that the schedule includes a full site-prep phase followed by construction of
Building A, then Building B. He confirmed permitted construction hours of 7 a.m.–
9 p.m.
In response to questions, Mr. Reid said they are willing to add buffers such as
fencing and additional trees. He clarified that the major changes since the
previous application include the revised footprint, reduced height of the northern
building, and updated site grading.
The applicant also clarified addressing, parking considerations, and the likelihood
of including some affordable units. They also clarified that the pathway to
Woodward Avenue, as presented previously, was still being discussed with the
closest adjacent neighbours.
224
Don-More Surveys 421 Woodward Avenue November 20, 2025
Page 2 of 2
The committee recommended adding a fourth Section 59 condition to limit
operating hours for rock breaking, allowing Common Council to determine the
specific restrictions. One member noted that while limits could reduce daily
disruption, they may lengthen the overall construction timeline. The amended
motion, including the condition to limit rock breaking hours, passed.
One letter was received in support and 34 letters were received in opposition.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council adopt the attached by-law amendment entitled “By-
law No. C.P. 111-212, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of
Saint John.”
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Community Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of
land having an area of approximately 16,354 square metres, located at
421 Woodward Avenue, also identified as PID 55002109:
a. That the owner/developer will install a crosswalk with side-mounted
RA-4 signs and zebra markings to connect the sidewalk on the
south side of Boars Head Road to the walkway through the
development.
b. The building on the northern half of the property be limited to 4-
storey
c. That the owner/developer install a fire hydrant at the entrance of
the site as per the specifications of the Fire Safety Department
d. Rock-Breaking shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Mitchel
Chair
225
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-277
Report Date November 24, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Growth and Community
Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: 421 Woodward Avenue - Supplementary Council Report.docx
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head Chief Administrative Officer
Yeva Mattson Amy Poffenroth/Pankaj
Nalavde
J. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
Staff Recommendation:
1. That Common Council adopt the attached by-law amendment entitled “By-law No.
C.P. 111-212, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John.”
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the Community
Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an area
of approximately 16,354 square metres, located at 421 Woodward Avenue, also
identified as PID 55002109:
a. That the owner/developer will install a crosswalk with side-mounted RA-4
signs and zebra markings to connect the sidewalk on the south side of
Boars Head Road to the walkway through the development.
b. The building on the northern half of the property be limited to 4-storey.
c. That the owner/developer install a fire hydrant at the entrance of the site as
per the specifications of the Fire Safety Department.
PAC Recommendation:
1. That Common Council adopt the attached by-law amendment entitled “By-law No.
C.P. 111-212, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John.”
2. That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the Community
Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an area
of approximately 16,354 square metres, located at 421 Woodward Avenue, also
identified as PID 55002109:
226
a. That the owner/developer will install a crosswalk with side-mounted RA-4
signs and zebra markings to connect the sidewalk on the south side of
Boars Head Road to the walkway through the development.
b. The building on the northern half of the property be limited to 4-storey
c. That the owner/developer install a fire hydrant at the entrance of the site as
per the specifications of the Fire Safety Department
d. Rock breaking shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 18, 2025, staff presented the rezoning application to the Planning Advisory
Committee (PAC). Following its review, PAC supported staff’s recommendations and
imposed one additional Section 59 condition to further restrict the permitted hours for
rock-breaking activities, beyond those already established under the Noise Bylaw.
PAC RECOMMENDATION
PAC made an amended recommendation at the November 18, 2025 committee meeting
in regard to the rezoning application for 421 Woodward Avenue. The Committee
endorsed Staff’s recommendation to approve the rezoning, with an additional
recommendation:
1. That a Section 59 condition be imposed to limit the rock breaking to the hours of
8:00 am to 6:00 pm.
REPORT
The Planning Advisory Committee, at its meeting on November 18, 2025 voted to approve
the staff recommendation for rezoning, with the addition of a fourth Section 59 condition.
This condition was introduced in response to neighbourhood concerns regarding noise
from rock-breaking.
These concerns arose primarily from recent works at the neighbouring property, 435
Woodward Avenue, where development required an extended period of rock removal.
Under the City’s Noise By-law, construction activity is permitted between 7:00 a.m. and
9:00 p.m. The condition proposed by PAC would further restrict rock-breaking hours to
8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Applying a project-specific condition of this nature creates inconsistencies and an uneven
playing field, as it limits working hours and increases costs. As one PAC member noted,
while reduced daily hours may lessen noise at certain times, they may also prolong the
overall construction period, thereby extending disruption for neighbours.
227
The applicant has indicated that the planned work represents only about 30% of the rock-
breaking activity previously undertaken at 435 Woodward Avenue, which was the source
of earlier complaints.
It should also be acknowledged that any development on this site—regardless of
zoning—will require some degree of rock-breaking and construction to install servicing
and prepare the land. If the developer were to submit permits tomorrow for a project fully
compliant with the existing Low-Rise Residential zoning, they would, like any other
applicant, be permitted to undertake construction within the hours established by the
Noise By-law.
Moreover, the imposition of conditions beyond those set out in the Zoning By-law
introduces unpredictability for applicants and is inconsistent with Council’s 2014 adoption
of the One Stop Shop guiding principle of “predictability and clarity.”
Taken together, these factors raise questions about the necessity and proportionality of
imposing this additional condition.
Streamlining Application Processes
Staff has previously been directed to reduce red tape in the application process. One
approach to achieving this goal is through the removal of Section 59 conditions on
properties across the City. While the comprehensive removal of existing conditions has
not yet begun, the first step involves minimizing the creation of new conditions moving
forward.
The Zoning By-Law is intended to establish built-in standards and requirements, helping
to ensure that development is limited to appropriate uses and scales for each site. In
response to neighbourhood concerns, the applicant also presented a site plan that
highlighted the amount of rock breaking required and clarified it will be approximately 30%
of what the neighbouring site had to remove.
The applicant, Isiah Reid, discussed the efforts made to ensure the project aligns with the
character of the neighbourhood. They have lowered the height of the rear building from
6-storeys to 4-storeys and made a comprehensive video showing how this scale will affect
the neighbouring properties.
Staff is requesting that Council reconsider the condition proposed by PAC on the basis of
whether it is necessary.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The recommendation aligns with Council’s priority to GROW and MOVE:
• Grow our population at a rate of 2% annually by the end of Council’s term;
• Achieve 3% annual property tax base growth and on-going work to increase the
target;
The approach also aligns with the Municipal Plan through initiatives that target existing
228
Neighborhoods for opportunities to add density and expand housing options.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
The holding of the public hearing and receiving advice and a recommendation from the
Planning Advisory Committee satisfies the legislative and service requirements as
mandated by the Community Planning Act.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS
Name of Service
Area/Stakeholder
Name of Staff
Person
Comments
Traffic Tim O’Reilly/Jill
DeMerchant
A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) was prepared
and
submitted by the applicant as part of the Rezoning
application. The TIS was reviewed by the City’s
Traffic Engineer who identified that a crosswalk is
required for the development. The crosswalk will
connect the subject site to the sidewalks located
on
the south side of Boars Head Road.
A Section 59 Condition is required.
While the TIS identified possible upgrades to the
intersection further east (Millidge and University
avenue), City Engineers have identified that
alternative upgrades for the area are scheduled as
part of the capital plan rendering the
recommendations regarding possible upgrades
obsolete.
Infrastructure Joel
Landers/Jeremy
Clack
Standard comments regarding responsibilities
of the Developer. No concerns raised and they
can support the project.
WAWA Mariah Belyea There is potential for unmapped wetland in the
area, however there should be enough
developable space and room to avoid the
potential wetland. The applicant should reach
out to confirm if a WAWA permit is required,
as the potential wetland (if present) may not
be regulated.
Fire and Safety Dan LeBlanc Emergency Management requires the
installation of an addition hydrant to support
emergency response in the area. The hydrant
shall be installed near the site entrance on
Boars Head Road.
A Section 59 Condition is required.
GIS Yves Leger No Concerns raised.
229
Public Works and
Parks
Barb Crawford No Concerns raised.
Transit Charles Freake No Concerns raised.
230
Page 1 of 6
Report Date: November 13, 2025
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: Growth & Community Services
Meeting Date: November 18, 2025
SUBJECT
Applicant: Don-More Surveys
Landowners(s): Woodward421 Developments
Location:
Civic Address: PID: Lot Size:
421 Woodward Avenue 55002109 16,355 m²
Plan Designation: Stable Residential
Zoning Low-Rise Residential (RL)
Proposed Zoning: Mid-Rise Residential (RM)
Application Type: Zoning By-Law Amendment - Rezoning
Jurisdiction: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law. Common Council will consider the Committee’s recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, December 1, 2025.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant is applying to rezone the site at 421 Woodward Avenue from Low Rise
Residential (RL) to Mid-Rise Residential (RM) to allow for two multi-unit residential buildings. A
6-storey building is proposed for the southern portion of the property adjacent to Boars Head
Road and a 4-storey building is proposed for the northern portion of the property adjacent to
Woodward Avenue. Site development would include associated parking, amenity space,
access, and landscaping. Approval of the application is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Common Council adopt the attached by-law amendment entitled “By-law No. C.P. 111-212, A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John.”
231
Don-More Survey 421 Woodward Avenue November 13, 2025
Page 2 of 6
2.That Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the Community
Planning Act, impose the following conditions on the parcel of land having an area of
approximately 16,354 square metres, located at 421 Woodward Avenue, also identified
as PID 55002109:
a.That the owner/developer will install a crosswalk with side-mounted RA-4 signs
and zebra markings to connect the sidewalk on the south side of Boars Head
Road to the walkway through the development.
b.The building on the northern half of the property be limited to 4-storey
c.That the owner/developer install a fire hydrant at the entrance of the site as per
the specifications of the Fire Safety Department
DECISION HISTORY
In 1986 a rezoning and subdivision application was submitted to create a cul-de-sac and 13 lots
for semi-detached duplexes. Despite positive staff and PAC recommendation, the application
was denied due to neighborhood concerns regarding increased density and property values.
The application was submitted again in 1988 and was approved at PAC with attached section
39 conditions requiring joint development with adjacent landowners for the access instead of
being able to access the property from Woodward or Boards Head. The applicant withdrew his
application before it went to Common Council citing that it was not feasible to do a joint
development with adjacent landowner who showed in interest in developing his lots.
In 2025, an application was submitted to rezone the property to RM to facilitate the development
of two six-storey apartment buildings. The rezoning application was defeated by Common
Council in May 2025 and a new application is being assessed for the site.
ANALYSIS
Proposal
The applicant is proposing to rezone 421 Woodward Avenue from Low-Rise Residential (RL) to
Mid-Rise Residential (RM) to facilitate the development of 2 multi-unit buildings containing
approximately 167 dwelling units. The building on the southern half of the property would be six-
storeys, with the building on the northern half of the property being proposed as four-storeys.
The development will be accessed from Boars Head Road with associated parking,
landscaping, and amenity space forming the broader site development.
This application is a revision of the previous rezoning application that was defeated by Common
Council in May 2025. The revised application addresses the concerns associated with the
proposed building height of the northern structure.
Site and Neighbourhood
The subject site is located in the Milledgeville area of Saint John with frontage along Boars
Head Road and Woodward Avenue. The immediate residential neighbourhood is a mix of
232
Don-More Survey 421 Woodward Avenue November 13, 2025
Page 3 of 6
residential zonings and housing typologies, such as the high-rise Brentwood Towers to single
family and semi-detached units, along with complimentary community zonings for churches,
schools, and senior housing facilities.
The subject site is accessible by a variety of transportation options. The area is served by Saint
John Transit’s on-demand flex system. Pedestrian movement is facilitated by sidewalks on the
south side of Boars Head Road, which connects to the wider pedestrian network.
Municipal Plan and Rezoning
Municipal Plan
As part of the application review, staff assessed the proposal’s alignment with the Municipal
Plan (Attachment 2). The site is located within the Stable Residential designation, an area
identified in Plan SJ as generally built out, but with potential for additional development that
aligns with existing scale and context.
Policy LU-86:
Within the Stable Residential designation, housing of almost every form and density may
be found and both the existing neighbourhood context and compatibility with the
Municipal Plan goals will determine suitability of new proposals. Other compatible uses
that may be found in the Stable Residential designation include convenience stores,
home occupations, parks, and community facilities which are permitted in the
designation without amendment to the Municipal Plan.
While a density target is not provided for Stable Residential areas, housing of almost every form
and density may be found. The rezoning application for two mid-rise buildings is appropriate for
the character of the neighbourhood and compliments the existing range of housing typologies.
Policy LU-87:
Intend that the areas designated Stable Residential will evolve over time from a land use
and built-form perspective but that new and redeveloped land uses are to reinforce the
predominant community character and make a positive contribution to the
neighbourhood.
The proposal is consistent with this vision, as it reflects the surrounding mix of building types
and densities, including nearby higher-density zoning. It supports additional housing options in a
suburban setting without altering the built form. This new design also proposes 4 storeys in the
northern half of the property to create a better step-down to the adjacent low-rise buildings
along Woodward. With the setback and landscaping required by the zoning bylaw, this would
help transition from low-rise to mid-rise building typologies and address neighbour concerns
Zoning
The property is currently zoned Low-Rise Residential (RL). The immediate area includes a mix
of Low-Rise Residential (RL), Mid-Rise Residential (RM), and nearby High-Rise Residential
233
Don-More Survey 421 Woodward Avenue November 13, 2025
Page 4 of 6
(RH) zoning. In this context, the proposed rezoning of the site to RM is compatible with the
existing development pattern. The RM designation has already been established along Boars
Head and within the adjacent, recently developed community of Cambridge Heights.
The site is also well-situated in relation to schools and general commercial nodes, further
supporting the appropriateness of the RM zoning. The proposed development complies with the
City’s Zoning By-law standards for the RM zone, including adequate on-site parking, appropriate
landscaping, and suitable site access. The reduced height of the northern building provides a
smoother transition between low-rise and mid-rise built forms. While the reduction in storeys has
resulted in a larger building footprint and a smaller setback from adjacent properties, the
proposal continues to meet the RM zone setback requirements.
Statements of Public Interest (SPIs)
The proposed development aligns with the Provincial SPI’s. It specifically aligns with SP.1-SP.9
which are concerned with settlement patterns by developing within the City’s serviceable
boundary and is located on a site served by an existing access, transit routes, infrastructure,
and City services. The proposed Municipal Plan Amendment and associated development
represents an extension of an existing neighbourhood and an appropriate increase from low-rise
to mid-rise development.
Service Area Review
Internal Service Areas Feedback
Infrastructure No concerns
Building No concerns
Emergency Management Emergency Management requires the installation of
an addition hydrant to support emergency response
in the area. The hydrant shall be installed near the
site entrance on Boars Head Road.
A Section 59 Condition is required.
Parks No concerns
Traffic A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) was prepared and
submitted by the applicant as part of the Rezoning
application. The TIS was reviewed by the City’s
Traffic Engineer who identified that a crosswalk is
required for the development. The crosswalk will
connect the subject site to the sidewalks located on
the south side of Boars Head Road.
A Section 59 Condition is required.
While the TIS identified possible upgrades to the
intersection further east (Millidge and University
avenue), City Engineers has identified that
234
Don-More Survey 421 Woodward Avenue November 13, 2025
Page 5 of 6
alternative upgrades for the area are scheduled as
part of the capital plan rendering the
recommendations regarding possible upgrades
obsolete.
Transit No concerns
Parking Commission No concerns
Operations (Public Works) No concerns
External Agencies
Department of Local Government and
Environment – WAWA
There is potential for unmapped wetland in the
area, however there should be enough developable
space and room to avoid the potential wetland. The
applicant should reach out to confirm if a WAWA
permit is required, as the potential wetland (if
present) may not be regulated.
Section 59 Conditions
Staff are proposing Section 59 conditions for a sidewalk to address pedestrian connection from
the site to the wider active transportation network which will be the responsibility of the
developer/owner. Staff are also proposing the instillation of a fire hydrant at the entrance of the
site per our Fire and Safety Departments comments.
Staff are recommending a section 59 condition limiting the height of the northern building to 4-
storeys as this is a critical change between the former application and current one. This will help
address concerns regarding the transition from adjacent low-rise to mid-rise development.
Conclusion
The proposed rezoning to allow for the development of two multi-unit residential buildings,
aligns with the policies established in the City’s Municipal Plan and conforms to the City’s
Zoning By-law. Staff are recommending approval of the rezoning subject to Section 59
Conditions associated with the installation of a crosswalk, fire hydrant, and building height.
ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No alternatives were considered.
ENGAGEMENT
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 October 25, 2025. As of the date of this
report, 35 letters were received including 1 in support and 34 in opposition to the application.
The public hearing notice was posted on the City of Saint John website on November 6, 2025.
The public hearing will be held on Monday, December 1, 2025 at 6:30PM.
235
Don-More Survey 421 Woodward Avenue November 13, 2025
Page 6 of 6
The applicant undertook engagement with the surrounding properties by going door-to-door to
speak to neighbours as well as engaging in one-on-one meetings at their office. A letter was
sent to neighbours as well. They also provided a contact number for further communications.
APPROVALS AND CONTACT
Manager Director Commissioner
Jennifer Kirchner RPP, MCIP Pankaj Nalavde RPP, MCIP Amy Poffenroth P.Eng., MBA
Contact: Yeva Mattson
Telephone: (506) 721-8453
Email: yeva.mattson@saintjohn.ca
Application: 25-0028
APPENDIX
Map 1: Aerial Photography
Map 2: Future Land Use
Map 3: Zoning
Attachment 1: Site Photography
Attachment 2: Policy Review
Submission 1: Site Plan and Renderings
236
Marlin
D
r
.
Boars He
a
d
R
d
.
Carter Ct.
WoodwardAv.CharlieGrace Terr.Cambridge Dr.BrentwoodCr.Aerial Context - 421 Woodward Avenue
Subject Property 0 90 18045 m
237
Black St.BoarsHead Rd.
Carter
Ct.
WoodwardAv.CambridgeDr.Marlin
D
r
.CharlieGrace Terr.BrentwoodCr.Subject Property
Future Land Use
Major Community Facility
Stable Residential
0 100 20050 m
Municipal Plan - 421 Woodward Avenue
238
CFN
CFN
CFN
RH
RM
RM
RM
CBP
CFM
RM
RM
RM
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL Black St.BoarsHead Rd.
Carter
Ct.
WoodwardAv.CambridgeDr.Marlin
D
r
.CharlieGrace Terr.BrentwoodCr.Subject Property
Zoning
High-Rise Residential (RH)
Mid-Rise Residential (RM)
Low-Rise Residential (RL)
Business Park Commercial (CBP)
Major Community Facility (CFM)
Neighbourhood Community
Facility (CFN)
0 100 20050 m
Zoning - 421 Woodward Avenue
239
Black St.BoarsHead Rd.
Carter
Ct.
WoodwardAv.CambridgeDr.Marlin
D
r
.CharlieGrace Terr.BrentwoodCr.Proposed Zoning
Zoning
High-Rise Residential (RH)
Mid-Rise Residential (RM)
Low-Rise Residential (RL)
Business Park Commercial (CBP)
Major Community Facility (CFM)
Neighbourhood Community
Facility (CFN)
0 100 20050 m
Zoning - 421 Woodward Avenue
Mid-Rise
Residential
(RM)
240
ATTACHMENT 1: SITE PHOTOGRAPHY
Subject Site frontage (from Boars Head) where access would be located
Subject Site frontage (from Boars Head)
241
Subject Site Frontage (from Woodward) – would remain unchanged (no access)
242
Attachment 2: Municipal Plan Policy Review 421 Woodward Avenue
Municipal Plan Policy 421 Woodward Avenue Assessment
Policy LU-86
Within the Stable Residential designation, housing of almost every form and
density may be found and both the existing neighbourhood context and
compatibility with the Municipal Plan goals will determine suitability of new
proposals. Other compatible uses that may be found in the Stable Residential
designation include convenience stores, home occupations, parks, and
community facilities which are permitted in the designation without
amendment to the Municipal Plan.
The proposed rezoning facilitates the integration of new housing into the
existing neighbourhood. The rezoning will provide increased density and
intensification into an established neighbourhood as identified in the
Municipal Plan.
The proposed site and building design addresses integration concerns
associated with the building height. The southern building, adjacent to Boars
Head Road, would be developed as a 6-storey building, as permitted in the
Medium-Density Residential zone. The northern building, adjacent to
Woodward Avenue, is proposed as a 4-storey building. The reduction in
height will help integrate the site development into the existing
neighbourhood context, and address concerns associated with the height and
massing of the development.
Policy LU-87
Intend that the areas designated Stable Residential will evolve over time from
a land use and built-form perspective but that new and redeveloped land
uses are to reinforce the predominant community character and make a
positive contribution to the neighbourhood.
This development would be consistent with the existing building typologies in
the neighbourhood. While many nearby buildings are low-rise structures of 3-
storeys or fewer, there is also a diverse mix of 4-storey multi-unit buildings
across various sites, as well as the 12-storey Brentwood Towers. The
proposed 4-storey building at the rear of the site, located next to low-rise
properties, provides a gradual transition in height and helps create an
appropriate step-down to neighbouring buildings while positively contributing
to housing options in the neighbourhood.
Policy LU-88
Ensure that significant new development and redevelopment in areas
designated Stable Residential shall generally be permitted only through a
rezoning process where compliance is demonstrated with the following
requirements:
a. The proposed land use is desirable and contributes positively to the
neighbourhood;
b. The proposal is compatible with surrounding land uses;
c. The development is in a location where all necessary water and
wastewater services, parks and recreation services, schools, public
a. The proposed land use would increase density and add housing diversity
to an existing neighbourhood. By limiting the rear building to 4-storeys it
helps create integrate the mid-rise built form while adding housing
options and density to the neighbourhood.
b. The proposed rezoning aligns with the variety of established residential
uses in the wider area. The reduction to 4-storeys in eth rear helps create
an appropriate transition to the low-rise building typologies while
conforming to wider development patterns.
243
transit and other community facilities and protective services can
readily and adequately be provided;
d. Site design features that address such matters as safe access, buffering
and landscaping, site grading and stormwater management are
incorporated;
e. A high quality exterior building design is provided that is consistent
with the Urban Design Principles in the Municipal Plan.
c. The property is serviced by existing infrastructure and is in a broader area
serviced by local schools, public transit and other services.
d. Section 59 Conditions will include the installation of a crosswalk and
hydrant, which will enhance infrastructure in the area. A storm water
management plan is also required.
e. The development will be of similar design to multi-unit buildings across
the city. reducing the height of the rear building to four storeys, the
proposal provides an appropriate transition to adjacent low-rise
properties. Together with the six-storey building positioned closer to
Boar’s Head Road, the development represents a suitable mid-rise form
that aligns with the height, scale, and massing of nearby buildings.
Policy I-2
In considering amendments to the Zoning Bylaw or the imposition of terms
and conditions, in addition to all other criteria set out in the various policies
of the Municipal Plan, have regard for the following:
a. The proposal is 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 I-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:
a. This proposal aligns with residential land use policies as established in the
City’s Municipal Plan and conforms to all relevant zoning standards.
b. The proposal is located on an existing lot in an established residential
neighbourhood. The development will utilize existing infrastructure and
will not have a negative impact on service provision. A condition
requiring a crosswalk and new hydrant will also contribute to the service
provision of the neighbourhood.
c. The zone standards will ensure appropriate height, setbacks, parking and
landscaping buffers, including landscaping between mid-rise
developments and low-rise developments. The applicant has proposed 4
storeys in the section of property along Woodward which would be
enforced with a section 59 condition to help create an appropriate
transition with the adjacent low-rise sites. Landscaping, specifically the
mature trees, will be retained to ensure visual buffering between the
development and adjacent properties.
244
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;
d. The proposed site has no large elevation changes and only minor
potential for an unmapped wetland that likely would not conflict with the
proposed scale of development.
Statements of Public Interest
SPI Assessment
Settlement Patterns
SP.1 Promote efficient development and land use patterns that are in the
best interests of the Province, local governments and residents of the
Province in the long-term.
The proposed development is within the City’s serviceable boundary (Primary
Development Area (PDA) – as defined in the City’s Municipal Plan) and is
located on a site served by an existing access, transit routes, infrastructure,
and City services. The proposed Municipal Plan Amendment and associated
development represents an extension of an existing neighbourhood and an
appropriate increase from low-rise to mid-rise development.
Given these considerations it conforms to the criteria as it is an expansion of
an existing land use which makes use of the City’s existing infrastructure and
services.
SP.2 Promote a range of housing options such as size, type, density and
design throughout communities.
This development represents an opportunity to increase housing options in an
existing neighbourhood.
SP.3 Support the provision of a range of affordable housing options
throughout communities.
This policy is not applicable.
SP.4 Avoid development and land use patterns that may cause
environmental or health and safety issues.
The proposed development is outside of any regulated wetland and
watercourse buffer.
245
SP.5 With respect to development that occurs in a community with existing
or planned public infrastructure and services, promote development in
locations where the public infrastructure and services are or are planned to
be available.
The proposed development is within the City’s serviceable boundary (Primary
Development Area (PDA) – as defined in the City’s Municipal Plan) and is
located on an existing roadway that is serviced by transit routes,
infrastructure, and City services.
SP.6 With respect to development that occurs in a community with no
existing or planned public infrastructure or services, promote development
in locations with previously constructed and actively maintained roads.
This policy is not applicable.
SP.7 Promote a range of transportation options, including public, regional
and active transportation.
The development is located on an existing roadway (Boars Head Road), which
has been developed with sidewalks on the southside of the road. The location
is also served by one of the City’s flex transit lines, which connects with key
locations across the City.
SP.8 Promote the use of green infrastructure, including climate resilient
lands.
The proposed development is outside of any regulated wetland and
watercourse buffer and flood zones
SP.9 Promote development in downtown areas and urban cores through
increased density, infill and brownfield development.
The expansion of the existing site can be viewed as an infill development, as it
is increasing density on a lot that already exists within an established
neighbourhood.
Agriculture
AA.1 Identify prime agricultural areas and prioritize them for agricultural
uses and other compatible uses.
Not applicable.
AA.2 Identify current and future areas for fishery use and aquaculture use
and prioritize them for those uses and other compatible uses.
Not applicable.
AA.3 Consider set-backs, including reciprocal setbacks if appropriate,
between areas with an agricultural use, fishery use or aquaculture use and
areas used for incompatible purposes.
Not applicable.
Climate Change
CC.1 Promote energy conservation and efficiency, improved air quality,
climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation through
development and land use patterns.
The subject site is located within a developed neighbourhood with access to
existing road, sanitary and water infrastructure.
CC.2 Consider how the siting and design of infrastructure can improve air
quality and energy conservation and efficiency, minimize the health and
public safety impacts of climate change and increase climate resiliency.
Not applicable.
Flood and Natural Hazard Areas
FH.1 Identify flood and natural hazard areas using provincial flood hazard
mapping, provincial erosion mapping and other resources.
Not applicable.
246
FH.2 Promote land use and development in areas other than flood and
natural hazard areas.
Not applicable.
FH.3 Promote land use and development that are not expected to increase
the impacts on safety and costs associated with flooding and natural
hazards.
Due to the location and topography of the subject site, there are no risks
associated with flooding or natural hazards.
FH.4 Promote land use and development that incorporate mitigation
measures with respect to flooding and natural hazards or that are
appropriate for areas subject to natural hazards.
Not applicable.
Natural Resources
NR.1 Identify natural resource development areas and environmentally
sensitive areas.
Not applicable.
NR.2 Prioritize natural resource development areas for natural resource
extraction and development.
Not applicable.
NR.3 Prioritize environmentally sensitive areas for conservation and
protection.
Not applicable.
NR.4 Consider set-backs, including reciprocal setbacks if appropriate,
between natural resource development areas or environmentally sensitive
areas and areas used for incompatible purposes.
Not applicable.
247
building A6 storey(86 units)Surface parking(86)m.f.e.+27.75lot-2lot-3lot-1ShedShed Top=20.27Top=20.12Top=20.09Top=20.52Top=20.67Top=20.46Top=23.42
Inv=20
.42DoghouseTop=20.58Inv=17.88Top=20.64Inv=16.67Top=20.5423.024.0 21.022.023.0 24.026.027.0 24.025.0 23.026.0 27.026.027.028.029.030.0
28.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27
.
0
23.024
.
0
24.0
25.0
26.0
23.
026.028.024.025.026.027.022.023.022.0 21.021.021.026.027.0 24.025.022.022.023.0
31
.00004991655002109550058885500592055005938550059465501157155047666550620205511171055112023551144255511443355114441551144585511839255119085551973885520666855220230externalamenity area-building Bexternalamenity area-building awalking trailwalking trailwalking trailwalking trail173'-1 1/2" [52.77m]174'-7" [53.21m]119'-2 1/4" [36.33m]142'-0" [43.28m]131'-4 1/8" [40.03m]28'-1 5/8"[8.58m]283'-9" [86.49m]65'-0" [19.81m]222'-2" [67.72m]65'-0" [19.81m]building b4 storey res.(81 units)parkade (37) +Surface parking(44)m.f.e.+26.1024
'-5
"
[7.44m
]
52'-7"
[16.03m]
Plotted: November 13, 2025 at 7:26:24am by amit mendiratta
DRG. NO.REV.DATEDEALTDRAWING TITLE:PROJECT:DISTRIBUTION OF PRINTSLEGENDNOTES2314, Wakefield Drive,Langley, British Columbia, Canada,Ph: +1.236.668.1078e: amitm.ecodesign@gmail.comDATE:ISSUEDBY:RZ / DP STAGECLIENTS:ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET/INCHES.All contents on this drawing are Copyright of EcoDesignARCHITECTURE . The Content may not be modified, copied,distributed, framed, reproduced, republished, displayed,posted, transmitted, or sold in any form or by any means, inwhole or in part, without EcoDesign ARCHITECTURE'S prior writtenpermission. Any other use of the Content is strictly prohibited.ERRORS AND OMISSIONS:While we make every effort to provide accurate drawings,ECODESIGN ARCHITECTURE shall not be responsible for anyvariances, errors and omissions from these drawings,structural drawings and specifications, or adjustmentsrequired resulting from conditions encountered at the job site.This would be the sole responsibility of the owner orcontractor.It would be the responsibility of all trades and workmen tocheck all drawings, verify dimensions before starting work atthe jobsite. IF any discrepancy is found on the drawingsprovided by EcoDesign ARCHITECTURE , please immediately adviseour office, so the necessary updates and corrections arecarried out.STAGE:PROJECT NO.CHECKEDrezoningDEVELOPMENT PERMITBUILDING PERMITISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONSEAL:1363711 BC LtdArchitecturefs2304.wadevelopment of apartmentbuildings at421, woodward avenue,saint john,new BRUNSWICKSCALE:SITE PLAN1/32"=1'-0"NSITE PLANA-1.2SITE RECONCILIATION:A. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: CIVIL: 221 woodward avenue, saint john, nb LEGAL:b. ZONING: current - r1 residentialproposed zoning - rH zoning(HIGH-rise residential) C. SITE AREA = 175,241 SF / 16,280 SQ.M. / 1.628 hAD. SETBACKS: DESCRIPTION PERMITTEDPROPOSED FRONT 9.0 M varies (min. 23.0M) YARD(SIDE) 5.5 M varies (min. 8.5M) YARD(REAR) 6.0 M varies (min. 18.9M)E. HEIGHT: PERMITTED: MAX 14.0m PROPOSED: 6 storeys - approx. 18mF. no. of units:apartments:building a: 86 unitsbuilding b: 81 units total = 167 unitsg. unit break-down (preliminary): bldg.a bldg.btotal1-beds1637 53 2-beds5839 97 3-beds 12 4 16 totalS: 8680 166h.density: PROPOSED: 167 units / 1.628 ha = 103 units/hectarei. BUILT-UP AREAS: PROPOSED: approx. FLOOR AREAs (approx): building a = 81,660 SQ.FT. (7,589 sq.m.) building b = 70,616 SQ.FT. (6,560 sq.m.) total built up = 152,276 SQ.FT. (14,147 sq.m.) TOTAL F.S.R. = 15,098 Sq.m. / 16,280 Sq.m. = 0.92j. parking stalls surface parking stalls = 135 stalls covered parking spaces =36 stallstotal parking = 171 stalls R0ACL05.01.2024AM248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
NO
Traffic, Noise & Crime
I live next to it
Make it regular apartments, not low income housing
NO
NO
266
I apologize in advance for my late comment. I was away the last few weeks so I am just getting
caught up with my mail.
My concern is that there is only one entrance shown on the application to these unit and it is on
Boars Head Rd. The address says 421 Woodward Ave. This seems very misleading to me.
I live at 395 Boars Head Rd and work at 399 Boars Head rd as the Lead Pastor. I'm not necessarily
against the idea of something there but I think this seems a little to big for the neighborhood. Plus
again, the info is misleading.
Thanks for taking the time to read my concerns.
Graham Perry
Lead Pastor
SJ1
267
- No. I simply cannot support the construction of two multi-unit, 4 to 6 story apartment buildingsin one of the most desirable neighbourhoods in Saint John. Single family, duplex, townhouse would be preferred.
- A perimeter fence on the Woodward Ave side of proposed building B would be desirabledue to the proximity of building B to existing Woodward Ave properties.- Secure garbage collection. Once complete the proposed multi-unit buildings will house in excess of 250 residents. Open access dumpsters risk attracting rodents, rats, crows andother wildlife. A secure fenced-in or underground dumpster facility would address this concern.
- Building B is adjacent to my property. According to the site plan provided, building Bfoundation will be approximately 9.5 meters from my property line at the narrowest point. The ability to shield my property from the building B proposed four story profilewill be very limited. Privacy and quality of life come to mind.- Concern for pedestrian traffic along parcel between properties at 417 & 425 Woodward Ave.
- No.
- Site preparation and rock breaking timeline. Will proposed building A & B be constructed at same time? Will rock breaking take place in stages or be completed as a single event? Will rock breaking activity be restricted to specific days of the week and hours?- What is the proposed overall height for building A and B. Will the proposed underground parking for building B increase overall height above 4 stories?
- Due to the close proximity of building B to my Woodward Ave property I do not believe there are any possible changes I could suggest that would preserve the quality of life we have enjoyed for the past 31 years. This will be a life changing event.
Daniel (Danny) Kaye
417 Woodward Ave., Saint John E2K 4N1
268
Formulaire de commentaire sur une demande d’urbanisme
Emplacement du projet : 421 avenue Woodward / NID 55002109
Description du projet : Pour permettre les bâtiments comportant des habitations
multifamiliales
Réunion du CCU : mardi, 18 novembre, 2025
Votre nom : Rodney Doucet et Danielle Downing
Votre adresse : 420 avenue Woodward
1. Soutenez-vous l’aménagement proposé?
Non, nous ne supportons pas le projet d’aménagement proposé.
2. Quelles sont vos deux ou trois principales préoccupations concernant l’aménagement
proposé?
Nous avons acheté notre maison en 1996 afin de nous situer dans un quartier résidentiel
harmonieux et homogène à basse densité dont la hauteur des bâtiments ne dépasse
typiquement pas 2 étages. Le projet proposé va complètement changer cette perspective et
nous apparaît incompatible avec le reste du quartier.
Nous avons également une grande préoccupation au niveau de la pression sur les services
publics, notamment le système d’aqueduc et égouts. Nous craignons que les systèmes de
gestion des eaux pluviales ne soient pas à la hauteur et que nous subirons les mêmes torts
qu’au moment de la construction des maisons derrière la nôtre alors que le système n’a pas
suffit.
Finalement, ce projet va assurer la disparition d’arbres matures et la perte d’un espace vert qui
sont des espaces pour la faune urbaine et une zone tampon pour la gestion de la pluie.
3. Comment l’aménagement proposé vous affecte-t-il directement?
Nous sommes d’avis que ce projet aura des effets néfastes au niveau de la circulation dans le
quartier qui est déjà très dense, notamment en raison des deux écoles qui sont situées pas très
loin.
Nous craignons aussi une augmentation indésirable du niveau de bruit lié au trafic ainsi qu’à la
construction. Les machines qui ont cassé la pierre ont eu un impact pervers sur notre santé
mentale lors de l’aménagement du projet près du manoir Kennebec au point où nous avons dû
nous absenter très souvent.
Nous craignons aussi que ce projet ait un impact négatif sur la valeur de notre maison.
Nous sommes d’avis que notre qualité de vie sera affectée de façon négative.
269
4. Quelles sont vos recommandations pour améliorer la proposition?
Nous sommes d’avis que ce genre de projet devrait être réalisé sur des terrains qui sont en
périphérie des quartiers résidentielles déjà établis (comme c’est le cas à Dieppe, par exemple).
L’exemple du projet réalisé en arrière du 471 ave Millidgeville serait un bon exemple. La ville de
Saint-Jean pourrait potentiellement échanger un terrain avec le promoteur.
5. Soutiendriez-vous l’aménagement tel que proposé?
Non, nous ne supportons pas le projet d’aménagement proposé.
6. Soutiendriez-vous l’aménagement avec quelques modifications?
Non. Selon nous, l’emplacement du projet est le problème principal de ce projet et devrait être
envisagé dans une région qui n’est pas un quartier résidentiel. Nous sommes convaincus que
la presque totalité des Saint-Jeannois qui habitent dans ce type de quartier aura la même
opinion.
270
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Dibyendu Debnath
Address: 28 Birchdale Crescent, Saint John, NB, E2K 4T4
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
a) Impact on Property Values and Neighborhood Appeal
Allowing large-scale affordable housing in one of the city’s most desirable areas feels, for lack of
a better word, detrimental to the community. We are concerned that such developments could
significantly reduce property values and make the neighborhood less attractive to potential
buyers. This could lead to declining home prices and, ultimately, reduced tax revenue for the
city.
b) Socio-Economic and Safety Concerns
We are also worried about how rezoning for mass affordable housing might alter the socio-
economic fabric of the neighborhood. There is concern that this could attract families struggling
with issues such as crime or substance abuse, which could negatively impact the safety and
character of the area.
Overall, introducing large-scale affordable housing in this neighborhood may prompt many residents,
including us, to relocate. Saint John is a large city with ample land and a relatively small population—
there are many other suitable locations for such developments. We strongly oppose this proposal and
will not support elected officials who advocate for it.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
As a resident living near the proposed site, I am deeply concerned about the direct impact this project
will have on our family and neighbors.
a. Decline in Property Value
Rezoning this area for large-scale affordable housing will inevitably reduce property values in
271
Page 2 of 2
the future. Many of us have invested our life savings into our homes, and this decision threatens
that investment.
b. Increased Traffic and Safety Risks
The intersection of Woodward Avenue and Board Head Road is already one of the busiest in the
area, with two schools nearby and narrow single-lane roads. Adding a high-density development
will significantly increase traffic congestion and create safety hazards for children and
pedestrians.
This proposal does not just affect property—it affects quality of life, safety, and the long-term stability of
our neighborhood. We urge the council to reconsider and explore alternative locations that do not
compromise existing communities.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
I do not support development of multi-unit and/ or affordable housing in our neighbourhood.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
No. I do not support multi-storied and/ or affordable housing developments in our neighborhood.
272
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Monday, December 1, 2025
PAC Meeting:
Public Hearing:
Your Name:
Your Address:
1.Do you support the proposed development?
2.What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
3.How does the proposed development directly impact you?
4.What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
5.Would you support the development as proposed?
6.Would you support the development with some changes?
Dmitry
361 Woodward Ave
I cannot support the proposed development unless the red line we identified is fully respected. Every meter beyond that line would mean cutting trees and increasing exposure to our backyards. We need assurance that this boundary will be maintained, ideally marked on site with a bright colored rope, and remain uncrossed throughout the entire construction project.
The possibility of construction crossing the red line, which would mean unnecessary tree cutting and loss of natural privacy for our backyards.Increased exposure and noise if that buffer zone of trees is reduced.The need for clear physical boundaries and ongoing monitoring to ensure the construction stays within the approved limits.
The proposed development directly impacts us by reducing the natural tree buffer that currently provides privacy, shade, and noise protection for our backyard. If construction crosses the red line, it would result in tree removal and greater visibility into our property, significantly affecting our living environment and sense of privacy.
I recommend that the red line boundary be formally recognized and physically marked on site with a bright colored rope or stakes before construction begins. This boundary should remain strictly uncrossed throughout the project to protect existing trees and maintain privacy for nearby homes. In addition, regular site checks should be carried out to ensure compliance and prevent accidental encroachment.
I would not support the development as currently proposed. The plan needs to include clear protection of the red line boundary to prevent tree removal and preserve the natural privacy buffer for nearby homes. Without that assurance, the project would have a negative impact on our properties and quality of life.
Yes, I would support the development if changes are made to fully protect the red line boundary. This includes keeping all construction activity within the approved limits, preserving the existing trees, and maintaining a clear physical marker such as a bright colored rope to ensure the buffer zone remains untouched throughout the project.
273
274
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Farah Naz Address: 71, Rivershore Drive
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
1. The neighborhood will be too much crowded
2. During school and office time there will be high traffic
3. High rising/Multi storied buildings are not suitable for a residential area. We have one but it was there before we have the town houses, garden houses, senior homes and
other single family owned houses.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
a. Increased Traffic
b. More people within shortest time in one place
c. It will hamper privacy and there will be more open space
d. It will disrupt the traditional character of neighborhood
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
I do not agree with the proposed proposal. If they want to build small town houses/garden houses in small nos then that will keep the neighborhood as close as it
is now.
275
Page 2 of 2
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
No, not with the current proposal to build high rise buildings.
276
Page 1 of 1
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Faraz Hussain Address: 505 Boars Head rd
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
Traffic on road during school season, especially in the mornings at 8:00
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
Makes it more difficult to attend early school lectures because I take the bike to school.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
Maybe less housing, I don’t mind there being more but the amount of residents has to be low enough for the surrounding area to adjust easily in. Don’t want to be overboarded a lot.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, smaller residency
277
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Farzana Hossain Sumi Address: 432 Woodward Avenue, Saint John, NB, E2K 4N2
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
i) Severe health and mental stress from long-term construction noise The proposed underground parking means breaking through solid Millidgeville rock for months or even years. The rock-breaking equipment produces extremely high noise levels that will disturb hundreds of nearby
residents daily, including patients and seniors at Kennebec Manor and Château de Champlain. For older people and those with medical conditions, this level of constant vibration and noise can trigger stress, anxiety, and even heart complications. It is not fair to expose vulnerable people to that kind of harm for a private project.
ii) Increased danger for children and pedestrians The area around Woodward Avenue includes a school zone, where children often walk or ride their bikes. During construction, heavy trucks and frequent machinery movement will create unsafe conditions. Even after completion,
more vehicles entering and leaving a larger complex will make it harder and
riskier for children and seniors to move around safely, especially in snowy months. iii) Loss of sunlight and neighborhood livability The proposed mid-rise building would block sunlight to several nearby homes
for almost four months a year. This will change the warmth and light that
families here enjoy every day. Natural sunlight is not only important for comfort but also for health and mental well-being. The area’s quiet, family-based character will be replaced by dense construction that doesn’t belong in this part of the city.
278
Page 2 of 2
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
As a resident living close to the project, I am deeply worried about how this project will
affect our family and neighbors. The continuous noise, safety risks, and loss of sunlight
will take away the peaceful atmosphere we now have. Our community includes seniors, children, and long-term homeowners who value this calm and livable environment — this development would take that away.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Remove underground parking to avoid long-term rock excavation and vibration.
• Limit any future construction to low-rise residential buildings consistent with existing homes.
• Protect seniors and families by conducting a full health, noise, and safety impact study before any decision.
• Maintain sufficient green buffers and setbacks to preserve privacy, sunlight, and
quiet.
• Encourage the developer to engage with local residents before redesigning the proposal.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, but only if it remains small-scale and respectful of existing homes, ensuring safety, peace, and sunlight for everyone living nearby.
279
As a property owner in Saint John for the last 46 years and resident of 381 Woodward Ave for the
last 30 l am opposed to the proposal for multi - story Apartment building to be built at 421
Woodward Avenue .Sometime we as taxes payer feel that our voice mean nothing . This pass year
from February to October we had to put up with the loud noise of rock breaking . With a much larger
project we would be certainly looking at a few years of rock breaking . This two large building do not
belong in a neighborhood of mainly single family homes . Most of the wooded area would be gone .
With these 2 big building there goes our privacy and forget enjoying our backward . To me these two
large building done fit in this area .
Thanks
Felix Bourque
280
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Monday, December 1, 2025
PAC Meeting:
Public Hearing:
Your Name:
Your Address:
1.Do you support the proposed development?
2.What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
3.How does the proposed development directly impact you?
4.What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
5.Would you support the development as proposed?
6.Would you support the development with some changes?
Dmitry
361 Woodward Ave
I cannot support the proposed development unless the red line we identified is fully respected. Every meter beyond that line would mean cutting trees and increasing exposure to our backyards. We need assurance that this boundary will be maintained, ideally marked on site with a bright colored rope, and remain uncrossed throughout the entire construction project.
The possibility of construction crossing the red line, which would mean unnecessary tree cutting and loss of natural privacy for our backyards.Increased exposure and noise if that buffer zone of trees is reduced.The need for clear physical boundaries and ongoing monitoring to ensure the construction stays within the approved limits.
The proposed development directly impacts us by reducing the natural tree buffer that currently provides privacy, shade, and noise protection for our backyard. If construction crosses the red line, it would result in tree removal and greater visibility into our property, significantly affecting our living environment and sense of privacy.
I recommend that the red line boundary be formally recognized and physically marked on site with a bright colored rope or stakes before construction begins. This boundary should remain strictly uncrossed throughout the project to protect existing trees and maintain privacy for nearby homes. In addition, regular site checks should be carried out to ensure compliance and prevent accidental encroachment.
I would not support the development as currently proposed. The plan needs to include clear protection of the red line boundary to prevent tree removal and preserve the natural privacy buffer for nearby homes. Without that assurance, the project would have a negative impact on our properties and quality of life.
Yes, I would support the development if changes are made to fully protect the red line boundary. This includes keeping all construction activity within the approved limits, preserving the existing trees, and maintaining a clear physical marker such as a bright colored rope to ensure the buffer zone remains untouched throughout the project.
281
All Comment Forms can be submitted to the City of Saint John through the One Stop
Development Shop. Comment Forms should be submitted no later than Tuesday,
November 11, 2025, to be included in the Staff Report and PAC Agenda Package.
The Comment Forms can be submitted through the following methods:
•By email to OneStop@saintjohn.ca
•By mail:
Planning Advisory Committee
c/o City of Saint John, Growth & Community Services,
P.O. Box 1971,
Saint John, NB,
E2L 4L1
•Hand delivery to the One Stop Development Shop located on the ground floor of
City Hall, 15 Market Square in Saint John.
All Comment Forms and Written Submissions will be made publicly available and will form
part of all Agenda packages associated with the Planning Application.
As of August 2025, our PAC process has changed. Written submissions will continue to
be accepted for all applications being brought before PAC.
Public Hearings will be held at PAC for the following application types:
•Planning Advisory Committee Variances
•Similar or Compatible Use
•Conditional Use
•Non-Conforming Use
•Subdivision Applications that involve the dedication of Land for Public Purpose
or the creation of lots not fronting onto a public street
Public Hearings will no longer be held at PAC for the following application types:
•Amendments to the Municipal Plan
•Amendments to Secondary Plans
•Amendments to the Zoning By-Law, including Rezonings
•Amendments to Section 59 Conditions
•Subdivisions that Create a New Public Street
•Land for Public Purpose Release
If you wish to only provide comments to Common Council for the Public Hearing,
submissions can be made by the Wednesday before the scheduled meeting. Written
comments can be emailed to the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@saintjohn.ca or through
the following website:
www.saintjohn.ca/en/city-hall/council-and-committees/written-comments-zoning-law-
and-municipal-plan-amendments
282
I support the development of new housing in Millidgeville provided it is done properly.
I have two concerns regarding this project that I hope the PAC will consider and fully address when
considering this application.
Green area - the developer must be strictly precluded from using riprap and or armour stone and or
any other form of rock as a surface treatment on any part of the development site. The attached
plan shows lawns adjacent to and anround the proposal site and no other materials should be
permitted.
The recent multi unit development further down Woodward is an embarrassing eyesore that is
clearly not in keeping with the built environment in this area. The use of rock as a surface treatment
around the buildings makes It look like an industrial park site and not a residential development.
(See attached photo.)
283
This mistake cannot be repeated. While the use of rock may be permitted in the bylaws, it is still not
at all appropriate and should not be allowed. This development can be a valuable addition to the
existing neighborhood or it can become another poorly planned eyesore.
Noise - this is a solid rock site. It will likely require blasting or jackhammering to prepare the land.
The noise from the site preparation at the recent development on Woodward Ave was an ongoing
nuisance. I am requesting that this type of activity be restricted to between 8am and 6pm.
I look forward to your deliberations and decision.
J Patrick Woods
91 Brentwood Cr
284
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Laboni Haque Address: 77 Cedarwood Dr
1. Do you support the proposed development? No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
• This will impact our quality of residential life due to excess road
traffic.
• Noise pollution due to rock breaking. My older parents stay home and they hear the noise when they go out for walking.
• Walking/jogging for each and every one is more difficult and less safer beside a busy construction zone. Road size of this area can’t handle more population and vehicle on this existing road.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
Road safety for my kids and older parents due to increased vehicle.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Remove underground parking to avoid long-term rock excavation and vibration.
• Limit any future construction to low-rise residential buildings consistent with existing homes.
• Protect seniors and families by conducting a full health, noise, and safety
impact study before any decision.
• Maintain sufficient green buffers and setbacks to preserve privacy, sunlight, and quiet.
285
Page 2 of 2
• Encourage the developer to engage with local residents before redesigning the
proposal.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
• No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
• Yes, but only if it remains small-scale and respectful of existing homes, ensuring safety, peace, and sunlight for everyone living
nearby.
286
To,
The planning advisory committee City of Saint John
Subject:objection to proposed multiunit development at 421 Woodward Ave. PID55002109
Dear members of the planning advisory committee,
I am a longtime resident of the Millidgeville area and I am writing to formally express my objection to
the proposed multiunit residential development at 421 Woodward Ave.
This property represents one of the few remaining rainforest areas in our Neighbourhood a virtual
natural space that contributes to the character, beauty and environmental health of Millidgeville.
Developing this land into a multi unit complex would be a loss, not only for nearby residence, but
for the community as a whole, my concerns are as follows:
1.Neighbourhood character:
Milledgeville has traditionally been a community of single-family homes the introduction of a multi
unit development would drastically alter the existing residential character and set a concerning
precedent for future high density projects in this peaceful area.
1.Trafficandinfrastructure:
Woodward Avenue and the surrounding roads were not designated to handle the increase traffic
that a large multi unit building would bring. The area already experiences, congestion during peak
hours. Moreover, university Avenue has recently been reduced from two lanes to one in order to
accommodate cyclist, which has further limited vehicle flow, adding more residence and vehicles
will only worsen this problem and pause safety risk for pedestrians and cyclist.
3.Alternate land availability :
While I understand and support the cities goal of addressing the housing shortage, I question why
this must come at the cost of our last significant green forest in Milledgeville. There are ample
vacant lands at the end of foster Thurston Drive and other nearby areas more suitable for high
density development. Constructing thousands of unit in those open space would contribute to the
housing supply.
287
4.Environmental impact the forest at 421 Woodward Ave. is more than just trees- it provides shade
supports wildlife and improves air quality. Once destroyed. It cannot be replaced. Furure
generations deserve to enjoy this small piece of natural beauty that is still exist within our urban
setting.
Allow me to end with a short story that I hope conveys the spirit of my concern.
One day, a man decided to cut down a large old tree that stood behind his house. It blocked some
light dropped leaves on his lawn and seemed at the time to be in the way of what he wanted to
build.
After cutting it down he enjoyed the extra space for a while, but as the seasons past, he noticed the
birds no longer came the summer sun felt harsher without the shade rain washed away the soil
where where the tree once stood, and the yard began to erode.
Only then did he realize that what he had removed was not an obstacle but a living parts of his
environment- One that quietly protected and nourished everything around it.
By the time he understood it was too late to bring it back.
I hope the committee will consider the long-term consequences of this development. Once these
green space is gone it will be gone forever.
Please preserv the natural beauty and character of Milledgeville for future generations.
Thank you for attention and for considering the views of Local residence.
Sincerely
MD Mohiuddin
127 Rivershore Drive,
288
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Mobbasshra Khan Address: 61, Brentwood Crescent
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
1. Rezoning does not fit existing community character The surrounding neighborhood is made up of single-family homes and low-density residences. Approving a mid-rise apartment here would completely change the nature of the area and set a dangerous precedent for future overdevelopment.
2. Unnecessary underground parking and prolonged construction The proposed underground parking would involve blasting through hard bedrock for an extended period, creating vibration, dust, and severe disruption for nearby residents. This feature is unnecessary for a neighborhood of this scale and would cause avoidable environmental and structural impacts.
3. Cumulative strain on local infrastructure Adding dozens of new units will increase pressure on local services — garbage collection, snow removal, and road maintenance — which are already stretched. There is no demonstrated need or plan to expand city infrastructure
to support this density increase.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
As a nearby resident, I will face constant construction disturbance, increased congestion, and the loss of the quiet, small-community feel that makes this area desirable. The proposed density would permanently alter the streetscape and reduce
the quality of life for existing homeowners.
My kids walk to MNS every day, and I’m really worried about how difficult and unsafe it will be for them during and after the construction.
289
Page 2 of 2
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Keep the zoning consistent with existing low-density residential use.
• Remove underground parking and avoid heavy rock excavation.
• Require a full neighborhood impact assessment and public engagement before
reconsidering any new proposal.
• Explore smaller, more community-compatible housing models like duplexes or townhomes.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support the development in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, only if it remains a low-rise residential project compatible with the surrounding homes and infrastructure.
290
Hi there,
Please find below my response to the PAC comment form dated October 24, 2025.
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No. I oppose the rezoning of 421 Woodward Avenue. The proposal envisions one six-storey
building and one four-storey building, which far exceed the current Low-Rise Residential
zoning. In fact, this same development was previously presented to Council on June 2, 2025
and was rejected due to its excessive scale and incompatibility with the neighbourhood. I
therefore respectfully urge the Committee to deny this rezoning application.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
o Height/Zoning Conflict and Neighbourhood Character: The mass and height of
the proposed buildings are inconsistent with this family-oriented, low-density area.
Council members noted earlier that two six-storey towers are »too.large‹ and do not
complement the existing profile of Millidgeville. The rezoning would allow structures
far above the zone’s normal limit. Such over-scale development would cast long
shadows and overlook adjacent yards, eroding the quiet, modest scale of the street
and intruding on neighbours’ privacy.
o Property Value and Insurance Risk: Introducing mid-rise multi-unit buildings will
almost certainly reduce nearby home values and raise insurance costs. It is noted
that adding mid-rise buildings in a low-rise neighbourhood will directly
undermine the market value of adjacent homes. Construction vibrations, blasting
and higher density would elevate the risk of damage to surrounding properties,
prompting insurers to charge higher premiums. These combined financial impacts
would unfairly burden long-time residents.
o Construction Impacts (Noise, Traffic, Safety): The construction process itself
poses direct threats. Blasting and rock removal can send seismic waves through the
ground, risking foundation cracks or other damage. Meanwhile, the completed
development will add significant traffic on Woodward Drive and Boars Head Drive,
creating serious safety risks for pedestrians and especially school children. The
cumulative noise, dust and congestion will severely degrade quality of life and
public safety in the neighbourhood.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
As a homeowner in the immediate neighbourhood, these issues have a direct personal
impact. My property’s market value would likely decline under this rezoning, and my home
insurance premiums would rise due to the increased risk of construction-related damage.
The blasting and heavy construction could even threaten my house’s foundation; without
developer-funded inspections and insurance. In short, this development would undermine
my personal investment and jeopardize my family’s safety and comfort.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
291
o Limit Height to Three Storeys: Scale the project down to a maximum of three
storeys. This would align with the existing low-rise context and address Council’s
concerns. (Even Councilors suggested earlier that four storeys would be the
absolute maximum.)
o Maintain Privacy: Require a generous setback with dense tree planting along the
property boundary. A thick buffer of evergreen trees or shrubs would screen the
buildings, reduce noise transfer, and preserve neighbours’ privacy.
o Developer-Funded Structural Inspections: Mandate that the developer pay for
professional home inspections on all adjacent properties both before and after
construction. Engineering best practices recommend pre- and post evaluations
whenever rock breaking and foundation works are involved. This ensures any
damage is documented and repaired at the developer’s expense.
o Insurance/Bond: Require the developer to obtain enough third party liability
insurance coverage or submit a performance bond with City's custody to cover any
structural or any other damage. Residents should not be exposed to the costs of any
damages or geological surprises.
o Restricted Construction Hours: Limit construction to regular weekday hours (e.g.
8:00 am–5:00 pm, Monday–Friday) and ban work on weekends. This would minimize
disruption to residents including senior citizens, especially those recovering from
medical issues or who need restful, quiet evenings.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No. In its current form (two mid-rise apartment buildings of 6 and 4 storeys), the project is
fundamentally incompatible with our zoning and community. The same proposal was
already rejected by Council for its impacts. I cannot support a plan that so clearly fails to
respect our residential context and safety concerns.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Only if it were substantially revised. A reduced-height proposal (ideally no more than three
storeys) coupled with strict mitigations could potentially be acceptable. If the rezoning were
conditioned on the enhancements above (buffers, limited hours, developer-funded
protections), I would be willing to reconsider my position. The developer needs to come up
with the detailed plan, risk mitigation strategy and address all the valid concerns of the
residents.
--
Thank you.
Regards,
Mohd Moinuddin Moin, CPA, FCCA
382 Boars Head Road, Saint John E2K 5C2
292
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Mostaq Hussain Address: 59 Rivershore Drive, Saint John, NB E2K 4T5
1. Do you support the proposed development?
Absolutely NO
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
Excessive traffic, noise, pollution, risk for children to maintain their as usual childhood
(as they used to understand the lively wood of the neighborhood.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
Noise would create an adverse impact on our mental and physical health, mostly where a great number of elderly peoples live. Increased amount of traffic would increase the
risk for children (used) to walk and play around the neighborhood
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
Do single house/detached properties like the way the area’s properties are permitted
now
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
Absolutely no.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
As mentioned before, city can approve single/detached houses like our ones are built.
Why it is so important that multi-storied building (mega project) has to be built in a neighborhood where people purchased properties (at a higher price for peaceful and
quite living breaking). If I’d knew that such a multi-storied would be built, I would not
purchase my property at such a high price and pay higher property tax than many other
neighborhoods
293
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Mostaq Hussain Address: 59 Rivershore Drive, Saint John, NB E2K 4T5
1. Do you support the proposed development?
Absolutely NO
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
Excessive traffic, noise, pollution, risk for children to maintain their as usual childhood
(as they used to understand the lively wood of the neighborhood.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
Noise would create an adverse impact on our mental and physical health, mostly where a great number of elderly peoples live. Increased amount of traffic would increase the
risk for children (used) to walk and play around the neighborhood
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
Do single house/detached properties like the way the area’s properties are permitted
now
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
Absolutely no.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
As mentioned before, city can approve single/detached houses like our ones are built.
Why it is so important that multi-storied building (mega project) has to be built in a neighborhood where people purchased properties (at a higher price for peaceful and
quite living breaking). If I’d knew that such a multi-storied would be built, I would not
purchase my property at such a high price and pay higher property tax than many other
neighborhoods
294
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: N M Hoffart
Address: 425 Woodward Avenue, Saint John, NB, E2K 4N2
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
My main concern is the amount of people being added to the block without making plans to
accommodate them. The previous application had no plans from the city to include crosswalks on
either the Woodward or Boars Head side of the street.
There was no walkways or passageways to Samuel de Champlain or Millidgeville North School from
the property, with the assumption that both kids and adults will cross the street to the sidewalk on
the other side of each road, then walk the long way around to school. When Woodward Avenue was
blocked off in August, the path that was created around the construction barricades within an hour
and a half suggests they're more likely to create their own shortcut. And the lineups on Boars Head
& angry drivers on Woodward having to turn around really demonstrated the traffic impact that
adding hundreds of people to the block would have.
Daycares in the area are full. The schools are already bringing in portables. The only playgrounds
belong to the schools and are sad and outdated. There is no park space and this development is
removing some of the wild green space. We have absolutely no activity space for older kids in the
neighbourhood and kids with nothing to do tend to find things; there's no recreational space, really.
Hundreds of people being added to the middle of the block with no plans and no infrastructure in
place isn't progress, it's creating future problems for the city and residents.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
We're surrounded on two sides by the property in question
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Limit construction to low-rise residential buildings consistent with existing homes
295
• Protect residents by conducting a full health, noise, and safety impact study before any decision
• Maintain sufficient green buffers and setbacks to preserve privacy, sunlight, and quiet
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, but only if it remains small-scale and respectful of existing homes, ensuring safety, peace,
and sunlight for everyone living nearby. I'm not opposed to development. I'm not opposed to
mixed-residential living. I'm opposed to adding hundreds of people to a small area with absolutely
no infrastructure or plans in place for those people to live there beyond the walls of their condo.
296
Page 1 of 1
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Naila Al Mahmuda
Address: 30 McIntosh Street, Saint John, NB E2K 2K9
1. Do you support the proposed development?
Supportive with some adjustments.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
Large-scale developments activities can alter the social and architectural character of
the community.
Traffic congestion: Higher population density often brings more vehicles, resulting in
longer commute times, and greater pollution.
Loss of green space: Redevelopment may reduce open areas, and tree cover,
impacting local ecosystems and residents’ well-being.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
The prolonged rock excavation for underground parking and increased construction
activity would alter the quiet, residential character of our community, which is one of the
main reasons I chose to live here.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
Following measure can minimize the adverse effects of the proposed development,
- A pilot study through survey model can be conducted earlier that reflects
community concerns.
- Include implementation of some protective measures of noise etc. for the nearby
buildings, such as at Kennebec Manor and Château de Champlain, where the
residents are mostly seniors.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, adjustments are required.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, I support the development in a small scale, if specific measures are implemented to
reduce its adverse impact on local ecosystem and residents.
297
298
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Neetu Payal Address: 10 Brentwood Crescent, Saint John, NB, E2K 4R4
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No. I cannot support the rezoning or the development as it has been presented.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
My first concern is the level of noise that will be generated during construction. The plan includes underground parking, which requires breaking through Millidgeville’s rock base. Anyone living in the area knows how solid that rock is. This is not a few weeks of regular construction noise — it could mean months or even years of drilling and blasting. Seniors, hospital patients, and families living nearby would be exposed to
noise levels that can cause not only discomfort but also stress and serious health impacts. Secondly, the project poses real safety risks. Woodward Avenue is used by children walking to school and by seniors who move through the area on foot. The increased construction traffic — and later the additional resident vehicles — would create ongoing risk in a zone that should remain calm and safe for pedestrians. Lastly,
the height and scale of the building would block natural sunlight from several properties during the winter months. This neighborhood is defined by small-scale, low-rise homes, and the access to sunlight is part of why people enjoy living here. A structure of this size changes the entire feel of the area and reduces livability for existing residents.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
My home is close to the site, and the project would affect the day-to-day environment that my family and neighbors currently enjoy. Reduced sunlight, an increase in traffic, and disruptive construction noise would significantly diminish the peace and comfort we have today. This is not just about inconvenience — it affects the quality of life in our own homes.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
I believe the development must be redesigned to better match the neighborhood. Eliminating underground parking would remove the need for extensive rock excavation and prevent long-term noise. A smaller, low-rise building that fits the character of
299
Page 2 of 2
surrounding homes would protect sunlight and privacy. Before any approval, an independent study on environmental, health, and traffic impacts should be completed,
and nearby residents should be included in meaningful consultation.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No. The proposal in its current form is not suitable for this location.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, I am open to supporting a revised plan — but only if it remains modest in scale and
protects the quiet, safe, and sunny environment that residents currently value.
300
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
i) Severe health and mental stress from long-term construction noise
The proposed underground parking means breaking through solid Millidgeville rock for months or
even years. The rock-breaking equipment produces extremely high noise levels that will disturb
hundreds of nearby residents daily, including patients and seniors at Kennebec
Manor and Château de Champlain.
For older people and those with medical conditions, this level of constant vibration and noise can
trigger stress, anxiety, and even heart complications. It is not fair to expose vulnerable people to
that kind of harm for a private project.
ii) Increased danger for children and pedestrians
The area around Woodward Avenue includes a school zone, where children often walk or ride their
bikes. During construction, heavy trucks and frequent machinery movement will create unsafe
conditions. Even after completion, more vehicles entering and leaving a larger complex will make it
harder and riskier for children and seniors to move around safely, especially in snowy months.
iii) Loss of sunlight and neighborhood livability
The proposed mid-rise building would block sunlight to several nearby homes for almost four
months a year. This will change the warmth and light that families here enjoy every day. Natural
sunlight is not only important for comfort but also for health and mental well-being. The area’s
quiet, family-based character will be replaced by dense construction that doesn’t belong in this
part of the city.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
As a resident living close to the project, I am deeply worried about how this project will affect our
family and neighbors. The continuous noise, safety risks, and loss of sunlight will take away the
peaceful atmosphere we now have. Our community includes seniors, children, and long-term
homeowners who value this calm and livable environment — this development would take that
away.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
· Remove underground parking to avoid long-term rock excavation and vibration.
· Limit any future construction to low-rise residential buildings consistent with existing homes.
· Protect seniors and families by conducting a full health, noise, and safety impact study before
any decision.
· Maintain sufficient green buffers and setbacks to preserve privacy, sunlight, and quiet.
· Mandate that the developer pay for professional home inspections on all adjacent properties both
before and after construction. Engineering best practices recommend pre- and post evaluations
301
whenever rock breaking and foundation works are involved. This ensures any damage is
documented and repaired at the developer’s expense.
· Limit construction to regular weekday hours (e.g. 8:00 am–5:00 pm, Monday–Friday) and ban work
on weekends. This would minimize disruption to residents including senior citizens, especially
those recovering from medical issues or who need restful, quiet evenings.
· Encourage the developer to engage with local residents before redesigning the proposal.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, but only if it remains small-scale and respectful of existing homes, ensuring safety, peace,
and sunlight for everyone living nearby.
--
PHAM,THUY NGOC & THIEN ANH LE
380 BOARS HEAD RD
SAINT JOHN, NB
E2K 5C2
302
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Nishant Patidar Address: 80 Brentwood Crescent
1. Do you support the proposed development? No
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development? The proposed density is not suitable for this quiet residential neighborhood, which currently consists mainly of single-family homes.
Increased traffic and parking congestion could create safety issues for children
and elderly residents. Local infrastructure and services (roads, water, waste, and community facilities) are not equipped to handle a significant increase in population.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you? I live very close to the proposed site, and this project would increase traffic, noise,
and parking pressure on nearby streets. It would also affect the overall character
and peaceful environment of our neighborhood, which is home to many families with young children and seniors. 4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
Consider a smaller-scale development, such as duplexes or townhomes, that better matches the existing character of the area. Include additional green space, parking, and pedestrian safety measures.
Conduct a detailed infrastructure and traffic impact study before approval. 5. Would you support the development as proposed? No Not in this current design proposal
303
Page 2 of 2
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Not in its current form. This neighborhood lacks the infrastructure to support such
a high-density project, and there is already a surplus of rental housing in the area due to reduced demand. A smaller, more community-oriented development would be more appropriate.
304
Dear sir/madam!
I would like to bring my own opinion about this development. I'm definitely don't support it.
Because I guess this project will destroy spirit of Millidgeville and will make neighbours unhappy.
Everybody wants to see trees and sunrise. Instead it's could be just a walls.
Sincerely
Oleksandr Troian
97 Brentwood crescent
305
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: PARAMESHH REDDY Address: 10 Brentwood Crescent, Saint John, NB, E2K 4R4
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
i) Significant health impacts and stress due to prolonged construction noise. The plan includes underground parking, which will require extensive rock excavation. Millidgeville’s bedrock is solid, and breaking through it could take months or even years.
The machinery used for rock breaking generates extremely loud and continuous noise, affecting hundreds of residents daily — including vulnerable individuals such as seniors and patients at Kennebec Manor and Château de Champlain. For seniors and people with medical conditions, constant noise and vibration can contribute to stress, anxiety, sleep disruption, and even cardiovascular issues. It is unacceptable to expose residents
to this level of disruption for a private development.
ii) Increased safety risks for children and pedestrians. Woodward Avenue is a school zone where many children walk or bike. Heavy truck traffic, construction equipment, and frequent vehicle movement will significantly reduce pedestrian safety during construction. Even after completion, the increased number of vehicles entering and
exiting the property will increase the risk of accidents, particularly during winter when visibility is low and roads are slippery.
iii) Loss of sunlight and negative impact on neighborhood character. A mid-rise building will block sunlight to nearby homes for several months each year. Families rely on
sunlight for warmth, comfort, and mental health — especially during winter. The quiet,
low-density, residential atmosphere of our neighborhood would be replaced with high-density development that is out of character with the existing community.
306
Page 2 of 2
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
I live close to the site, and I am deeply concerned about the impact this development
will have on my family and our neighbors. Continuous construction noise, increased
traffic risks, and loss of sunlight will disrupt the peaceful environment that residents currently enjoy. Many families here — including seniors and long-term homeowners — chose this neighborhood specifically for its calm and livable surroundings. This proposal threatens those qualities..
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Eliminate underground parking to avoid prolonged rock excavation and vibration. • Restrict future development to low-rise buildings that match the scale of existing homes. • Require a comprehensive health, noise, and safety impact assessment before
approval.
• Preserve green buffers and adequate setbacks to maintain privacy, sunlight, and quiet. • Ensure the developer consults meaningfully with nearby residents before redesigning the project.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes — but only if the development remains low-scale and compatible with the existing neighborhood, ensuring safety, peace, and access to sunlight for all nearby residents.
307
308
Formulaire de commentaire sur une demande d’urbanisme
Emplacement du projet : 421 avenue Woodward / NID 55002109
Description du projet : Pour permettre les bâtiments comportant des habitations
multifamiliales
Réunion du CCU : mardi, 18 novembre, 2025
Votre nom : Rodney Doucet et Danielle Downing
Votre adresse : 420 avenue Woodward
1. Soutenez-vous l’aménagement proposé?
Non, nous ne supportons pas le projet d’aménagement proposé.
2. Quelles sont vos deux ou trois principales préoccupations concernant l’aménagement
proposé?
Nous avons acheté notre maison en 1996 afin de nous situer dans un quartier résidentiel
harmonieux et homogène à basse densité dont la hauteur des bâtiments ne dépasse
typiquement pas 2 étages. Le projet proposé va complètement changer cette perspective et
nous apparaît incompatible avec le reste du quartier.
Nous avons également une grande préoccupation au niveau de la pression sur les services
publics, notamment le système d’aqueduc et égouts. Nous craignons que les systèmes de
gestion des eaux pluviales ne soient pas à la hauteur et que nous subirons les mêmes torts
qu’au moment de la construction des maisons derrière la nôtre alors que le système n’a pas
suffit.
Finalement, ce projet va assurer la disparition d’arbres matures et la perte d’un espace vert qui
sont des espaces pour la faune urbaine et une zone tampon pour la gestion de la pluie.
3. Comment l’aménagement proposé vous affecte-t-il directement?
Nous sommes d’avis que ce projet aura des effets néfastes au niveau de la circulation dans le
quartier qui est déjà très dense, notamment en raison des deux écoles qui sont situées pas très
loin.
Nous craignons aussi une augmentation indésirable du niveau de bruit lié au trafic ainsi qu’à la
construction. Les machines qui ont cassé la pierre ont eu un impact pervers sur notre santé
mentale lors de l’aménagement du projet près du manoir Kennebec au point où nous avons dû
nous absenter très souvent.
Nous craignons aussi que ce projet ait un impact négatif sur la valeur de notre maison.
Nous sommes d’avis que notre qualité de vie sera affectée de façon négative.
309
4. Quelles sont vos recommandations pour améliorer la proposition?
Nous sommes d’avis que ce genre de projet devrait être réalisé sur des terrains qui sont en
périphérie des quartiers résidentielles déjà établis (comme c’est le cas à Dieppe, par exemple).
L’exemple du projet réalisé en arrière du 471 ave Millidgeville serait un bon exemple. La ville de
Saint-Jean pourrait potentiellement échanger un terrain avec le promoteur.
5. Soutiendriez-vous l’aménagement tel que proposé?
Non, nous ne supportons pas le projet d’aménagement proposé.
6. Soutiendriez-vous l’aménagement avec quelques modifications?
Non. Selon nous, l’emplacement du projet est le problème principal de ce projet et devrait être
envisagé dans une région qui n’est pas un quartier résidentiel. Nous sommes convaincus que
la presque totalité des Saint-Jeannois qui habitent dans ce type de quartier aura la même
opinion.
310
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Safayat Hasan
Address: 432 Woodward Avenue, Saint John, NB, E2K 4N2
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I strongly oppose the proposed rezoning and development at 421 Woodward Avenue.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
1. Severe and prolonged noise pollution from excavation and underground parking
construction
The site is located on hard Millidgeville conglomerate rock, and excavation for underground
parking would require months or even years of continuous rock breaking.
Rock breakers generate 120–130 decibels of noise—comparable to a jet engine. Harvard
Health research indicates that every 5-decibel increase in long-term noise exposure raises
heart attack and cardiovascular risk by 34%.
This is alarming given that two nursing homes flank the proposed property — Kennebec
Manor (84 m away) and Château de Champlain (159 m away). These facilities house
elderly residents, including veterans and individuals with PTSD, who are highly vulnerable to
the stress and anxiety caused by such vibrations and constant high noise levels. The daily
start of rock-breaking around 7:30 a.m. coincides with the most critical hour for heart-
related incidents (8–9 a.m.), posing a serious health hazard.
2. Traffic and pedestrian safety in a school zone
The proposed development lies near a school zone frequently used by children walking,
biking, and playing. Increased vehicle activity during construction and after occupancy will
significantly raise the risk of accidents—especially in winter when sidewalks are obstructed
by snow buildup.
Furthermore, there is a blind spot near the proposed entrance, compounding the risk for
pedestrians and cyclists. The additional traffic flow from residents and service vehicles
would make the area considerably less safe and less livable for families.
3. Complete sunlight blockage for nearby homes
Shadow-length calculations and geographic analysis show that the proposed mid-rise
structure would block direct sunlight to adjacent homes all day for approximately four
months each year.
This would substantially reduce natural light, increase heating costs, and negatively affect
311
the health and comfort of existing residents. Such year-round shadowing is inconsistent
with responsible, community-focused development and will erode property values in the
area.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
As a nearby resident at 432 Woodward Avenue, I will be directly impacted by constant construction
noise, heavy vehicle movement, and the loss of natural sunlight. These factors will seriously affect
my family’s health, peace, and overall quality of life. The proposal is out of scale with the
surrounding neighbourhood and threatens the safety and serenity of one of Saint John’s most
established residential areas.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Eliminate underground parking to prevent years of damaging rock excavation and noise
pollution.
• Limit development height to a low-rise, low-density form consistent with the current
neighbourhood character.
• Require full environmental, noise, and traffic impact assessments before rezoning
consideration.
• Preserve green buffers and natural light, ensuring setbacks that protect neighbouring
properties and residents’ well-being.
• Engage nearby residents in meaningful consultation before any revised proposal moves
forward.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support the development in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Yes, but only if it remains a low-rise residential development that preserves sunlight access,
minimizes noise and vibration, and protects the health and safety of nearby seniors and families.
312
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109 Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Laboni Haque Address: 77 Cedarwood Dr
1. Do you support the proposed development? No, I do not support this rezoning or the proposed development.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
• This will impact our quality of residential life due to excess road
traffic.
• Noise pollution due to rock breaking. My older parents stay home and they hear the noise when they go out for walking.
• Walking/jogging for each and every one is more difficult and less safer beside a busy construction zone. Road size of this area can’t handle more population and vehicle on this existing road.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
Road safety for my kids and older parents due to increased vehicle.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
• Remove underground parking to avoid long-term rock excavation and vibration.
• Limit any future construction to low-rise residential buildings consistent with existing homes.
• Protect seniors and families by conducting a full health, noise, and safety
impact study before any decision.
• Maintain sufficient green buffers and setbacks to preserve privacy, sunlight, and quiet.
313
Page 2 of 2
• Encourage the developer to engage with local residents before redesigning the
proposal.
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
• No, I do not support it in its current form.
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
• Yes, but only if it remains small-scale and respectful of existing homes, ensuring safety, peace, and sunlight for everyone living
nearby.
314
As a life long resident of Millidgeville and property owner since the 1960’s I am opposed to the
proposal for multi-story apartment buildings to be built on solid red Millidgeville conglomerate rock
at 421 Woodward Avenue.
Most streets, services and basement foundations in Millidgeville from the 1950’s until the present
time were blasted before excavating the rock, including Brentwood Towers and the Anchorage
subdivision. Most of the homes west of Chateau Champlain did not exist when Brentwood Towers
was built. Some subdivisions like Brentwood Crescent and much of Westminster Court were built
on a bog and did not need much rock excavation. Similar to multiple apartment properties on
University Avenue.
Millidgeville, WEST of Millidge Avenue has developed primarily as subdivisions of single family
homes.
There are only two buildings built in the last decade four stories or over and one resulted in two
years and millions of dollars for rock breaking.
Many of the neighbours of this proposal are seniors including the Kennebec Manor nursing home
who endured the deafening racket of rock breakers from 7 am to 5 pm from February to October of
2025. That rock breaking cost was also in the millions of dollars.
Breaking rock with hydraulic breakers is a relatively new phenomena that is extremely costly and
very disturbing to the neighbours of a large project like this.
Has the City offered any help to the developer to find a more suitable location for this project
including swapping or selling their own vacant serviced land at MacIntosh Street and Boars Head
Road; or the serviced parcel of city owned land at 1671 Sandy Point Road overlooking Harrington
Lake close to the hospital and University? If not, why not?
Kamel Debly also has land properly zoned and the rock excavation is already done for apartment
buildings that he might wish to sell.
The residents of Millidgeville north of Woodward Avenue have put up with that daily aggravating
noise of rock breaking from February until October of this year on land that was previously zoned for
Single Family homes until February. Thee prevailing summer winds out of the southwest carried the
noise of this rock breaking to the core of Millidgeville.
Please clarify if Council approves this development for the current six and four story building
proposal; can the developer return and deal with City Staff alone (with no Council input) to amend
the subdivision approval to allow the four story building to be changed to six stories?
There are certainly many unanswered questions on why a better location for this development
cannot be found.
Yours truly,
G.A. (Sandy) Robertson
409 Woodward Avenue
cell 506 977-2885
315
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Sayeda Mohiuddin
Address: 127 Rivershore Drive
1. Do you support the proposed development? No
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
a) it will destroy all trees.
b) Area will be overcrowded.
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
It will creat more Traffic
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
Make a children play ground
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
No
316
I’m writing to you this morning to object to the proposed development at 421
Woodward Avenue. Please see the attached comment form.
This new proposal is not substantially different from the original and still does
not conform to the City’s own principle of gentle density. The sheer scale of
these buildings, combined with the significant increase in traffic they would
bring, remains incompatible with the character and infrastructure of the
surrounding neighborhood. I urge Council to ensure that any future
development on this site respects the established three-storey scale of the area
and includes a comprehensive plan for traffic safety and stormwater
management.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Scott Thomson
Good Morning
317
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Monday, December 1, 2025
PAC Meeting:
Public Hearing:
Your Name:
Your Address:
1.Do you support the proposed development?
2.What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
3.How does the proposed development directly impact you?
4.What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
5.Would you support the development as proposed?
6.Would you support the development with some changes?
Dmitry
361 Woodward Ave
I cannot support the proposed development unless the red line we identified is fully respected. Every meter beyond that line would mean cutting trees and increasing exposure to our backyards. We need assurance that this boundary will be maintained, ideally marked on site with a bright colored rope, and remain uncrossed throughout the entire construction project.
The possibility of construction crossing the red line, which would mean unnecessary tree cutting and loss of natural privacy for our backyards.Increased exposure and noise if that buffer zone of trees is reduced.The need for clear physical boundaries and ongoing monitoring to ensure the construction stays within the approved limits.
The proposed development directly impacts us by reducing the natural tree buffer that currently provides privacy, shade, and noise protection for our backyard. If construction crosses the red line, it would result in tree removal and greater visibility into our property, significantly affecting our living environment and sense of privacy.
I recommend that the red line boundary be formally recognized and physically marked on site with a bright colored rope or stakes before construction begins. This boundary should remain strictly uncrossed throughout the project to protect existing trees and maintain privacy for nearby homes. In addition, regular site checks should be carried out to ensure compliance and prevent accidental encroachment.
I would not support the development as currently proposed. The plan needs to include clear protection of the red line boundary to prevent tree removal and preserve the natural privacy buffer for nearby homes. Without that assurance, the project would have a negative impact on our properties and quality of life.
Yes, I would support the development if changes are made to fully protect the red line boundary. This includes keeping all construction activity within the approved limits, preserving the existing trees, and maintaining a clear physical marker such as a bright colored rope to ensure the buffer zone remains untouched throughout the project.
318
All Comment Forms can be submitted to the City of Saint John through the One Stop
Development Shop. Comment Forms should be submitted no later than Tuesday,
November 11, 2025, to be included in the Staff Report and PAC Agenda Package.
The Comment Forms can be submitted through the following methods:
•By email to OneStop@saintjohn.ca
•By mail:
Planning Advisory Committee
c/o City of Saint John, Growth & Community Services,
P.O. Box 1971,
Saint John, NB,
E2L 4L1
•Hand delivery to the One Stop Development Shop located on the ground floor of
City Hall, 15 Market Square in Saint John.
All Comment Forms and Written Submissions will be made publicly available and will form
part of all Agenda packages associated with the Planning Application.
As of August 2025, our PAC process has changed. Written submissions will continue to
be accepted for all applications being brought before PAC.
Public Hearings will be held at PAC for the following application types:
•Planning Advisory Committee Variances
•Similar or Compatible Use
•Conditional Use
•Non-Conforming Use
•Subdivision Applications that involve the dedication of Land for Public Purpose
or the creation of lots not fronting onto a public street
Public Hearings will no longer be held at PAC for the following application types:
•Amendments to the Municipal Plan
•Amendments to Secondary Plans
•Amendments to the Zoning By-Law, including Rezonings
•Amendments to Section 59 Conditions
•Subdivisions that Create a New Public Street
•Land for Public Purpose Release
If you wish to only provide comments to Common Council for the Public Hearing,
submissions can be made by the Wednesday before the scheduled meeting. Written
comments can be emailed to the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@saintjohn.ca or through
the following website:
www.saintjohn.ca/en/city-hall/council-and-committees/written-comments-zoning-law-
and-municipal-plan-amendments
319
Page 1 of 2
Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form
Project Location: 421 Woodward Avenue / PID 55002109
Project Description: To permit multi-unit development
PAC Meeting: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Public Hearing: Monday, December 1, 2025
Name: Shamim Ara Hoque
Address: 63 Rivershore Drive Saint John E2K 4T5
1. Do you support the proposed development?
No, I do not.
2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development?
i) Loss of natural beauty, green buffer and quietness of the neighborhood
ii) Declining of law and order situation of the neighborhood
iii) Increased incidence of road accident due to increased motor vehicle as this area is
closed to three busy schools- Elementary, Middle and High school.
iv) The Senior citizens and children will be more vulnerable to face road accident due
closed proximity of their senior living homes and schools to this new proposed location
3. How does the proposed development directly impact you?
i) Ecological imbalance due to loss of green trees and wildlife especially deer, birds will
lose their habitat
ii) Concern about how the neighborhood schools will accommodate increased number
new students who will reside this new proposed multistoried units and chances of
decrease quality of school standard
iii) Neighborhood road cannot accommodate the increased number motor vehicles
iv) I am very concern about the decline of law and order situation and this neighborhood
will lose its fame known as very quiet and safe neighborhood.
4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal?
May develop detached or semidetached house instead of multistoried multi units
320
321
322
1. I do not support the proposed developments.
2. My top concerns about the proposed development are, over crowding in the area. Traffic is
already bad enough it will only get worse.
My privacy will be gone with such a large building looking down into my back yard. It will take my
afternoon sun casting a huge shadow,
My property value will be decreased. But my insurance will be increased. Safety of my family. With
that many people there’s is a greater chance of crime being committed around the neighborhood.
4. My proposed recommendations would be to build it in a different part of town that already has
big apartment buildings.
5..I do not support the development as proposed.
6. I would never support this development with or without changes. It will just make the area to
congested .
Tyrell Sparks
320 Boarshead Rd.
323
324
325
Page 2 of 2
5. Would you support the development as proposed?
No, I do not support
6. Would you support the development with some changes?
Only when I feel the changes reflects my opinion
326
Mayor and Councillors November 20, 2025
Subject: 421 Woodward Ave Rezoning
Following the PAC meeting of December 18th I was able to review the staff report and attached public
comments. I wasn’t sure how to provide additional resident feedback on the proposed rezoning of 421
Woodward Ave prior to the December 1st public hearing and I didn’t want to waste Council’s time trying
to make my point with a long time-consuming speech at the meeting. Hopefully you will indulge me
while I share my thoughts concerning the rezoning application.
The staff report makes reference to a Stable Residential density target with regard to the
neighbourhood surrounding the 421 Woodward Ave site. One of the public comment forms (attached)
objected to the proposed development at 421 Woodward Ave stating “enough multi-units in one
neighbourhood already” which caused me to think about the actual number of existing multi-unit
apartment buildings and available units. Within the perimeter of Millidge Ave, Woodward Ave and Boars
Head Road the number might surprise you. Let me list the ones that come to mind.
• Charlie Grace Apartments (off Boars Head Road) – 3 earlier, 3 story buildings housing 36 units
plus a recently completed 3 story building housing 30 units.
• Killam Apartment Complex (off McIntosh Street between Woodward and Boars Head) – 6 x 3
story buildings housing a total of 72 units.
• Seabird Residence (corner of Millidge Ave and Daniel Ave) – 2 x 4 story buildings housing a total
of 87 units.
• Evergreen Suites (Millidge Ave next to Tipsy Tomato) – 5 story building with 46 units.
• Cambridge Estates (Cambridge Cresent/Drive off Boars Head Road) – 4 story building under
construction with 24 units.
• NB Housing Development (next to Kennebec Manor between Woodward Ave & Boars Head
Road) – 2 x 2 story buildings with a total of 20 units.
• Brentwood Tower (off Woodward Ave) – 15 story high rise with 185 condo units.
I would suggest a total of 500 existing apartments/condos qualifies as meets or exceeds the definition of
medium or high density for this particular neighbourhood. Another major development of 2 multi-unit
apartment buildings with a capacity of 166 units is simply not necessary. When I look at the sheer scale
of the proposed development (see attached) it just doesn’t feel right or look right. The developer is
trying to fit too much infrastructure into a confined space. The footprint is just too large for the size of
the site and does not compliment the character of the neighbourhood. I trust you are in agreement.
Sincerely
Daniel (Danny) Kaye
417 Woodward Ave
327
328
329
330
BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 111-212
A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW
OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN ARRÊTÉ NO
C.P. 111-212
ARRÊTÉ NO C.P. 111-212 ARRÊTÉ
MODIFIANT L’ARRÊTÉ DE ZONAGE
DE 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:
Lors d'une réunion du conseil
communal, The City of Saint John a décrété
ce qui suit :
L'arrêté sur le zonage de The
City of Saint John, décrété le quinze (15)
décembre 2014, est modifié par :
Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map
of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a
parcel of land having an area of
approximately 16, 355 square metres,
located at 421 Woodward Avenue, also
identified as PID 55002109, from Low-
Rise Residential (RL) to Mid-Rise
Residential (RM).
- 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 XXX, A.D. 2025 and signed by:
La modification de l’annexe «A», Plan
de zonage de la ville de Saint John,
permettant de modifier la désignation
pour une parcelle de terrain d’une
superficie d’environ 16 355 mètres,
situé au 421 avenue Woodward,
également identifié comme le NID
55002109, de Zone résidentielle –
Immeubles d’habitation bas (RL) a
Zone résidentielle – Immeubles
d’habitation de hauteur moyenne
(RM).
- toutes les modifications sont
indiquées sur le plan ci-joint et font partie du
présent arrêté.
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a
fait apposer son sceau communal sur le
présent arrêté le X XXX 2025, avec les
signatures suivantes:
_______________________________________
Mayor/Maire
__________________________________________
Common Clerk/Greffier communal
First Reading - X
Second Reading - X
Third Reading - X
Première lecture - X
Deuxième lecture - X
Troisième lecture - X
331
Proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment RE : 421 Woodward Avenue
Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to
consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By-law at its regular meeting to be held in the
Council Chambers on Monday, December 1, 2025, at 6:30 p.m., by:
1. Rezoning a portion of a parcel of land having an area of approximately 16,355 square
metres, located at 421 Woodward Avenue, also identified as PID 55002109, from Low-
Rise Residential (RL) to Mid-Rise Residential (RM) as illustrated below.
REASON FOR CHANGE:
To permit multi-unit residential development, with one 6-storey building and one 4-storey
building.
332
For details on how to inspect the amendment, or to register to participate, please contact the
Office of the City Clerk at cityclerk@saintjohn.ca. Written objections to the amendment may be
provided in writing and/or verbally at the Public Hearing to be held by Common Council. To
register for participation in the hearing, please contact the City Clerk’s Office in advance at
cityclerk@saintjohn.ca
If you require French services for a Common Council meeting, please contact the office of the
City Clerk.
Jonathan Taylor, City Clerk
(506) 658-2862
333
Projet de modification de l’arrêté de zonage Objet : 421 avenue Woodward
Par les présentes, un avis public est donné par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint
John indique son intention de modifier l’arrêté de zonage de The City of Saint John, lors de la
réunion ordinaire qui se tiendra dans la salle du conseil le lundi 1 decembre 2025 à 18 h 30,
en apportant les modifications suivantes :
1. Rezonage d’une parcelle de terrain d’une superficie d’environ 16,355 mètres carrés,
situé au 421 avenue Woodward, également identifié comme de NID 55002109, de Zone
résidentielle – Immeubles d’habitation bas (RL) à Zone résidentielle – Immeubles
d’habitation de hauteur moyenne (RM), tel qu’illustré ci‑dessous.
RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION:
Pour permettre la construction d'un bâtiment de 4 étages et d'un bâtiment de 6 étages
334
Pour plus d’informations concernant la lecture de l’amendement, ou pour s’enregistrer à
l’audience publique, veuillez contacter le Bureau du greffier municipal à l’adresse
cityclerk@saintjohn.ca. Les objections à l’amendement peuvent être écrites ou présentées
oralement à l’audience publique tenue par le conseil commun. Veuillez faire part de vos
objections au projet de modification par écrit à l’attention du soussigné à l’hôtel de ville.
Si vous avez besoin des services en français pour une réunion de Conseil Communal, veuillez
contacter le bureau du greffier municipal.
Jonathan Taylor, greffier municipal
(506) 658-2862
335
Common Council Public Hearing
December 1, 2025 –18:30
By-Law Number: CP 111-212
421 Woodward Avenue
PID 55002109
336
Current:
Low-Rise Residential (RL)
Proposed:
Mid-Rise Residential (RM)
Proposal
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
Rezoning
337
Proposal
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
338
City Context
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
339
Aerial Context
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
340
Site Photo
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
341
Municipal Plan
Designation
Stable Residential
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
342
Within the Stable Residential
designation, housing of almost every
form and density may be found and
both the existing neighbourhood
context and compatibility with the
Municipal Plan goals will determine
suitability of new proposals.
Policy LU-86 Policy LU-87
Policy Alignment
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
Intend that the areas designated
Stable Residential will evolve over
time from a land use and built-form
perspective but that new and
redeveloped land uses are to
reinforce the predominant community
character and make a positive
contribution to the neighbourhood.
343
Zoning
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
PID #
55002109
Lot Size
16,355 m²
Current Zoning
Low-Rise Residential (RL)
The Low-Rise Residential
(RL) zone intended to
accommodate a range of
ground-oriented, lower-
density residential
development in a variety of
housing forms including one-
unit, semi-detached,
duplexes, townhouses,
stacked townhouses, and
small-scale apartments.
344
Zoning
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
PID #
55002109
Lot Size
16,355 m²
Proposed Zoning
Mid-Rise Residential
The Mid-Rise Residential
(RM) zone is intended to
accommodate a range of
mid-rise and medium density
residential developments in
the form of townhouses,
multiple unit dwellings,
apartments, and
condominiums, and
complementary non-
residential uses on the
ground floor.
345
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
Mailout:
Public Engagement
October 25, 2025
Letters Received:
Ad Posted on Website:
35
November 06, 2025
PAC Date:November 18, 2025
Applicant Engagement: Yes
346
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
PAC Recommendation
Rezoning
That Common Council
rezone the site from Low-
Rise Residential (RL)to Mid
Rise Residential (RM)
Section 59 Conditions
•Maximum height of 4
storeys for northern
building
•Required Crosswalk
•Required Fire Hydrant
•Rock-Breaking between
8am-6pm 347
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
Staff Recommendation
Rezoning
That Common Council
rezone the site from Low-
Rise Residential (RL)to Mid
Rise Residential (RM)
Section 59 Conditions
•Maximum height of 4
storeys for northern
building
•Required Crosswalk
•Required Fire Hydrant
348
421 Woodward
Avenue
Rezoning Application
A proposed residential development in the Millidgeville
neighborhood of Saint John, designed to contribute to the
long-term health of the community.
349
Site Plan
●4 Story Building B Along
Woodward Ave)
●6 Story Building A Along
Boars Head Road)
●Approximately 166 Units.
○1Beds:97
○2Beds:53
○3Beds:16
●Open to working with
neighbours along Woodward
Ave. on privacy.
350
Site Grading
Plan
●Minimize the amount of necessary rock
breaking
●Preserving existing trees requires
thoughtful planning
●Development respects the natural
contours of the land
Total Take Off Volumes
●Cut Volume 2011 Cu. M.
●Fill Volume 7392.87 Cu. M.
●Net Volume 5381.08 Cu
351
Cross Section
●Underground Parking is on Building B only.
●We will build up around the parking for this to remain a 4 Story Building.
●Looking at Building A from Boars Head Road, This will only visually look like a 5 Story Building
352
Cross Section
353
Cross Section
354
Shadow
Study
●December 22 3PM
●With Buildings
355
Shadow
Study
●December 22 3PM
●Without Buildings
356
Shadow
Study
●December 22 10AM
●With Buildings
357
Shadow
Study
●December 22 10AM
●Without Buildings
358
Shadow
Study
●June 22 2PM
●With Buildings
359
Shadow
Study
●June 22 10AM
●With Buildings
360
Shadow
Study
●September 21 3PM
●With Buildings
361
Shadow
Study
●September 21 10AM
●With Buildings
362
363
Servicing
Plan
●Preliminary Servicing Plan
●Services will connect to Boars Head
Road
364
Zoning
Consideration
●Rezoning from RL to RM.
●Taking a look at our surroundings.
PROPOSED
RM
365
Path Forward
With the proposed development we are
aiming to build the path forward with
careful consideration to the area
surrounding us.
1 3 Story
Building
2 Proposed
Development
3 15 Story
Building
366
Brentwood
Towers
An overview visual
of the line of site for
Woodward Ave.
1
2
Proposed
Site
Brentwood
Towers
15 Stories
367
Community Engagement
20
Engagement to date
●At the DMSE Office
●Phone/Text messages
●Door to Door
●Communication with city Staff
We continued to reach out to
residents and have spoken to more
of our neighbors since PAC. Working
with Neighbors on the Boars Head
Road, Side as well.
368
369
Concerns regarding the
Rezoning proposal for
421 Woodward Avenue
Presenter: Farzana Sumi
432 Woodward Avenue
370
Purpose of This Presentation
I will focus on the following key areas related
to the proposed rezoning of 421 Woodward
Avenue:
1. Community petition
2. Questions about the developer’s
Community Engagement
3. Impact of Construction Timeline on
Community 371
1.Community petition
✅Evidence of Strong Neighborhood Opposition
• 100+ local residents signed a petition opposing the proposed
rezoning at 421 Woodward.
• The original petition has been shown to Council.
A copy has also been submitted with blurred names,
signatures, addresses and phone numbers to protect our
residents’ privacy.
• Signatures span multiple streets and age groups,
demonstrating broad and genuine concern.
🔴Red Flag: Despite this clear local opposition, the project
continues to advance based largely on technical reports.
372
373
2. Questions about the developer’s Community Engagement
In the PAC meeting, the developer stated that they went door-to-door and spoke
with surrounding residents (as shown in their community-engagement slide).
Request to Council: Can the developer provide a clear and verifiable list to the
Common Council of:
•What does ‘door-to-door’ engagement truly mean to the developer and
among them how many agreed with the proposal?
•How many residents they claim to have spoken with?
Because we found very minimal evidence of such action. We believe this
information is essential for accurate decision-making for the council and for
evaluating whether the developer’s public-engagement claims are
factual and reliable.
374
3. Impact of Construction Timeline on Community
3 Years of Construction Is Simply Inhuman for Seniors
Developer’s Statement at PAC:The developer confirmed the total construction timeline is at
least 3 years.This includes months of rock breaking,excavation,heavy machinery,and
continuous daytime noise.
Why 3 Years Is Not “Normal”for Seniors:
For many residents at Kennebec Manor,three years is the remainder of their life.They are
individuals living with:Dementia,PTSD,Frailty and mobility limitations,Chronic medical
conditions.They cannot leave the facility,escape the noise,or “wait it out.”Real Impacts
Already Witnessed During the Last Project.
From the CEO’s letter:Rock-breaking noise “like drilling or machine-gun fire”terrified
residents.Seniors with dementia believed they were being bombed,reliving old traumas.
Residents lost sleep,became disoriented,refused meals,and withdrew from activities.Some
experienced increased behaviors,confusion,and emotional distress.Staff endured 8+hours a
day of extreme noise while trying to provide care.
Message to Council:A three-year construction project next to a seniors’home is not just a
construction timeline —it is a humanitarian issue.The consequences are physical,emotional,
and psychological,and they fall entirely on those who have no ability to
advocate for themselves.
375
Thank you
376
Rezoning 421 Woodward Avenue
Key Concerns & Required Conditions
377
Introduction
•I support responsible growth and recognize
Saint John’s need for housing.
•Development must align with neighborhood
character and the Zoning By-law.
•Goal: fairness, neighborhood compatibility,
and protection of existing residents.
378
Concern 1: Height
& Compatibility
•Proposed 6-storey building on Boars Head
is incompatible with Stable Residential
context.
•Woodward Ave / Boars Head are
predominantly low-rise: one–three storey
homes.
•The proposed 6-storey / 4-storey pair
would create a large mid-rise cluster out
of scale with this Stable Residential area.
•PlanSJ expects new development to
reinforce the predominant community
character, and make positive contribution
to the neighborhood. (Policy LU-87)
379
Concern 1 (cont.): Shadow,
Density & Fairness
•Missing updated Boars Head-side shadow study.
•Lack of supporting to properly assess loss of light and
privacy impacts.
•Requested RM rezoning plus two large buildings would
add far more units (166)than the pattern established
by existing homes.
•High unit count is what drives the excessive height and
mass; a truly compatible project would have fewer
units and a building envelope comparable to existing
forms on the street.
380
Concern 2:
Mechanical Rock
Breaking Risks
•Heavy mechanical rock breaking on
bedrock.
•Vibration can travel through ground and
affect nearby home’s foundations and
structures.
•Older homes need proactive protection,
not after-the-fact disputes.
381
Concern 2(cont):
Mechanical Rock
Breaking Risks
•Impact analysis due to rock breaking for
adjacent homes.
•Vibration monitoring with clear safe
limits.
•Commitment to promptly repair any
damage caused by construction.
•Restricted hours for rock breaking (no
evenings/weekends).
382
Concern 3:
Infrastructure,
Traffic & Safety
•166 units will significantly increase
traffic and pedestrian activity.
•Woodward and Boars Head have
missing sidewalk.
•Children and transit users currently walk
on the road shoulder.
•Lack of playgrounds for children in the
neighborhood—along with 166 new
units—will place an additional burden
on existing facilities.
383
Key
Considerations
•Request Council to refuse this rezoning and, if
redevelopment proceeds in future, require a
scale and unit count that genuinely matches the
existing neighborhood character/infrastructure,
rather than creating a new mid-rise hub.
•Home protection: pre-and post-surveys/impact
analysis, vibration monitoring, and damage
repair commitments.
•Additional Sidewalk and crosswalk for
pedestrian safety to connect to the playground
and transit.
384
Conclusion
•I support responsible growth, not growth
at any cost.
•Section 59 of the Community Planning
Act allows Council to impose these
reasonable conditions.
•I request the Council to protect the
existing neighborhood while enabling
fair, compatible development.
385
Proposal
421 Woodward Avenue (PID 55002109)
386
OPPOSITION TO REZONING
421 Woodward Avenue
Traffic Safety, Noise Pollution, and Data
Inconsistencies
PID: 55002109
387
Traffic
and Safety
388
Safety
in
School
Zones
389
Sunlig
ht
Realit
y
Sunlight will be
BLOCKED at both 10:00
AM and 3:00 PM in
December
The building B
completely blocks
direct sunlight during
November, December and
January.
390
391
The sun (max ~21°) NEVER rises
high enough to clear the roof.
Even at high noon, the sun remains 4.4°below the top of the building
392
Information
Inconsisten
cies
Discrepancy 1:
True Building Height.
Discrepancy 2:
Conflicting Information.
Discrepancy 3:
Misleading Visuals.
393
Conflicting Information
“45” or “36.33”
394
395
396
Manipulat
ed Scale
397
398
399
400
“We are 45
meters from
the closest
building and
15 meters
from the
property line”
from –DMSE
Consultant
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
Two trees measured by
Light Detection and Ranging
(LiDAR)
411
Cross-checked by a different
measurement technique via Globe
Observer.
412
The distance from Building B to the House measures 4 cm. With the
House situated 3.74 cm from Viewpoint A, the total distance from
Viewpoint A to Building B is about 7.74 cm (70.33 meters).
413
414
Since the angle of elevation to the building B is greater than to the
top of the tree, the line of sight to Building B is above the line of
sight to the tree. Therefore, from the viewpoint A, the tree cannot
block building B from sight.
The angle of elevation to the top of Building BThe angle of elevation to the top of the
tree
415
Manipulated Scale
416
On the drawing, 15 cm represents the distance of 36.33 meters
between building B and the house, however, the amenity area’s
drawn length is only 3.5 cm but represents the distance of 16.03
meters 417
Following the scale used for other objects in this drawing, the length
of the amenity area should be only 8.477 meters, not 16.03 meters
If the scale used for Amenity area is correct, then the distance
between building B and the house should be 68.7 meters, not 36.33
meters as labeled in this drawing.418
Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment RE: 0 Rex Hurley Boulevard/0 Glen Road/ portion of
PID 00302778 and PID 00420802
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. Redesignate on Schedule A of the Municipal Development Plan land having an
approximate area of 5.5 hectares identified as a portion of PID 00302778 and 00420802,
from Rural Resource Area and Park and Natural Area, to Stable Area, as illustrated
below;
2. Redesignate on Schedule B of the Municipal Development Plan land having an
approximate area of 5.5 hectares identified as a portion of PID 00302778 and 00420802
from Rural Resource and Park and Natural Area to Stable Residential, and extend
the boundary of the Primary Development Area (PDA) as illustrated below;
419
REASON FOR CHANGE:
To extend the existing Mini-Home Park.
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 on Monday, December 1,
2025. Written objections to the proposed amendment may be made to the Council, in care of
the undersigned, by Wednesday, December 31, 2025.
Enquiries may be made at the office of the City 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.
Jonathan Taylor, City Clerk
(506) 658-2862 or cityclerk@saintjohn.ca
Project de modification du Plan Municipal objet: 0 boulevard Rex Hurley/0 rue Glen /
partie de NID 00302778 et 00420802
Par les présentes, un avis public est donné par lequel le conseil communal de ville de Saint
John a l’intention d’étudier la modification du plan d’aménagement municipal comme suit :
1. À l’annexe A du plan d’aménagement municipal modifier la désignation d’un terrain
d’une superficie de 5.5 hectares identifiés comme des partie de NID 00302778 et
00420802, qui passera de secteur de ressources rurale et parc ou aire naturelle
à secteur stable, comme illustré ci-dessous ;
2. À l’annexe B du plan d’aménagement municipal modifier la désignation d’un terrain
d’une superficie de 5.5 hectares identifiés comme des partie de NID 00302778 et
00420802, qui passera de ressources rurales et parc ou aire naturelle à Secteur
résidentiel stable, et repoussera les limites de la zone d’aménagement primaire
comme illustré ci-dessous;
420
RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION:
élargir la Parcs de minimaisons
Une présentation publique de la modification proposée aura lieu lors d’une réunion ordinaire du
Conseil communal, qui aura lieu dans la salle du Conseil à l’hôtel de ville, le lundi 1 decembre
2025. Les objections écrites à la modification proposée peuvent être présentées au Conseil,
aux soins du soussigné, d’ici lundi 31 mercredi 2025.
Les demandes de renseignements peuvent être présentées au Bureau du greffier municipal ou
aux Services de croissance et de développement communautaire, Hôtel de ville, 15 carré
Market, Saint John (N.-B.), entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30, du lundi au vendredi, inclusivement, jours
fériés exclus.
421
Bureau du greffier municipal
(506) 658-2862
ou cityclerk@saintjohn.ca
422
EWEWEWEWOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOH40 Ashburn Lake Road, PO Box 1045, Saint John, NB E2L 4E3tel: 506.696.9155 fax: 506.696.9158N423
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||40 Ashburn Lake Road, PO Box 1045, Saint John, NB E2L 4E3tel: 506.696.9155 fax: 506.696.9158||||||||||||||||||||XREX HURLEY BLVDGLEN ROADNEW ACCESSMarsh CreekN GLEN ROAD EXTENSION424
425
426
A LAW TO AMEND
BY-LAW NUMBER BIA-2
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT LEVY
BY-LAW
ARRÊTÉ MODIFIANT
ARRÊTÉ N° BIA-2
ARRÊTÉ CONCERNANT LA
CONTRIBUTION POUR
L’AMÉLIORATION DES AFFAIRES
Be it enacted by the Common Council of
the City of Saint John as follows:
Le conseil communal de The City of Saint
John décrète ce qui suit:
The Business Improvement Levy By-Law
of The City of Saint John enacted on the
third day of January, 2006, is amended by:
L'arrêté concernant la contribution pour
l’amélioration des affaires de The City of
Saint John décrété le 3 janvier 2006 et
modifié par:
1 Repealing section 2 thereof and
inserting the following:
2. A levy of 16 cents for each one
hundred dollars of assessed value
is hereby imposed for 2026 upon
non-residential property within the
Business Improvement Area
established by By-Law No. BIA-1
Business Improvement Area By-
Law enacted on the 5th day of
January, 2004.
1 L’abrogation de l’article 2 aux
présentes et l’ajout du texte qui suit :
2. Par la présente, une
contribution de 16 cents par
tranche de cent dollars par
rapport à la valeur fixée est
imposée pour l’année 2026 sur
les immeubles non résidentiels
situés à l’intérieur de la zone
d’amélioration des affaires
établie en vertu de l’Arrêté n°
BIA-1 relatif à la zone
d’amélioration des affaires
édicté le 5 janvier 2004.
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.
2025 and signed by:
EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John
a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le
présent arrêté ** ** **** 2025,
avec les signatures suivantes :
____________________________________________
Mayor/Maire
___________________________________________
City Clerk/Greffier communal
First Reading - November 17, 2025
Second Reading - November 17, 2025
Third Reading -
Première lecture - le 17 novembre 2025
Deuxième lecture - le 17 novembre 2025
Troisième lecture -
427
COUNCIL NOTICE OF MOTION
Received Date November 3, 2025
Meeting Date November 17, 2025
Open or Closed Open Session
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT : Proposal for Fort Howe and Robertson’s Square
Primary Author Input from Council Input from Staff
Councillor Ogden
PROPOSED MOTION:
That City Council direct City Staff to investigate and prepare a report on:
1. The potential reopening of Rockland Road as a pedestrian pathway to the top of Fort Howe,
including design considerations for accessibility, safety, and interpretive elements.
2. The creation of a commemorative site at Fort Howe recognizing the Friendship Treaties
between the Crown and the Wabanaki peoples, with the intent for it to serve as a symbol of
learning, respect, and Truth and Reconciliation overlooking the harbour and city.
3. The feasibility of reopening the wharf at Robertson’s Square on Bridge Street for use by the
riverboat from Saint John Marina, including necessary infrastructure assessments and potential
partnerships.
4. The possibility of extending tram service from the cruise ship terminals along Main Street to
Robertson’s Square to facilitate riverboat connections and enhance visitor experiences in the
downtown area.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Saint John’s Old North End holds deep historical and cultural significance, being one of the
earliest settled areas in the city and home to Fort Howe National Historic Site. This area
provides a unique opportunity to blend heritage, education, reconciliation, and tourism in ways
that honour both the original inhabitants of this land and the city’s early settlers.
As part of advancing Truth and Reconciliation, and enhancing local tourism, it is proposed that
City Staff investigate reopening Rockland Road as a pedestrian pathway leading to the top of
428
Fort Howe. This would be much easier to walk on than the steep hill in the back. The vision is to
create a commemorative space overlooking the harbour and city that celebrates the Friendship
Treaties signed between the Crown and the Wabanaki peoples.
In addition, it is proposed that the City explore reopening the former wharf at Robertson’s
Square on Bridge Street, allowing access for the riverboat from the Saint John Marina. This
would support new tourism routes along the Saint John River — connecting visitors and
residents to areas such as Dominion Park, Pokiok, Randolph, Milford, and Millidgeville.
To complement this initiative, staff are also asked to explore expanding the use of trams from
the cruise ship terminals to run along Main Street to Robertson’s Square, providing a
convenient and engaging way for visitors to experience Saint John’s downtown, its history, and
its waterfront.
Collectively, these initiatives have the potential to:
Reinvigorate the Old North End and Main Street area.
Enhance tourism offerings within the city core.
Strengthen local pride and knowledge of Saint John’s cultural and Indigenous history.
Promote reconciliation and shared understanding through public education and
commemoration.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT:
This motion supports Truth and Reconciliation through meaningful recognition of Indigenous
history and provides a pathway to celebrate and learn from Saint John’s shared heritage while
creating new economic and cultural opportunities.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES: N/A
INPUT FROM OTHERS: N/A
ATTACHMENTS – None
429
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-283
Report Date November 25, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Growth and Community
Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Housing for All – Implementation Plan Update
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head Chief Administrative Officer
Greg Cutler Amy Poffenroth / David
Dobbelsteyn
J. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
That Common Council receive and file this report and the attached monthly infographic for
information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Saint John’s Red Zone Implementation Plan began after Council approval on
September 22, 2025. The Plan had targets/goals based on available information, resources, and
the actual state of things at that time. One of the goals of the Implementation Plan was to
relocate encampments out of Red Zones by November 17, 2025, with the understanding that
there may be specific circumstances due to unique individual needs and their specific relocation
plan where one or more tents could remain further into the fall.
There has been considerable progress made on cleaning and relocating encampments, and many
individuals have moved into Green Zones and Yellow Zones. However, the City has been informed
by its Outreach provider that there are certain individual circumstances that will require more
time for relocation from Red Zones as there is a shortage of available beds or housing that meets
the needs of many individuals living in unsheltered homelessness. In most of these cases, Yellow
Zones do not present a viable alternative as the individuals who remain to be relocated have
specific needs or impediments, such as health care or mobility issues, which require closer
proximity to services than would be available if they were relocated to Yellow Zones. The City’s
Green Zones - which have fifty-four units - are nearly full, and recent data shows that sixty-one
430
(61) additional individuals have entered into homelessness in the last three months. Relocating
certain individuals without a plan to address those legitimate needs would put them in harm’s
way and would not be in alignment with the City’s Housing for All Framework which is a rights-
based approach.
The City recognizes the urgency of getting individuals indoors and is actively working with the
Province to ensure they provide sufficient beds for the Winter. For those who are remaining
outdoors, the City, its outreach provider, Social Development and other front-line agencies will
be urgently addressing each situation on a case-by-case basis, but it can offer no firm timeline as
to when all individuals will be relocated as it will depend on the needs of the individual and
available resources for each individual who remains.
The City is beginning a major initiative this winter with all service providers to address how to
move or mobilize resources from Waterloo Village to reduce the need for clustering, and to
address concerns like access to medical support, food, transportation, or harm reduction supplies
etc.
Since the implementation plan began, the City and partners have achieved several significant
milestones, strengthening the City’s ability to address acute health and safety risks associated
with encampments. The Housing for All Policy Framework has continued to guide
implementation of the Green, Yellow, and Red Zones by outlining the principles that shape the
City’s approach, clarifying how implementation will be carried out and communicating planned
actions to the public. Together, these tools have supported a transparent and accountable rollout
of the Strategy.
The Housing for All Strategy enabled the opening and operation of the Green Zones on Egbert
Street and Thorne Avenue, expansion of homeless outreach services, advancement of additional
Housing for All initiatives, and the implementation of the Red Zones. During this period, the City
and its partners strengthened service coordination, improved neighbourhood stability, expanded
supportive and transitional housing options, and streamlined outreach services for individuals
experiencing homelessness.
431
The City will continue to work with the Province of New Brunswick to ensure that its forthcoming
Provincial Homelessness Strategy addresses many of the core challenges that are being
experienced in Saint John.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
November 17, 2025:
RESOLVED that the submitted infographic Housing for All Strategy - Progress Update be
received for information.
November 3, 2025:
RESOLVED that the Housing For All Strategy: Progress Update be received for information
October 20, 2025:
RESOLVED that the submitted report M&C 2025-246: Biweekly Reporting on Housing for All
Strategy and Red Zone Framework be received for information.
September 22, 2025 - Housing for All – Policy Framework and Red Zone Implementation Plan
RESOLVED that Common Council:
1. Adopt the Housing for All – Policy Framework which clarifies the principles and
policies which guide the City’s work and behaviour in addressing the complex
challenges of homelessness in Saint John and further define the City’s criteria for
the establishment of Green, Yellow and Red Zones; and,
2. That the CAO be directed to implement the revised Red Zone Implementation
Plan as attached to M&C 2025-226; and
3. That the City enters into a service agreement with Fresh Start Services for
Outreach Services generally in the form as presented to the Committee of the
Whole on September 19, 2025, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized
to execute the agreement and any documents ancillary thereto.
September 8, 2025 – Common Council Resolution: Housing For All Strategy Update – Red Zone
Implementation
RESOLVED that Common Council establish the Red Zones along with the criteria as
presented to Open Session on September 8th, 2025; that the CAO be directed to begin
implementation of the Red Zones commencing on September 9th, 2025; and further that
the Mayor be authorized to send letters to the appropriate Ministers to make the
requests listed in staff’s Sept. 8, 2025, presentation to Council as part of the
implementation of the City’s Red Zones and its overall Housing Strategy.
REPORT
432
The Housing for All Policy Framework continues to serve as a foundational tool guiding the City’s
implementation of the Housing for All Strategy. The Framework sets clear expectations for how
the City and its service partners will conduct themselves as they deliver homelessness-response
initiatives, and it outlines where municipal efforts and resources will be directed across the
system. This has ensured consistent decision-making and a shared approach as implementation
has advanced.
The principles embedded in the Policy Framework reflect the City of Saint John’s commitment to
a balanced, rights-based approach to supporting individuals experiencing homelessness. These
principles build on the City’s operational experience, promising practices from jurisdictions
across Canada, and established interpretations from Canadian courts regarding municipal
obligations under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the rule of law. This approach enables
the City to uphold public safety while ensuring services are delivered in a manner that respects
individual dignity and human rights.
The Policy Framework also provides overarching direction for several key components of the
Housing for All Strategy, including the criteria used to designate Green, Yellow, and Red Zones.
These criteria guide how staff respond to encampments, prioritize resources, and coordinate
interventions within each zone. In addition, the Framework informs the specific actions identified
in the Strategy, ensuring alignment between day-to-day implementation and Council’s broader
policy goals.
Municipalities across Canada continue to face significant challenges in addressing homelessness
and managing encampments. Cities are often positioned as frontline responders, yet do not have
legislative authority over housing, mental health, or addiction services, which are core drivers of
homelessness. As a result, municipalities must navigate the difficult balance between public
safety, human rights obligations, and the need to maintain access to public spaces. Encampments
frequently present significant health, fire, and safety risks for both residents and surrounding
neighbourhoods, while a small number of individuals may refuse relocation due to trauma,
service barriers, or trust-related concerns. These challenges highlight the ongoing need for
sustained provincial and federal investment, strengthened service coordination, and long-term
housing solutions to support the effective implementation of the Housing for All Strategy.
Green Zones
433
The establishment of Green Zones at Thorne Avenue and Egbert Street, operated in partnership
with 12Neighbours Inc., marks a significant milestone in the implementation of the City of Saint
John’s Housing for All Strategy. One Major success in the Implementation Plan was the opening
of the City’s second green zone at Thorne Avenue one month ahead of schedule on November 5,
2025.
Collectively, the Egbert Street and Thorne Avenue Green Zones offer safe and secure housing for
up to 54 individuals at any given time. As of the Infographic Date (Attachment A), 21 of 27 units
at Egbert Street and 21 of 27 units at Thorne Avenue are occupied, demonstrating strong
utilization of these critical transitional housing resources. The Neighbourly Homes team
continues to work with the coordinated access system to identify individuals from the By-names
list to transition into one of the six unoccupied units.
The City continues to advance key implementation actions under the Housing for All Strategy,
including targeted work within the Green Zones at Egbert Street and Thorne Avenue. Over the
coming months, staff will focus on filling the remaining vacant units through coordinated
outreach and placement efforts with our housing partners. This work includes ensuring
appropriate tenant supports are in place and that all units meet the City’s established habitability
and safety standards prior to occupancy. These efforts are designed to help stabilize the
neighbourhoods while improving access to quality housing for residents who need it most.
Select Highlights from the Green Zones
There has not been a single emergency (911) call to a Green Zone since the first one
opened in August 2025.
One resident has maintained sobriety, gained confidence and was able to gain
employment as a line cook in the community. This individual has also reconnected with
his stepmother who is currently residing at 12 Neighbours in Fredericton.
One resident successfully entered rehab and is taking great steps towards sobriety.
10 people have completed the resume building course and are starting to get calls to go
to interviews.
3 people have made large strides reconnecting with family.
Many participants have been taking this time to visit with the nurses from Horizon
Health and “actually start to heal from all the aches and pain that living on the street has
caused”.
434
A new kitchen unit has been dropped off on site and set up is well underway. The
kitchen unit will include a new full-size fridge, cupboards, and a new kitchen table and
chairs.
The wonderful mural on the front façade has been the talk of the Egbert street location,
drawing many visitors who marveled at its size and beauty. Despite initial concerns
regarding vandalism, the mural has not been touched showing respect for the mural and
the project.
12Neighbours staff continue to work hard to ensure neighbouring businesses and the
greater community understand the project is committed to the safety, security, and
wellbeing of all. Staff continue to actively canvas the area to ensure positive
communications and partnership.
Red Zones
The City of Saint John’s Red Zones are specific areas where tents, encampments, and temporary
shelters for unhoused individuals are not permitted. Red Zones have been established to balance
community safety and dignity with the overarching goal of moving individuals into stable housing
solutions. These sites are identified based on risks such as proximity to hazardous terrain,
vulnerable populations, or critical infrastructure, as well as potential fire hazards and unsanitary
conditions. Decommissioning encampments in Red Zones aim to reduce these risks for both
residents and the broader community, while also facilitating clean-up, maintenance, and the
restoration of public spaces. By systematically addressing the most hazardous sites, the City seeks
to prevent accidents and create safer environments for all residents.
The City approaches Red Zone decommissioning through a “housing as a human right” lens,
ensuring that individuals are treated with dignity, and supported throughout the relocation
process. Outreach teams work directly with the unhoused to connect them to transitional,
supportive, and permanent housing options, as well as critical social services such as mental
health and employment resources. The goal is balancing the clearing of encampments with viable
alternatives that meet individuals’ needs while respecting their rights. This approach aligns with
the broader Housing for All Strategy, reinforcing the City’s commitment to addressing
homelessness as a social and human issue rather than solely a regulatory or enforcement matter.
Despite these efforts, relocating encampments remains a complex challenge due to a variety of
social and individual factors. Some individuals may face mental health or substance use
challenges that make transitioning to structured housing difficult. Limited availability of
transitional and supportive housing units can also constrain options, requiring the City to balance
immediate safety concerns with the need for sustainable housing solutions. Recognizing these
435
challenges, the City continues to prioritize outreach, individualized planning, and partnerships
with service providers to ensure that Red Zone decommissioning is conducted safely, humanely,
and effectively.
Red Zone Data
15 Individuals have been relocated from Red Zones to alternate locations since the
Implementation Plan began.
9 Encampments have been fully vacated.
There are 18 Encampments still on Red Zones containing approximately 38 individuals.
Yellow Zones
The City of Saint John’s Yellow Zones are areas where tents may be permitted as a last resort
when minimum standards are followed. Yellow Zones include all areas of the city that are not
identified as Red. For private property encampments, the unhoused require approval from the
landowner before erecting a tent.
The outreach team closely monitors Yellow Zones, and the City has provided the outreach team
with a comprehensive list of City-owned Yellow Zone properties where individuals can set up a
tent. The City is actively exploring opportunities to enhance amenities and resources within or
near Yellow Zones. This includes evaluating potential locations for transitional or supportive
housing, improving access to essential services such as washrooms and clean water, and
strengthening connections to community programs that support long-term housing stability.
With planning and coordinating resources, the City aims to create safer, more supportive
environments in Yellow Zones while providing residents with tangible pathways toward
permanent housing.
Yellow Zone Data
There are approximately 9 encampments in Yellow Zones containing approximately 19
individuals.
Support Mobilization and Transportation Project
436
As part of the City of Saint John’s Housing for All Strategy and supported by the Unsheltered
Homelessness and Encampment Initiative, a new collaborative project is exploring innovative
ways to bring social services directly to clients. Recognizing that many residents face barriers
accessing traditional service locations, this initiative aims to mobilize support so that outreach
and service providers can meet individuals where they are geographically. By delivering services
directly to clients, the project seeks to strengthen engagement, provide timely access to critical
resources such as mental health supports, addiction services, and housing navigation, and help
unhoused individuals build pathways toward stable housing.
In addition to mobile service delivery, the project is examining potential transportation solutions
to increase access to programs and amenities. This may include shuttle services or transit
partnerships to connect residents to community health centers, employment resources, and
social programs, reducing the barriers created by distance or lack of mobility. By combining
geographically responsive service delivery with enhanced transportation options, the City and
Fundy Regional Service Commission aim to provide a more equitable and effective approach to
supporting residents in Yellow Zones, reinforcing the broader objectives of the Housing for All
Strategy.
Encampment Clean-Ups
Encampment cleanups play a critical role in supporting both community well-being and the safety
of individuals experiencing homelessness. While encampments often emerge from a lack of
available and appropriate housing options, they can quickly become unsafe due to fire hazards,
unmanaged waste, exposure to the elements, and limited access to basic health services.
The City has conducted 14 encampment cleanings since the plan began, including at the following
locations.
o Garden Street / Golden Dome (3 separate occasions)
o Paradise Row
o Thorne Avenue
o Agar Place
o Charlotte Street / Tin Can Beach
Regular garbage / waste collection continues in accordance with the Waterloo Village
Enhanced Clean-Ups.
Encampments at Haymarket Square and Garden Street continue to receive regular
garbage / waste collection and monitoring on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and
437
Friday each week while the City and Outreach continue to work on relocation plans for
individuals remaining there.
Waterloo Village receives regular maintenance including sweeping and garbage / litter
collection 4-5 nights per week.
Homeless Outreach Services (SHIFT SJ Outreach Team)
The City and the Province of New Brunswick jointly fund a dedicated outreach team designed to
strengthen the City’s delivery of the Housing for All Strategy and improve frontline responses to
encampments and unsheltered homelessness. The SHIFT SJ Outreach Team operated by Fresh
Start Services increases the ability to provide consistent, timely, and coordinated engagement
with individuals living rough, helping ensure support is available when and where they are
needed most, and the compassionate relocation of individuals sleeping outdoors in high-risk
areas i.e. Red Zones.
The City’s Implementation plan provides funding to expand the capacity of the Outreach Service
from 5 to 9 full-time staff. Since the plan began, Outreach has hired 4 additional staff and is
conducting interviews to fill the final position.
Data Collection
A key deliverable through the implementation of the Housing for All Strategy has been the
successful establishment of baseline data to better understand the scope and dynamics of
homelessness in Saint John. Through close collaboration with outreach teams, municipal
departments, community agencies and provincial partners, the City has coordinated new data
collection processes, standardized reporting tools, and introduced new methods for mapping
encampments and monitoring service and support needs. Staff is actively working with Fresh
Start, the Human Development Council, 12 Neighbours, Social Development, and other front-line
partners to ensure data is accurate, timely and relevant in order to inform key decisions.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The Housing for All Implementation Plan is in alignment with the City of Saint John’s Housing for
All Strategy, and council priority Belong - to enhance the quality of life and social well-being in a
safe place to live.
438
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
The $3.4 million Unsheltered and Homeless Encampment Initiative (UHEI) funding agreement has
been instrumental in advancing priority actions within the Housing for All Strategy. This
investment has supported ongoing operation of Green Zones, strengthened outreach services,
and contributed to the deployment of new tools and resources required for effective Zone
management. The City’s financial stewardship has ensured that UHEI funds are aligned with
strategic priorities while reducing pressure on the municipal budget. As implementation
continues, staff will maintain rigorous financial oversight, track expenditures against projected
outcomes, and identify opportunities to leverage additional funding partnerships to support
long-term housing and service system improvements.
Implementation of the Housing for All Strategy has resulted in strengthened service coordination
across outreach teams, community agencies, and municipal departments. Expanded capacity has
allowed for significant progress towards the Housing for All goal of providing consistent, person-
centered service delivery, resulting in improved case management, reduced calls for service in
priority areas, and more timely identification of health and safety risks within encampments.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Chief Administrative Officer J. Brent McGovern
General Counsel Office Melanie Tompkins, Maria Powell & Jacqueline
Boucher
Finance Kevin Fudge, Jodie Forgie
External Relations Lisa Kennedy
Public Works and Transportation Michael Hugenholtz, Tim O’Reilly
External Stakeholders
Saint John Community Council on
Homelessness
Various agency representatives
GNB - Social Development and Transportation
and Infrastructure
Various staff at all levels
Human Development Council Greg Bishop
Fresh Start Services Melanie Vautour, Nick Shepard
12Neighbours Inc. Marcel Lebrun
ATTACHMENTS
439
Attachment A: Infographic
440
Housing for All Strategy: Progress Update*
Operational Support
Transportation & Public Works: 2 staff dedicated to litter cleanup in Waterloo area (4 nights/week)
Green Zones
Number of Green Zones
Number of Units Site 1 27
"I'm so grateful for this place, its given me time to heal
mentally and physically and now I feel like I can think
clearly and start to focus on what my next steps need to be" .”
- A Neighbourly Homes Participant
Red Zones
Housing for All Framework Implementation Plan
Private Land
Provincial Land
CityLand
25%44%
31%
Location Breakdown
2
Site Updates
123
Outreach engaged with clients
Framework Activation
City staff, in collaboration with community partners, are advancing the Housing for All Strategy and Policy Framework to support the Red Zone
Implementation Plan and guide ongoing
operations.
*Tracking period: September 23-November 26, 2025
21
Operational Update
Both Courtyards at Thorne Avenue are now open and operating with participants. Participants are engaging in pro-social activities within their courtyards by taking pride in their new space by cleaning and maintaining the area around them. Participants are continuing to
positively progress by utilizing support services and back to work
initiatives.
15
Encampment relocations
14
Encampment clean ups
9
Encampments vacated
Units Occupied
Number of
Units Site 2 27
21Units Occupied
441
Housing for All Strategy
Green, Yellow, Red Zone
Implementation Plan Update
December 1, 2025
Common Council
Small City,
Big Heart.
442
September 8,2025 –Common Council Resolution:Housing For All
Strategy Update –Red Zone Implementation
RESOLVEDthat Common Council establish the Red Zones along with the criteria as presented to
Open Session on September 8th,2025;that the CAO be directed to begin implementation of the
Red Zones commencing on September 9th,2025;and further that the Mayor be authorized to
send letters to the appropriate Ministers to make the requests listed in staff’s Sept.8,2025,
presentation to Council as part of the implementation of the City’s Red Zones and its overall
Housing Strategy.
September 22, 2025 –Housing for All -Policy Framework and
Red Zone Implementation Plan
RESOLVED that Common Council:
1.Adopt the housing for All –Policy Framework which clarifies the principles and policies which guide
the City’s work and behaviour in addressing the complex challenges of homelessness in Saint John and
further define the City’s criteria for the establishment of Green, Yellow and Red Zones; and,
2.That the CAO be directed to implement the revised Red Zone Implementation Plan as attached to
M&C 2025-226; and
3.That the City enters into a service agreement with Fresh Start Services for Outreach Services generally
in the form as presented to the Committee of he Wole on September 19, 2025, and that the Mayor and
City Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement and any documents ancillary thereto.443
Housing for All Policy Framework
Principles
Human Rights –The City recognizes the inherent human rights of all residents, including those
experiencing homelessness. It is mindful of the rights enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms, especially the right to life, liberty and security of the person, as well as the United
Nations Declaration of Human Rights, which recognizes that housing is part of the right to an
adequate standard of living. The City is committed to advancing the right to housing through
policy, partnerships and advocacy.
Person-Centred –the City is Committed to equity and inclusion, and it recognizes that an
individuals needs, preferences, values, and goals should guide and be at the forefront of any
decision making or care, rather than a one-size-fits-all model. All individuals are treated with
dignity and respect, and this includes recognizing cultural safety and equity, particularly for
Indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups whose experiences must inform service
delivery and design.
444
Housing for All –Strategy in Brief
PURPOSE
The Saint John Housing for All Strategy identifies our community’s coordinated response to addressing
homelessness over the next three years using a person centred and human rights approach. This strategy
advances our shared vision of every resident having a safe, supported, and sustainable home.
OUTCOMES
1.To provide safe community spaces for access by all residents, while supporting individuals as they
access housing that meets their specific needs.
2.We will strive to make homelessness rare, brief and nonrecurring
445
xGreen Zone Update
Neighbourly Homes at
Egbert Street
August 1, 2025
Thorne Avenue
November 5, 2025
446
x
Social and Learning Space
~programs
NBCC Students
Onsite services and support
Neighbourly Homes
447
448
449
Totals
Data Informed Supportive Housing Needs –Saint John
Unsheltered
Supportive Housing Deeply Affordable
/Affordable Housing
Emergency
Shelters
Dependent Care
Nursing & Special
Care Homes
Transitional
Housing Semi-independent
Housing
Independent
Social housing
Below Market
HousingDependent Care+
Complex Needs
Supports Enabling Housing Stability
•Outreach
•Warming
centers
•Access to
primary
healthcare
Low barrier*
•Emergency beds
•Recovery plan
•24/7 staff
•Case
management
•Access to primary
care, addictions &
mental health
services
Low barrier* clinical
care
•addiction treatment
•Clinical mental health
diagnosis &
treatment
•Treatment voluntary
& affects housing
outcomes
•Specialized care
Low barrier* nursing
home level care for
people living with
addictions, mental
illness, cognitive
impairment
•24-7 specialized care
•Primary care,
addictions & mental
health services
Low barrier*
•Case managers
•Recovery plan
•Skills training
•Education
•Access to primary
care, addictions &
mental health
services
Low barrier*
•Case managers
•Light touch supports
•Life skills training
•Access to education &
employment
•Access to primary care,
addictions & mental
health services
Low barrier*
•Rent subsidies
•Access to support
staff
•Wellness check-ins
•Community spaces
•Access to addictions
& mental health
services
•Access to primary
healthcare
•Rent supplement
•Access to affordable
units
•Housing benefit
•Rent bank
•Access to public
housing
•Co-op housing
•Etc.
*Low Barrier: shelter or housing opportunity where there are a minimum number of expectations or requirements placed on people wishing to stay there (i.e., Housing First approach)
Support housing needs
unknown –outreach to work
with individuals to understand
their needs & find appropriate
housing options.
Housing For All Strategy addresses these individuals
Housing For All Strategy only partially addresses these individuals
450
Encampment Relocation Response
Person centred, compassionate, and rights-based approach, respecting that it is an actual
individual living in an encampment.
Reporting an Encampment –
Call: 506-65-4455 | Email:service@saintjohn.ca
Response Times, based on risk profile of encampment location
Rapid Response –within 30 minutes
Quick Response –same day
Standard Response –within 2-3 days
3-Step Process
City Property
Public and Private Property
451
Red
Zones
Public App accessible on
Shape your City
All areas not coloured
Red are “Yellow”
Zones
City of Saint John –September 8, 2025
Red Zone Map
452
Red Zone Implementation Plan
November 17
•Goal: No tents, encampments, or temporary shelters
remaining in Red Zones.
Note: there may be specific circumstances due to unique
individual needs and their specific relocation plan where
one or more tents could remain further into the Fall.
•Enhanced Monitoring of Red Zones begins
•Relocations will occur as necessary
453
Why the Need for Yellow Zones?
•Yellow zones are being established by the City of Saint John as a temporary emergency
response to our housing crisis. They will not become a permanent part of our City.
They need to be eliminated as provincial housing and institutional solutions are provided.
•As Saint John has adopted a human-rights based approach to encampments, it recognizes
that unhoused persons cannot be forcibly relocated or evicted from tents, temporary shelters,
or encampments.Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms establishes the right to life,
liberty and security of the person and various Courts have found that this right is violated:
•when unhoused residents are forcibly evicted, or
•evicted in haste, or
•if they are not treated with dignity, or
•if they do not have an alternative place to go that adequately meets their shelter needs.
The City in partnership with senior levels of Government and front-line agencies is providing
meaningful adequate alternatives including green zones, transitional housing and shelters.
454
Housing for All Strategy -Successes
Supported Sites | Transitional Housing
Egbert Site Green Zone –27 Units -OPEN
Thorne Avenue Green Zone 27 Units -OPEN
1 month ahead of schedule
Somerset Acres transitioned 3 people to
housing, with 3 more getting ready to
transition to housing
455
Housing for All Strategy -Successes
Encampments
Adhering to Human Rights Based Approach
15 people relocated from 11 sites
9 Encampments in Red Zones fully vacated
9 Encampments now in Yellow Zones
14 encampments cleaned
5 vacated encampment sites restored to natural state
Occupied encampment site occupant weekly cleanup
NEW -Storage Solutions for those living in encampments
and Shelters
456
Housing for All Strategy Successes
Other Related City Initiatives
NEW -Community Safety and Security
NEW -Community Resilience Grant
Garbage cleaning -4 evenings weekly added to
Waterloo Village area
NEW -Police announced the Safe Neighbourhood
Camera Registry
457
Housing for All Strategy Successes
Provincial Action in response to City request
Provincial Task Force established after Council's call
for the creation of a Provincially led Action Team
Additional dedicated security services added to the
Emergency Shelters in the city
New mobile public health resources -social worker and
community nurses to support unhoused individuals
458
Housing for All Strategy Opportunities
300+ deeply affordable units anticipated to be available
over the next 2 years
Sunnyside Community -(70-80 Modular Tiny Homes)
Yellow Zone close to medical services, possibly on
Provincial property being explored
Mobilizing Resources and Transportation Options
459
Housing for All Strategy Challenges
Increase in number of high acuity / complex needs that require
provincial solutions
–Housing for All Strategy does not address this Gap
Increase in homelessness in Saint John by 61 since August.
18 encampment sites still in Red Zones
–high acuity individuals or health / mobile challenges where a
Yellow Zone may not currently work.
Significant resources are clustered in Waterloo Village
(Food, Health Care, Harm Reduction, etc.)
No Yellow Zone in close proximity to these services
460
Housing for All Strategy Challenges
Lack of sufficient places for unsheltered individuals to
go during the day –and in proximity to where they
are staying given shelter operates from 8pm to 8am
daily
SHIFTSJ Outreach Team still onboarding new team
members
Obtaining accurate and timely data is challenging
Need solutions via a Provincial Homelessness
Strategy
461
December
•Enhanced Monitoring of Red Zones continues
o Goal to prevent any new tents or structures being erected in
designated Red Zones
•Occupied Encampment Monitoring
o Adherence to safety and cleanliness
•Outreach and Support Services continue to develop client
transition plans out of Red Zones for the remaining high
acuity/complex needs of those remaining
December / January
•Roundtable Summit on mobilizing resources and transportation
options
Next Steps
462
Summary
What we are doing is WORKING
•Approximately 13% of individuals experiencing
homelessness in Saint John remain unsheltered and we
are advancing urgent solutions with the Province and front-
line agencies.
•We are maintaining a rights-based approach and getting
individuals indoors.
463
Summary
Looking Ahead
•Our Implementation Plan will remove specific deadlines for final relocations
from Red Zones
•Individuals will still be relocated, but the timing will be on a case-by-case
basis informed by individual needs and resource availability of beds, food,
medical support, etc.
The City will be consulting on Provincial Task Force on Homelessness and
requesting:
More solutions for individuals experiencing addictions and mental health
issues
More housing solutions for high acuity individuals.
Additional Transitional Housing and Supported Sites for low and mid
acuity.
464
That Common Council receive and file this report and the
attached monthly infographic for information.
RECOMMENDATION
465
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-274
Report Date November 18, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Strategic Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: 2026 General Fund Operating Budget
AUTHORIZATION
Primary
Author
Commissioner/Dept.
Head
Chief Administrative
Officer
Chair of Finance
Committee
Craig Lavigne Kevin Fudge J. Brent McGovern Councillor Gary Sullivan
RECOMMENDATION
RESOLVED:
1. That the sum of $205,078,040 be the total Operating Budget of the City of Saint John
for 2026.
2. That the sum of $157,817,119 be the Warrant of the City of Saint John for 2026.
3. That the tax rate for the City of Saint John be set at $1.535.
4. That the City of Saint John set the property tax rate for Heavy Industrial Class at 1.7 times the
residential rate.
5. That the City of Saint John set the property tax rate for Non-Residential Class at 1.7 times the
residential rate.
6. That Common Council orders and directs the levying by the Minister of Environment and Local
Government of said amount on real property liable to taxation under the Assessment Act
with the municipality of Saint John.
7. The Common Council authorizes the Chief Financial Officer to disburse, at a time acceptable
to him, to the named Commissions, Agencies and Committees, that have approved funds as
contained in the 2026 General Operating Budget.
8. The Management Professional Group receives a wage increase of 3.0% for 2026.
9. That Common Council approves the establishment of permanent positions at 622.
466
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed 2026 General Operating Budget was presented to Common Council on November
17th, 2025. The budget has been produced based on the Council’s strategic priorities, 10-year
Strategic Plan, as well as on the principles, policies and targets contained in the City’s Long Term
Financial Plan.
The proposed 2026 General Operating Budget totals $205,078,040, up 5.5% year over year. The
budget includes a property tax rate reduction of 1.5 cents, from $1.55 to $1.535 per $100 of
assessed value. If approved by Council, the 2026 property tax rate has been reduced by a total of
25 cents or 14% reduction over the last four years. The budget also incorporates maintaining the
tax differential for Commercial and Heavy Industry at 1.7 which aligns the City’s strategy on tax
reform.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
Common Council Meeting – November 17, 2025 – “It is recommended that Common Council
reflect upon the proposed 2026 General Fund Operating Budget, make all inquiries to staff and
receive and file this report and presentation.”
Finance Committee Meeting – November 12, 2025 – “It is recommended the Finance Committee
endorse the proposed 2026 General Fund Operating Budget and forward the budget to Common
Council for receive and file”
REPORT
The proposed 2026 General Operating Budget was presented to Common Council on November
17th, 2025. The budget has been produced based on the Council’s strategic priorities, 10-year
Strategic Plan, as well as on the principles, policies and targets contained in the City’s Long Term
Financial Plan.
The proposed 2026 General Operating Budget totals $205,078,040, up 5.5% year over year. The
budget includes a property tax rate reduction of 1.5 cents, from $1.55 to $1.535 per $100 of
assessed value. If approved by Council, the 2026 property tax rate has been reduced by a total of
25 cents or 14% reduction over the last four years. The budget also incorporates maintaining the
tax differential for Commercial and Heavy Industry at 1.7 which aligns the City’s strategy on tax
reform.
Revenue
Property tax assessment has increased based on a growth rate of 1.78% and is much lower due
to the Province freezing assessments. The proposed reduction of the tax rate to 1.535 and
increased property tax assessment results in an increase in annual property tax revenue of
467
$852,800 or 0.54% over the previous year. However, the Fiscal Capacity Funding (formerly
Unconditional Grant) saw an increase of $4,384,432 or 34.24% over the prior year.
Own source revenue increased by $5,446,244 due to several factors such as increased transfer
from reserves, capital funding, housing for all and housing accelerator funding. Below is a
summary of the changes year over year.
Expenditures
Overall expenditure is up to $10,683,476 or 5.5%. Wages and benefits are within wage escalation
with an increase of $4,570,560. There are several temporary staff that are included in the wages
and benefits that are offset by various funding sources, such as housing accelerator funding,
housing for, growth reserves and capital funding.
Other notable increases include.
Housing for All Program - $2.1M
Housing Accelerator Program - $515K
Police Commission - $1.25M
Fire Services - $400K
Parks and Recreation - $1.0M
Bylaw, Inspections, Min Standards - $1.4M
Principle and interest payment have decreased by $1.2M, which represents a decrease of $2.5M
over the last two budgets. The City has also continued to budget $3M for the future recreation
facility.
Council Priorities/Strategic Plan/Service Delivery
Property Tax 852,800.00$
Fiscal Capacity Funding 4,384,432.00$
Housing For All 2,090,127.00$
Housing Accelerator 515,669.00$
Reserves 722,000.00$
Funding from Capital 525,343.47$
Interest Income 425,000.00$
Saint John Energy 200,000.00$
911 Centre 280,000.00$
Bulding Permit 100,000.00$
Other increases 588,105.00$
10,683,476.47$
468
The 2026 operating budget along with the capital budget addresses multiple elements of the 10-
year strategic plan, Council Priorities, and addresses service delivery. The following list are
highlights from the various service areas which have one time funding and recurring expenditure.
1. 1.5 Cent Tax Rate Reduction
a) Proposed Tax Rate Reduction of 1.5 cents
a) $1.55 to $1.535 per $100 of assessed value
b) Reduction of 25.00 cents in five years – 14% reduction
2. Debt Service Ratio
a) Principal & Interest on debt only 6.3% of the General Operating Budget.
b) Fiscal Charge reduction of $1.3M from 2025 to 2026 ($14.2m to $12.9m).
3. Parks & Recreation
a) $3 Million for Catalytic Multiplex Project (Reserve Fund up to $12 Million)
b) Funding Conceptual Design and Plan for St. Peters ballfield
c) Ellerdale Street Playground Renewal
d) Memorial Field Improvement Plan Funding & Backstop fencing
e) Funding for Design & Master Plan at Seaside Park
f) Skateboard Park Refurbishment
g) New $100K Recreation Fund ($25K per Ward – Policy to be Established)
h) Shamrock Park Tennis Court Investigation & Design work
i) Tot lot (trees, benches and possibly tot lot at Intersection of Grant Cresent and
Daniel Avenue).
j) Upgrades to Rainbow Park Playground & surrounding area
k) Additional funding for the Cove (Harbour Passage Extention)
l) Additional funding for a new Cricket Field
m) Contribution (grant) to YMCA Glen Carpenter Center
4. Saint John Energy Benefit
a) City Burchill Wind Farm Benefit budgeted at $1.2 million
5. Housing
a) Housing Accelerator Fund Investment in 2026 - $3.2 million.
b) Housing for All Strategy Investment in 2026 - $2.1 million.
6. Community Improvement
a) New position – Community Standards Coordinator – that will increase service
levels associated with unsightly premises, zoning, compliance, unsightly buildings
and properties.
b) New position – Assistant Building Inspector – that will be assigned to
substandard units and substandard buildings as well as vacant building files.
c) New position – East Side Recreation Coordinator
d) By-law enforcement/Community Enhancement Project extension (3 FTE) for
another 2 years.
e) New Funding for Community Support – $1 million.
f) 4 new sidewalk plows and winter management internal audit will frame
resourcing requirements.
g) Round about strategy - City Funding for a new roundabout for Loch Lomond Road
conditional upon provincial contribution. Sandy Point Road near completion.
Ashburn Road/Rothesay Road PMHP funding for design.
h) Replacement of two Saint John Transit Buses
i) Operating funding for Police Governance Review
469
j) $100K allocated to Communication for Website upgrades
k) City Market redesign
l) New Funding Officer position added with responsibility to seek additional capital
funding opportunities and enhance capital budget reporting for Council.
m) New funding added for Medical School Scholarship grant
The investments being made maintain existing service levels but also support the priorities of
council, follow various plans, and address social issues and meeting the targets and principles of
the long-term financial plan.
Aligning with Long Term Financial Plan
The budget follows 4 key financial values set out in the long-term financial plan:
Don’t spend more money than you make – 2026 budget is a structurally balanced budget
Borrow Wisely – the budget includes principal and interest charges of $12.96M, which is a
reduction of $1.23M over 2025.
Save your money for a rainy day – The budget includes $3.0M in capital reserves to address
several Council priorities, avoiding new debt and continuing a culture of “save first” versus
“spend first”.
Take control of your expenses before they take control of you – the 2026 operating budget
follows the City’s wage escalation policy.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the proposed 2026 General Fund Operating Budget continues to advance and
surpass the City’s long term strategic financial objectives. This budget advances the City’s
strategic financial objectives to increase flexibility, reduce vulnerability, and sustainability.
The budget also balances the financial objectives of the long-term plan while balancing the
priorities of Council along with the 10-year strategic plan.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The proposed 2026 draft General Fund Operating Budget is aligned with Councils’ priorities, the
10-year Strategic Plan, the City’s financial policies and plans, and strategic operational plans
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
See enclosed 2026 General Fund Operating Budget
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
470
Finance Committee, Common Council
All Service Areas Senior Leadership Team
ATTACHMENTS
1. Appendix A – 2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2. Appendix B – 2026 General Fund Operating Budget Presentation
471
The City of Saint John
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Revenues
Property Taxes 157,817,119 156,964,319
PILT Adjustment ‐ 23,453
Fiscal Capacity Funding 17,188,123 12,803,691
Regional Services Grant 1,223,082 1,006,997
Surplus 2nd Year Previous Year 39,097 272,858
Transfer from Operating Reserves 1,398,000 676,000
Growth & Community Services 9,957,165 7,216,811
Public Works & Transportation Services 7,007,828 6,726,934
Public Safety Services 2,516,407 2,208,313
Utilities & Infrastructure Services 275,000 340,635
Strategic Services 6,456,218 5,154,554
Saint John Energy Benefits 1,200,000 1,000,000
Total Revenues 205,078,040 194,394,563
Expenditures
Growth & Community Services 27,452,522 22,628,358
Public Works & Transportation Services 51,939,033 49,476,188
Public Safety Services ‐ Fire, EMO and PSCC 34,287,394 33,675,248
Public Safety Services ‐ Police Commission 31,999,266 30,751,388
Utilities & Infrastructure Services 6,249,874 5,453,727
Strategic Services 10,217,339 9,072,153
Corporate Services 9,314,019 8,424,251
Other Charges 33,618,593 34,913,250
Total Expenditures 205,078,040 194,394,563
Surplus (Deficit)‐ ‐
472
City of Saint John by Service
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Growth & Community Services
Salaries 7,712,666 7,138,317
Goods & Services 19,739,855 15,490,041
TOTAL 27,452,522 22,628,358
Public Works & Transportation Services
Salaries 19,773,849 18,456,763
Goods & Services 32,165,184 31,019,425
TOTAL 51,939,033 49,476,188
Public Safety Services ‐ Fire, EMO and PSCC
Salaries 27,030,913 26,733,140
Goods & Services 7,256,481 6,942,108
TOTAL 34,287,394 33,675,248
Public Safety Services ‐ Police Commission
Grant 31,999,266 30,751,388
TOTAL 31,999,266 30,751,388
Utilities & Infrastructure Services
Salaries 3,592,486 3,253,673
Goods & Services 2,657,389 2,200,054
TOTAL 6,249,874 5,453,727
Strategic Services
Salaries 5,479,574 4,704,798
Goods & Services 4,737,765 4,367,355
TOTAL 10,217,339 9,072,153
Corporate Services
Salaries 6,546,719 6,059,634
Goods & Services 2,767,300 2,364,617
TOTAL 9,314,019 8,424,251
Other Charges
Goods & Services 33,618,593 34,913,250
33,618,593 34,913,250
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 205,078,040 194,394,563
473
The City of Saint John
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Revenues
Property Taxes 157,817,119 156,964,319
PILT Adjustment ‐ 23,453
Fiscal Capacity Funding 17,188,123 12,803,691
Regional Services Grant 1,223,082 1,006,997
Surplus 2nd Year Previous Year 39,097 272,858
Transfer from Operating Reserves 1,398,000 676,000
Growth & Community Services 9,957,165 7,216,811
Public Works & Transportation Services 7,007,828 6,726,934
Public Safety Services 2,516,407 2,208,313
Utilities & Infrastructure Services 275,000 340,635
Strategic Services 6,456,218 5,154,554
Saint John Energy Benefits 1,200,000 1,000,000
Total Revenues 205,078,040 194,394,563
Expenditures
Growth & Community Services
Growth & Community Planning Services 1,668,320 1,680,262
Development Engineering 397,629 391,301
Community Development 525,810 528,505
Animal Control 126,903 120,000
Dangerous and Vacant Building Program 286,436 278,451
Minimum Property Standards 606,319 506,125
Heritage Conservation Service 215,097 207,018
Other By‐Laws 1,391,435 297,552
Permitting & Inspection Services 1,611,441 1,459,850
Regional Economic Development Agency 3,087,500 3,087,500
Market Square 2,500,000 2,500,000
Saint John Trade & Convention Centre 159,540 156,543
Imperial Theatre 346,889 322,021
Saint John Aquatic Centre 453,630 423,225
Saint John Arts Centre 133,943 128,549
TD Station 500,851 502,796
Library 594,457 544,839
City Market 1,449,361 1,316,629
474
The City of Saint John
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Growth & Community Services (Continued)
Arts & Culture Board 70,000 70,000
PRO Kids 257,324 243,677
Local Immigration Partnership ‐ 62,831
Carleton Community Center 195,979 193,167
Loch Lomond Community Center ‐ 45,000
North End Community Center 195,979 193,167
Recreation Programming 1,311,535 1,222,380
Neighbourhood Development 261,000 172,000
YMCA ‐ Contracted Services 157,898 155,564
Boys and Girls Club ‐ Contracted Services 146,344 144,181
Unspecified Grants 300,400 289,000
Affordable Housing Strategy 205,972 197,583
Lifeguards 207,466 203,400
Play SJ ‐ 45,000
Lord Beaverbrook Rink 185,907 182,000
Building Incentive Reserve 350,000 350,000
Regional Services Commission 663,670 396,772
Housing Accelerator Program 3,291,241 2,775,572
Housing For All 2,090,127
Growth Department 827,120 720,897
Saint John Industrial Parks 679,000 515,000
Total Growth & Community Development Services 27,452,522 22,628,358
Public Safety Services ‐ Fire, EMO and PSCC
Fire Rescue and Suppression Service 25,563,543 25,278,938
Fire Training 4,500 3,000
Technical Rescue Response 100,410 47,489
Hazardous Materials 82,939 61,417
Fire Prevention 991,086 970,571
Fire Investigation 70,698 67,743
Emergency Management Services 260,392 330,971
Water Supply and Hydrants 2,600,000 2,500,000
Public Safety Communications Centre 3,301,226 3,205,118
Street Lighting 1,282,600 1,210,000
Total Public Safety Services ‐ Fire, EMO and PSCC 34,287,394 33,675,248
Public Safety Services ‐ Police Commission
Saint John Police Commission Grant 31,999,266 30,751,388
Total Public Safety Services ‐ Police Commission 31,999,266 30,751,388
475
The City of Saint John
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Public Works & Transportation Services
Snow Control Streets 6,182,269 5,509,023
Street Cleaning 1,783,385 1,741,677
Utility Cuts 1,291,767 1,222,668
Street Services ‐ Surface Maintenance 8,851,449 8,608,264
Snow Control Sidewalk 1,225,913 1,197,741
Sidewalk Maintenance 1,109,404 941,591
Pedestrian & Traffic Management Service 2,552,334 2,607,775
Solid Waste Management 4,008,470 4,145,894
Landscape ‐ Parks & Open Spaces 3,523,462 3,094,030
Rockwood Park 632,279 588,050
Urban Forestry 463,041 413,439
Saint John Horticultural Association 80,000 70,000
Arena Operation & Maintenance 1,447,058 1,518,945
Sportsfield Operation & Maintenance 1,780,793 1,428,466
Other Facilities Operation & Maintenance 777,116 539,239
Transit Debt 1,373,000 1,411,000
Transit Subsidy 7,611,353 7,405,172
Fleet Stockroom 371,833 340,939
Stormwater 4,236,465 4,213,369
Parking Administration 1,010,882 971,024
Peel Plaza Parking Garage 246,334 332,673
Market Square Parking Garage 299,906 169,538
Off Street Parking 1,080,519 1,005,670
Total Public Works & Transportation Services 51,939,033 49,476,188
476
The City of Saint John
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Utilities & Infrastructure Services
Engineering 1,655,775 1,457,300
Carpenter Shop 431,012 404,336
Facilities Management 2,279,722 1,763,070
City Hall Building 1,174,123 1,089,123
GIS 470,828 517,550
Stockroom 238,413 222,347
Total Utilities & Infrastructure Services 6,249,874 5,453,727
Strategic Services
Finance 1,659,945 1,402,393
Assessment 1,909,173 1,879,282
Supply Chain Management 468,030 449,811
Information Technology 4,524,991 4,129,729
Corporate Planning 928,195 487,609
Insurance 157,006 153,328
Liability Insurance 570,000 570,000
Total Strategic Services 10,217,339 9,072,153
Corporate Services
Chief Administrators Office 688,693 808,249
Mayor's Office 186,314 199,201
Common Council 673,869 583,959
Common Clerk 805,318 737,800
Human Resources 3,239,721 2,801,678
Legal Department 1,442,787 1,302,142
Real Estate 376,638 325,144
Customer Service 926,251 956,699
Corporate Communications 974,427 709,379
Total Corporate Services 9,314,019 8,424,251
Other Charges
Fiscal Charges 12,956,400 14,191,000
Landfill Closure 300,000 300,000
Special Pension Contributions 10,400,077 10,222,250
PILT Adjustment 9,388 ‐
Transfer to Capital Reserves 3,000,000 3,000,000
Other Charges 952,728 400,000
Capital from Operating 6,000,000 6,800,000
Total Other Charges 33,618,593 34,913,250
Total Expenditures 205,078,040 194,394,563
Surplus (Deficit)‐ ‐
477
2026 General
Fund Operating Budget
December 1st, 2025
478
June-July
Shape Your Budget
September
Council Feedback
October 29
Finance Committee Receive and File
November 12
Finance Committee Recommendation
November 17
Council Receive and File
December 1
Recommendation to Common Council
2026 Budget Timeline
479
Federal Government
•Senior Programs
•Poverty Reduction
•Employment Programs
•Funding Health Care
•Foreign Affairs
•Family Benefits
•Monetary Policy
•National Defense
•Postal Services
480
Provincial Government
•Education
•Healthcare
•Highways
•Income Assistance
•Subsidized Housing
•Nursing Homes
•Social Services
•Justice 481
Municipal Government
•City Roads
•Police and Fire Services
•Utilities
•Public Transit
•Zoning (land use)
•Parks &
Recreation
•Solid Waste 482
483
AGENDA
•Section 1 – 2026 Shape your Budget Feedback & Council
Roundtable Feedback
•Section 2 – 2026 Operating & Capital Budget Highlights that address feedback
•Section 3 – 2026 Draft Operating Budget Recommendations
484
Section 1: Summary
of Public Engagement
and Council Feedback
485
2026 Operating Budget – Public Engagement
486
2026 General Fund
Budget
Main Themes
Common Council Feedback
Comms/Website
Communications
Roads/Sidewalks
Housing for All support
Tax Rate Reduction
By-law Enforcement
Cleaner City
Parks & Recreation
Traffic Calming
487
Section 2: General
Fund Capital &
Operating Highlights
that address feedback
488
2026 Operating & Capital Budget Highlights that address Council Feedback
1.1.5 Cent Tax Rate Reduction
a)Proposed – $1.55 to $1.535 per $100
b)Reduction of 25.00 cents in five years – 14% reduction
2.Debt Service Ratio - 6.3%. Debt Management Plan success
reducing Fiscal Charges by $1.3M from 2025 to 2026.
3.Saint John Energy Benefit – success of Birch hill windmill
project sharing benefits of $1.2M.
4.Recreation Investments
a)Ellerdale Street Playground Renewal
b)Rainbow Park Playground & surrounding area upgrades
c)Shamrock Park Tennis Court Rehabilitation
d)Design & Master Plan for Seaside Park
e)Memorial Park Improvement Plan Funding & Backstop fencing
f)Skateboard Park Repair
g)Creation of new $100K Recreation Fund ($25K per Ward – Policy to be Established)
h)$3 Million for Catalytic Multiplex Project (Brings total Reserve Fund up to $12 Million)
i)Tot lot (trees, benches and possibly tot lot at Intersection of Grant Cresent and Daniel Avenue).
j)Contribution (grant) to YMCA Glen Carpentar Center
k)Design and Plan for St. Peters ballfield489
2026 Operating & Capital Budget Highlights that
address Council Feedback Continued
5.Housing for All Support
a)New Funding for Community Support – details to following in future Council meeting).
b)Housing Accelerator Fund Investment in 2026 - $3.2 million.
c)Housing for All Strategy Investment in 2026 - $2.1 million
6.Traffic Calming
a)City Funding for a new roundabout for Loch Lomond Road construction pending provincial contribution. Sandy Point Road near completion. Ashburn Road/Rothesay Road PMHP funding for design.
7.Community Improvement
a)New position – Community Standards Coordinator – that will increase service levels associated with unsightly premises, zoning, compliance, unsightly buildings and properties.
b)New position – Assistant Building Inspector – that will be assigned to substandard units and substandard buildings as well as vacant building files.
c)By-law enforcement/Community Enhancement Project extension (3 FTE) for another 2 years.
d)4 new sidewalk plows ordered.
e)Internal Audit for Winter management will provide recommendation for future service level investment.
f)Replacement of two Saint John Transit Buses
g)$100K allocated to Communication for Website upgrades
h)Medical School Donation
i)Funding Officer added with responsibility to seek additional capital funding opportunities and enhance capital budget reporting for Council.
j)Capital Investment in City Market redesign
490
Section 3
Draft 2026 Operating
Budget
Recommendations
491
2026 Tax Base
2026 2025 Change %
Residential 6,539,988,900$ 6,389,210,200$ 150,778,700$ 2.36%
Non Residential 1,647,639,200$ 1,661,584,900$ 13,945,700-$ -0.84%
Heavy Industrial 553,100,000$ 536,946,300$ 16,153,700$ 3.01%
Total 8,740,728,100$ 8,587,741,400$ 152,986,700$ 1.78%
2026 2025 Change %
Residential 6,539,988,900$ 6,389,210,200$ 150,778,700$ 2.36%
Non Residential 2,800,986,640$ 2,824,694,330$ 23,707,690-$ -0.84%
Heavy Industrial 940,270,000$ 912,808,710$ 27,461,290$ 3.01%
Total 10,281,245,540$ 10,126,713,240$ 154,532,300$ 1.53%
Property Tax Rate 1.55
Property Tax Revenue 159,359,306$ 156,964,055$ 2,395,251$ 1.53%
Saint John Assessment Base
Saint John Tax Base
492
2026 Assessment Base Growth Benchmarks
2.69%
1.78%
3.58%
2.42%
2.99%
2.36%
4.29%
2.88%
0.88%
-0.84%
0.99%
0.19%
0.99%
3.01%
0.00%0.00%
-2.00%
-1.00%
0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
Provincial Saint John Moncton Fredericton
Benchmark Performance
Total Residential Non Residential Heavy Industrial
493
2026 Fiscal Capacity Grant
$17,188,123
$12,803,691
$13,773,579
$15,321,432
$16,647,118 $17,335,948
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
$18,000,000
$20,000,000
Saint John
Saint John
2026 2025 2024 2022 2021 2020
494
Proposed 2026 General
Operating Budget
•2026 General Operating Budget $205,078,040
•Year Over Year budget increase of approx. $10.68M or 5.5%
•Year Over Year Property Tax Revenue Increase of $853K or 0.54% (tax burden)
•Property Tax Rate of $1.535 per $100 of assessed value
•Proposed 1.5 cent reduction in tax rate – $1.55 to $1.535 per $100
•Reduction of 25.00 cents in five years – 14% reduction
•Property Tax Multiplier
•No change in the 1.7 multiplier for Commercial and Heavy Industrial Classes
•Need for more Flexibility in the multiplier
•Core Funding & Equalization Grant
•Equalization Grant Increased by $4,384,432 from previous year (34.24% increase over prior year)
•Capital Renewal Funding (outside operating budget) - $7,682,505 495
2026 Draft
General
Fund
Operating
Budget
19
The City of Saint John
2026 General Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Approved Budget
$$
Revenues
Property Taxes 157,817,119 156,964,319
PILT Adjustment - 23,453
Fiscal Capacity Funding 17,188,123 12,803,691
Regional Services Grant 1,223,082 1,006,997
Surplus 2nd Year Previous Year 39,097 272,858
Transfer from Operating Reserves 1,398,000 676,000
Growth & Community Services 9,957,165 7,216,811
Public Works & Transportation Services 7,007,828 6,726,934
Public Safety Services 2,516,407 2,208,313
Utilities & Infrastructure Services 275,000 340,635
Strategic Services 6,456,218 5,154,554
Saint John Energy Benefits 1,200,000 1,000,000
Total Revenues 205,078,040 194,394,563
Expenditures
Growth & Community Services 27,452,522 22,628,358
Public Works & Transportation Services 51,939,033 49,476,188
Public Safety Services - Fire, EMO and PSCC 34,287,394 33,675,248
Public Safety Services - Police Commission 31,999,266 30,751,388
Utilities & Infrastructure Services 6,249,874 5,453,727
Strategic Services 10,217,339 9,072,153
Corporate Services 9,314,019 8,424,251
Other Charges 33,618,593 34,913,250
Total Expenditures 205,078,040 194,394,563
Surplus (Deficit)- - 496
$100,388,830
64%
$42,995,145
27%
$14,433,145
9%
Residential Class Non Residential Heavy Industrial
2026 Property Tax Revenue by Class
497
General Fund Operating Budgets 2016-2026
General Fund Operating Budget Overview
$151.5 $154.0 $156.1
$160.3
$166.7
$157.3
$164.7
$177.3 $187.8
$194.4
$205.1
$130
$140
$150
$160
$170
$180
$190
$200
$210
2016
Budget
2017
Budget
2018
Budget
2019
Budget
2020
Budget
2021
Budget
2022
Budget
2023
Budget
2024
Budget
2025
Budget
2026
Budget
$ in Millions
Short Term Provincial
Assistance
Restructure
$47.8M
Increase
over 5
years
498
1.785
1.71
1.62 1.58 1.55 1.535
$1.40
$1.45
$1.50
$1.55
$1.60
$1.65
$1.70
$1.75
$1.80
$1.85
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Tax Rate
Tax Rate
Saint John Property Tax Rate
499
$16,650,273 $15,941,014 $15,741,124 $15,685,605 $15,420,430
$14,191,000
$12,956,400
$18,000,000.00
$16,000,000.00
$14,000,000.00
$12,000,000.00
$10,000,000.00
$8,000,000.00
$6,000,000.00
$4,000,000.00
$2,000,000.00
$0.00
2026202020212022202320242025
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Fiscal Charges (Principal &Interest)
Approximately
$10M savings
since 2020
500
2026 General Operating Other Revenues
2025 2026
Approved Budget Budget
$$
Revenues
Growth & Community Services 7,216,811 9,957,165
Public Works & Transportation Services 6,726,934 7,007,828
Public Safety Services 2,208,313 2,516,407
Utilities & Infrastructure Services 340,635 275,000
Strategic Services 5,154,554 6,456,218
Saint John Energy Benefits 1,000,000 1,200,000
Total Revenues 22,647,246 27,412,618
501
2026 General Fund Budget –
Other Revenues (significant
changes)
•Growth & Community
Services:
•Housing for All Funding
$2.09M
•Housing Accelerator
Funding $432K
•Strategic Services:
•ERP Recovery from Capital Budget - $600K
502
2026 General Fund
Operating Expenses
•Expenditures up approximately $10.7M
•Wage & Benefits Increase $4.6M
•Housing Accelerator Program - $515K
•Housing for All Program - $2.1M
•Police Commission - $1.25M
•Fire Services - $400K
•Parks and Recreation - $1.0M
•Bylaw, Inspections, Min Standards - $1.4M
•Debt Repayment – Reduction of $1.2M
503
2026 General Fund Operating Budget Service
Area
Growth and Community Services
$4.8M (21.1%) increase
Bylaw, Min Standards, Inspections- $1.36M
Housing Accelerator Program -$500K
Housing for All Program -$2.09M
Public Works and Transportation
Services - $2.5M (4.98%) increase
Sportsfields/Other facilities - $590K
Landscape – Parks & Open Spaces - $429K
Transit Operating Subsidy - $200K
Snow Control Streets/Sidewalks - $916K
Public Safety (Fire, PSCC, EMO)
$612K (1.8%) increase Increases due to inflation
Public Safety (Police Commission)
$1.25M (4.06%) increase
4 New officers and Inflation
504
2026 General Fund Operating Budget Variance
Service Area
Utilities and Infrastructure -
$796K (14.6%) increase
General Inflation
Additional security cost for City Hall
Additional security measure for Council
Chambers
Strategic Services - $1.1M
(12.62%) increase
Information Technology – Inflation for various
software
Corporate Planning – ERP Support
Finance – Capital Budget Staff Position
Corporate Services - $890K
(10.56%) increase
Inflationary increases
Human Resources – Implementing HR Strategy,
Safety and increased legal cost
Communications – Website Redesign
Other Charges - $1.3M
(3.70%) reduction
Fiscal Charges - $1.23M reduction
Pay as you go - $800K pay as you go decrease
Other Charges – $550K over prior year
505
Wage Escalation
Policy
•The CAO shall recommend the wage and benefit budget increase in accordance with
the Wage Escalation Policy
•The Wage Escalation Policy provides that the
wage and benefit budget shall not exceed the lessor of:
•The Three-Year Rolling Tax Base Growth Average (5.48%)
•(8.65%, 6.26%, 1.53%)
•Consumer Price Index + 1% (2.81%)
Note: CPI was adjusted upward – April – Sept by .70 to reflect
removal Carbon Tax 506
2026 Proposed General Operating Budget
Recommendation
It is recommended that Common Council
approve the 2026 General Fund Operating Budget.
507
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-275
Report Date November 18, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept.
Head
Chief Administrative
Officer
Chair of Finance
Committee
Craig Lavigne/Jodie
Forgie
Ian Fogan J. Brent McGovern Councillor Gary
Sullivan
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Common Council:
1. RESOLVE that the estimated revenue for the Water and Sewerage Utility for the year 2026 in
the amount of $55,709,782 be adopted (Appendix “A”); and
2. RESOLVE that the estimated expenses for the Water and Sewerage Utility for the year 2026 in
the amount of $55,709,782 be adopted (Appendix “A”); and
3. PROCEED with the first and second reading of the amendment to the Water and Sewerage
By-Law No. M-16 (Appendix “C”)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget will represent the first increase for ratepayers in eight
years. The proposed increase of 1.26% results in an increase of $1.50 per month or $18.00 per
year for flat-rate customers, bringing the annual flat rate to $1,446. Meter rates will also see the
same rate increase of 1.26%.
The rate increase remains well below the CPI and does not keep pace with the significant cost
increases the Utility has seen over the past several years for supplies, mechanical parts, chemicals
and wages and benefits. The Utility’s long term financial plan approved early in 2025 plans for
small annual increases over the next 10 years.
508
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
Common Council Meeting – November 17, 2025 – “It is recommended that Common Council
reflect upon the proposed 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget, make all inquiries to staff and
receive and file this report and presentation.”
Finance Committee Meeting – November 12, 2025 – “It is recommended the Finance Committee
endorse the proposed 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget and forward the budget to Common
Council for receive and file”
REPORT
The 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget will represent the first increase for ratepayers in eight
years. The proposed increase of 1.26% results in an increase of $1.50 per month or $18.00 per
year for flat-rate customers, bringing the annual flat rate to $1,446. Meter rates will also see the
same rate increase of 1.26%.
Potable Revenue
Overall potable revenue for 2026 is budgeted at $41,491,500 (2025- $41,273,000). Despite the
rate increase of 1.26%, overall revenue is projected to remain flat due to less meter consumption
than anticipated in 2025.
Meter rate revenue from metered customers is largely commercial, manufacturing, malls,
schools, restaurants, hotels, and apartment buildings and revenue is anticipated to remain flat
due to less consumption that is occurring in 2025.
The balance of revenues includes the fire protection levy, storm sewer levy, interest revenue,
and prior year surplus which overall remains flat year over year.
Potable Expenditures
The Utility operating expenditure increased by $41,508 over 2025. To balance the increase in
the operational expenses, capital from operating was decreased by $940,583 over prior year to
balance the budget.
The Utility still has a large amount of expenses that cannot be reduced further to provide water
and sewer services. Costs such as annual payments for the water treatment plant capital and
operating, cost of operating water and wastewater pump stations, sewer treatment plants, debt
payments, electricity, property taxes, chemicals and insurance are just some examples of areas
that need to be funded to provide services. These costs along with several are subject to the
inflation pressures being felt due to the economic environment.
509
There are several initiatives that will be undertaken in the 2026 budget. There will be continued
leak detection and installation of other leak detection technology in the water distribution
system which may identify leaks to be repaired to improve water efficiency and maintain a highly
reliable water system. There is a plan to start the plan or road map for the implementation of
universal metering.
The budget also includes the rehabilitation of the Rockwood Park water reservoir (tanks) and
access road, performance management of five lift stations, and increased focus on improving
safety standards.
The budget includes $7,186,418 million in pay as you go (capital from operating). This will allow
the Utility to complete its 2026 capital program without any borrowing. There has been
continued success in obtaining funding for Capital projects as can be seen in the proposed 2026
Capital Utility Budget. The funding will allow the Utility to focus on climate change initiatives,
sewer separation, and the renewal of underground infrastructure in coordination with the
General Fund.
Industrial Raw Water
The Utility budget also includes the expenditures and revenues for the four customers who
receive raw untreated water. The bylaw rates include.
Operational cost to provide the service,
Contributions to asset replacement/asset management,
Rate stabilization reserves,
New debt associated with the industrial system delivering the service,
Previous debt associated with being a member of the water distribution system.
In summary, the City set the rates to cover all operating costs associated with providing raw water
to each customer, recovering past debt associated with each system and including a charge for
future asset replacement. There is also a charge to some customers to cover the cost of assets
currently being replaced, along with funding to a rate stabilization reserve for each customer.
Rates for each of the four customers see various degrees of change. Some of the increases or
decreases are a result of lower or higher consumption estimates, prior year surplus or deficit or
higher cost of service.
Overall, the consumption rates for each customer are noted below.
Customer 2026 Rate 2025 Rate
East Industrial Irving Oil 0.2638 0.2530
Irving Paper 0.1064 0.1074
West Industrial Irving Pulp & Paper 0.0933 0.0904
NB Power Coleson Cove 0.3193 0.5143
510
CONCLUSION
The 2026 Budget represents the first time in eight years ratepayers will see an increase in rates.
The Utility has managed to hold the rates for seven years in a row; however, that has largely
come at the expense of capital reinvestment. The infrastructure deficit in 2024 was well over
$360M and requires an annual reinvestment of $40.8M to maintain the system. The long-term
financial plan sets out a plan for rates, anticipated expense increase, and the capital funds
available for reinvestment. It will be critical to continue to follow and update the plan as needed
to ensure a reliable, affordable, and resilient water and wastewater system.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The proposed 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget is aligned with Council’s priorities
demonstrated though the commitment to address infrastructure risk associated with climate
change, focusing on its leak detection program that helps eliminate water waste.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
See enclosed Utility Fund Operating Budget
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Finance Committee, Common Council
All Service Areas Senior Leadership Team
ATTACHMENTS
1. Appendix A – 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
2. Appendix B – 2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget Presentation
3. Appendix C - Water and Sewerage By-Law No. M-16
511
The City of Saint John
2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Budget
Expenditures
Drinking Water Service
Watershed Management 693,521 879,878
Water Treatment 9,453,598 9,577,589
Water Pumping & Storage 1,258,777 1,256,360
Transmission & Distribution 5,080,715 4,623,509
Customer Metering 768,130 707,125
Internal Charges 470,000 470,000
Other Charges 595,272 575,142
Debt Servicing 3,265,121 3,410,695
Transfer to Capital Reserves ‐ 180,673
Capital from Operating 4,233,691 4,293,658
Total Drinking Water Service 25,818,825 25,974,629
Wastewater Service
Wastewater Pumping 3,697,100 3,318,003
Wastewater Collection 3,547,518 3,368,216
Wastewater Treatment 6,622,430 6,046,572
Internal Charges 470,000 470,000
Other Charges 595,272 575,142
Debt Servicing 2,688,182 2,746,973
Transfer to Capital Reserves ‐ 180,672
Capital from Operating 2,952,727 3,833,343
Total Wastewater Service 20,573,229 20,538,918
Industrial Water Service
Watershed Management 942,819 894,359
Water Pumping and Transmission 3,189,164 3,081,035
Customer Metering 279,711 245,421
Debt Servicing 1,560,169 1,661,162
Transfer to Operating Reserves 730,182 703,469
Transfer to Capital Reserves 836,677 836,677
Capital from Operating 754,594 596,260
Total Industrial Water Service 8,293,316 8,018,383
Infrastructure Management
Engineering Services 1,024,412 861,410
Total Expenditures 55,709,782 55,393,340
1
512
The City of Saint John
2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
2026 2025
Budget Budget
Revenues
Flat Rate Accounts 22,102,000 21,883,500
Meter Rate Accounts 19,389,500 19,389,500
Industrial Raw Water Accounts 7,697,445 7,438,122
Fire Protection Levy 2,600,000 2,500,000
Storm Sewer Levy 1,000,000 1,000,000
Other Revenues 1,750,000 1,667,360
Transfer from Reserves ‐ 750,000
Previous Year's Surplus 1,170,837 764,858
Total Revenues 55,709,782 55,393,340
Annual Flat Rate ‐ Water and Sewerage $1,446 $1,428
Meter Rates:/Cu.m.
Block 1 ‐ First 100 $2.0195 $1.9944
Block 2 ‐ Excess of 100 $1.2860 $1.2700
Consumption based on Bi‐monthly billings
NOTE: Sewer Surcharge 80.35% of Water Charge
Industrial Raw Water Rate:/Cu. M 2026 2025
East Industrial
Irving Oil $0.2638 $0.2530
Irving Paper $0.1064 $0.1074
West Industrial
Irving Pulp and Paper $0.0933 $0.0904
NB Power (Coleson Cove)$0.3193 $0.5143
Industrial Raw Water Rate ‐ Bi‐monthly fixed charge
East Industrial
Irving Oil $47,061 $42,379
Irving Paper $5,775 $14,821
West Industrial
Irving Pulp and Paper $69,642 $70,383
NB Power (Coleson Cove)$1,362 $1,425
2
513
2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
Common Council –November 17th, 2025
Small City,
Big Heart.
514
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget
The City of Saint John
2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
2025 2026
Budget Budget
$$
Revenues
Flat Rate Accounts 21,883,500 22,102,000
Meter Rate Accounts 19,389,500 19,389,500
Fire Protection Levy 2,500,000 2,600,000
Storm Sewer Levy 1,000,000 1,000,000
Industrial Raw Water Accounts 7,438,122 7,697,445
Other Revenues 1,667,360 1,750,000
Transfer from Reserves 750,000 -
Previous Year's Surplus 764,858 1,170,837
Total Revenues 55,393,340 55,709,782
Expenditures
Drinking Water Service 25,974,629 25,818,825
Wastewater Service 20,538,918 20,573,229
Industrial Raw Water Service 8,018,383 8,293,316
Infrastructure Management 861,410 1,024,412
Total Expenditures 55,393,340 55,709,782 515
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget Revenue
2025 2026
Budget Budget
$$
Revenues
Flat Rate Accounts 21,883,500 22,102,000
Meter Rate Accounts 19,389,500 19,389,500
Fire Protection Levy 2,500,000 2,600,000
Storm Sewer Levy 1,000,000 1,000,000
Industrial Raw Water Accounts 7,438,122 7,697,445
Other Revenues 1,667,360 1,750,000
Transfer from Reserves 750,000 -
Previous Year's Surplus 764,858 1,170,837
Total Revenues 55,393,340 55,709,782
516
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget - Revenue
•Rate Increase of 1.26% for Residential Customers – First rate increase in 8 years despite inflationary pressures.
•Annual Flat rate $1,446, an increase or $1.50 per month or $18 per year.
•Same increase of 1.26% for Commercial Potable Customers
•Meter Revenue – despite increase in rate, projecting less consumption based on 2025
•Other Revenue – combination of interest, leachate, miscellaneous and recovery from general fund.
517
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget
Priorities/Key Highlights/Variances
•No new debt being proposed for 2026
•Pay as you go is $7,186,418 for 2026
•Significant increase in wastewater operations over prior year due to ongoing maintenance
The City of Saint John
2026 Utility Fund Operating Budget
2025 2026
Budget Budget
$$
Expenditures
Drinking Water Service 25,974,629 25,828,825
Wastewater Service 20,538,919 20,573,229
Infrastructure Management 861,410 1,024,412
Total Expenditures 47,374,958 47,426,466
518
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget
Priorities/Key Highlights
•Water System Master Plan – Investigation and concept design to complete long term water strategy to address residential, commercial and industrial growth throughout the City.
•Universal Metering – Complete a detailed plan (i.e. Road map) to execute the installation of metering throughout the City in a phased approach.
•Leak detection of East water distribution system, repair identified leaks to minimize water loss and improve water system efficiency and reliability
•Unidirectional flushing (UDF) of the West water distribution and parts of the east system not completed in 2025 due to water conservation efforts. UDF is completed to ensure high quality drinking water.
•Installation of two additional iHydrants (Clow) in strategic areas to provide early leak detection of critical watermains by analyzing pressure changes.
519
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget
Priorities/Key Highlights/Variances (continued)
•Fire Hydrant Inspection & Painting Program (repaint approx. 25% and inspect approx. 33% of the 2,100 in inventory)
•Water reservoir (tanks) Rehabilitation of the Rockwood Park water reservoir and the associated access road.
•Wastewater Collection – utilization of trenchless technology programs to complete more sanitary pipe repairs though pipe patching. Reduces the need to excavate pipes, repair and reinstate asphalt.
•Environmental Protection staff to complete the “14 Point Verification Procedure” provided by the pump manufacturer for five lift stations. This procedure will identify the current performance of the lift station and identify any necessary repair works.
•Safety – Increased efforts to improve standard operating procedures focused on safety with the assistance of the Field Safety Officer and Consultants.
520
2026 Industrial Raw Water Rates
Background
•Full separation of the potable and industrial water supply was achieved with the completion of the Safe, Clean Drinking Water Project.
In 2019 Hemson Consulting Ltd. completed a raw water rate analysis and assist is developing separate raw rates for each customer that are set by Common Council via by-law annually for;
•Irving Oil Ltd. & Irving Paper on the East Saint John Industrial Water
System
•Irving Pulp & Paper and the NB Power Generating Station (Coleson Cove) on the West Saint John Industrial Water System
521
2026 Industrial Raw Water Rates
(Background Continued)
Since 2020 all industrial raw water customers have been billed the full cost of delivering raw water via by-law rates set by Common Council.
•By-law rates are updated annually through Common Council.
•Industrial Raw Water By-law rates include the following:
•Operational Cost to provide the service,
•Contributions to asset replacement/asset management,
•Rate stabilization reserves,
•New debt associated with the industrial system delivering
•the service, and
•Previous debt associated with being a member of the water distribution system.
522
2026 Industrial Raw Water Rates - East
Industrial System
Current 2025 raw water by-law rate
$0.2530/m3
Calculated 2026 raw water by-law rate
$0.2638/m3
Irving Paper (Flume)
Current 2025 raw water by-law rate
$0.1074/m3
Calculate 2026 raw water by-law rate
$0.1064/m3
523
2026 Industrial Raw Water Rates - West
Industrial System
Current 2025 raw water by-law rate
$0.0904/m3
Calculated 2026 raw water by-law rate
$0.0933/m3
NB Power (Coleson Cove
Current 2025 raw water by-law rate
$0.5143/m3
Calculate 2026 raw water by-law rate
$0.3193/m3
524
Saint John Water 2026 Draft Operating
Budget
Conclusion
•The Utility is balancing the need to replace aging infrastructure to support growth with need to replace infrastructure to ensure service levels can be met.
•Examining opportunities for revenue increases within existing service areas
•Increased rates are not covering the increase costs the Utility has seen over the last 8 years and impacts is felt in Capital investment to offset the increase in operating expenditures.
Recommendation
•Finance Committee to Receive and File this presentation and direct any questions to Staff
525
BY-LAW NUMBER M-16
A LAW TO AMEND A BY-LAW
RESPECTING WATER AND SEWERAGE
ARRÊTÉ NO M-16
ARRÊTÉ MODIFIANT L’ARRÊTÉ
CONCERNANT LE RÉSEAU D’EAU ET
D’ÉGOUTS
Be it enacted by the Common Council of
The City of Saint John as follows:
Lors d’une réunion du conseil communal,
The City of Saint John a décrété ce qui suit :
A By-law of The City of Saint John entitled
“A By-law Respecting Water and Sewerage”,
enacted on the 7th day of June, A.D. 2004, is hereby
amended as follows:
Par les présentes, l’arrêté de The City of
Saint John intitulé « Arrêté concernant les réseaux
d’eau et d’égouts », décrété le 7 juin 2004, est
modifié comme suit:
1 Schedules “A”, “B” and “E” are repealed
and replaced with Schedules “A”, “B” and
“E” attached hereto.
1 Les annexes « A », « B » et « E » sont
abrogée et remplacée par les annexes
« A », « B » et « E » ci-jointe.
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. 2025 and signed by:
EN FOI DE QUOI The City of Saint John a fait
apposer son sceau communal sur le présent arrêté
le ________ ___________________ 2025, avec
les signatures suivantes :
_________________________________________
Mayor / Mairesse
_________________________________________
City Clerk / Greffier de la municipalité
First Reading -
Second Reading -
Third Reading -
Première lecture -
Deuxième lecture -
Troisième lecture -
526
Schedule “A”
Effective January 1st, 2026
Flat Rate Customers
Flat Rate customers Water
charge
Yearly $801.78
ANNEXE « A »
En vigueur le 1er Janvier, 2026
Tarif forfaitaire pour les clients
Tarif forfaitaire pour les
clients Redevance sur l’eau
Tarif annuel 801.78 $
Schedule “B”
Effective January 1st, 2026
METERED CUSTOMERS – WATER SERVICE CHARGE
Meter Size Yearly ($) Monthly ($) Bi-Monthly ($)
15mm 270.90 22.58 45.15
20mm 331.62 27.64 55.27
25mm 452.88 37.74 75.48
40mm 595.44 49.62 99.24
50mm 1,187.88 98.99 197.98
75mm 2,468.46 205.71 411.41
100mm 4,292.76 357.73 715.46
150mm 6,746.52 562.21 1,124.42
200mm 9,694.08 807.84 1,615.68
250mm & up 13,129.26 1,094.11 2,188.21
METERED CUSTOMERS – CONSUMPTION CHARGE
Monthly (by m3) Bi-Monthly (by m3)
Consumption (m3) Rate ($/m3) Consumption (m3) Rate ($/m3)
For the first 50 2.019529 For the first 100 2.019529
For all in excess of
50
1.286002 For all in excess of
100
1.286002
ANNEXE « B »
En vigueur le 1er Janvier, 2026
CLIENTS AVENC COMPTEUR – TARIF DES SERVICES D’EAU
Dimension du
compteur
Tarif annuel ($) Tarif mensuel ($) Tarif bimensuel ($)
15mm 270,90 22,58 45,15
20mm 331,62 27,64 55,27
25mm 452,88 37,74 75,48
40mm 595,44 49,62 99,24
50mm 1 187,88 98,99 197,98
75mm 2 468,46 205,71 411,41
100mm 4 292,76 357,73 715,46
150mm 6 746,52 562,21 1 124,42
200mm 9 694,08 807,84 1 615,68
250mm et plus 13 129,26 1 094,11 2 188,21
CLIENTS AVEC COMPTEUR – FRAIS DE CONSOMMATION
Mensuels (par m3) Bimensuels (par m3)
Consommation (m3) Frais ($/m3) Consommation (m3) Frais ($/m3)
Pour les 50 premiers 2,019529 Pour les 100 premiers 2,019529
Pour toute
consommation au-
delà de 50
1,286002 Pour toute
consommation au-
delà de 100
1,286002
527
Schedule “E”
Raw Industrial Water Customers and Rates
Raw Water
Customer
Infrastructure Rate per
Cubic
Metre ($)
Rate
Stabilizing
Reserve
Bi-
Monthly($)
1. New Brunswick
Power
This user draws its industrial raw water
through a 1500mm diameter concrete
intake pipe running from Ludgate Lake
across Route 1 to the Coleson Cove Screen
Building located at coordinates N
7355170.56 and E 2522389.97 just off of
Route 1. Once through the screen building
water passes through approximately
5,000m of 600mm diameter transmission
main to ultimately make its way to the
Coleson Cove generating station located
at 4077 King William Road.
0.3193 1,362
2. Irving Pulp
and Paper
Limited
This user draws its industrial raw water
through a 1800mm diameter intake pipe
and approximately 330m of 1800mm
diameter concrete pressure pipe originating
from Spruce Lake leading to the Spruce
Lake Screen building. The screen building
is located at coordinates N 7357823.16 and
E 2525290.60 and is just to the right of the
eastern shore of Spruce Lake. Once
through the screen building water passes
through the Spruce Lake Transmission
main to ultimately make its way to the
Irving Pulp and Paper Mill located at 408
Mill Road. The Spruce Lake transmission
main consists of approximately 7,500 m of
1500mm diameter concrete pressure pipe
owned by City of Saint John and
approximately 1,000m of 1370mm
diameter concrete pressure pipe owned by
IPP.
0.0933
69,642
3. Irving Paper
Inc.
This user draws its industrial raw water
through a 1200mm diameter intake pipe
originating from Latimer Lake leading to
the Latimer Lake control valve chamber.
Once through the control valve chamber,
water passes through approximately 275m
of 1500mm diameter reinforced concrete
pipe to ultimately discharge into Eldersley
brook. Eldersley Brook recharges the
Silver Falls watershed. Irving Paper has a
private intake, screen and chlorination
building located at Silver falls. From there
the water eventually makes its way to
Irving Paper located at 435 Bayside Drive.
0.1064 5,775
528
4. Irving Oil
Limited
Multiple raw water transmission mains
deliver raw water from Latimer Lake to
other transmission piping near the
Lakewood Heights pump station for use by
potable and industrial users. Irving Oil
Limited draws its industrial raw water from
two separate connections to the above
mentioned transmission mains prior to their
connection to the Loch Lomond Drinking
Water Treatment Facility.
The first raw water connection to the
transmission system near the Lakewood
Heights Pumping Station delivers raw
water to a chamber located at Champlain
Heights through approximately 2,500m of
600mm HDPE relined cast iron raw water
transmission main to ultimately make its
way to the Irving Oil Refinery located at
340 Loch Lomond Road. The second
connection to the above transmission
systems is a 600mm PVC Raw water
transmission main, approximately 3,000m
delivers raw water along Hickey Road to a
chamber located at Champlain Heights.
From there raw water is delivered through
approximately 450m of 500mm raw water
transmission main along Commerce Drive
to ultimately make its way to the Irving Oil
Refinery located at 340 Loch Lomond
Road.
0.2638
47,061
Notes:
a) At between approximately 3 to 5 year intervals, the city will undertake
industrial raw water rate studies for purposes of reassessing rates and rate
structures.
b) Rate Stabilizing Reserve will be reviewed annually as part of the yearly
rate setting exercise with the intent of holding approximately 7 months of
operating costs in the rate stabilizing reserve at any given time.
529
Annexe « E »
Clients et tarifs de l’eau industrielle brute
Client d’eau
brute
Infrastructure Taux au
mètre cube
($)
La réserve de
stabilisation
des tarifs
Tari
bimensuel($)
1. Énergie Nouveau-
Brunswick
Cet utilisateur puise son eau brute industrielle
dans un tuyau de prise d’eau en béton de
1 500 mm de diamètre qui, traversant la route 1,
va du lac Ludgate au bâtiment de dégrillage de
Coleson Cove situé aux coordonnées
N 7355170.56 et E 2522389.97, à proximité de
la route 1. Une fois sortie du bâtiment de
dégrillage, l’eau circule dans environ 5 000 m
de conduite principale de 600 mm de diamètre
pour finalement se rendre à la centrale de
Coleson Cove, située au 4077, chemin King
William.
0,3193 1,362
2. Irving
Pulp and
Paper
Limited
Cet utilisateur puise son eau brute industrielle
dans un tuyau de prise d’eau de 1 800 mm de
diamètre vers un tuyau sous pression en béton
de 1 800 mm de diamètre d’une longueur de
330 m environ provenant du lac Spruce et
menant au bâtiment de dégrillage du lac Spruce.
Le bâtiment de dégrillage est situé aux
coordonnées N 7357823.16 et E 2525290.60,
juste à droite de la rive est du lac Spruce. Une
fois sortie du bâtiment de dégrillage, l’eau passe
par la conduite principale du réseau de transport
du lac Spruce pour finalement se rendre à
l’usine de pâtes et papiers Irving située au 408,
chemin Mill. La conduite principale de
transport du lac Spruce est composée d’environ
7 500 m de conduite sous pression en béton de
1 500 mm de diamètre appartenant à la ville de
Saint John et d’environ 1 000 m de conduite
sous pression en béton de 1 370 mm de
diamètre appartenant à IPP.
0,0933 69,642
3. Irving
Paper Inc.
Cet utilisateur puise son eau brute industrielle
dans un tuyau de prise d’eau de 1 200 mm de
diamètre provenant du lac Latimer et menant à
la chambre de vannes de régulation du lac
Latimer. Une fois sortie de la chambre de
vannes de régulation, l’eau circule dans environ
275 m de tuyau en béton armé de 1 500 mm de
diamètre pour finalement s’écouler dans le
ruisseau Eldersley. Le ruisseau Eldersley
recharge le bassin versant de Silver Falls. Irving
Paper possède un bâtiment privé de prise d’eau,
de dégrillage et de chloration situé à Silver
Falls. De là, l’eau se rend éventuellement à
l’usine d’Irving Paper, située au 435 promenade
Bayside.
0,1064 5,775
530
4. Irving Oil
Limited
De multiples conduites principales de transport
d’eau brute acheminent l’eau brute du lac
Latimer à d’autres conduites de transport
situées près de la station de pompage de
Lakewood Heights pour être utilisées par des
utilisateurs d’eau potable et industrielle. Irving
Oil Limited tire son eau brute industrielle de
deux raccordements distincts aux conduites de
transport susmentionnées avant leur
raccordement à l’usine de traitement de l’eau
potable de Loch Lomond.
Le premier raccordement d’eau brute au réseau
de transport près de la station de pompage de
Lakewood Heights achemine l’eau brute à une
chambre située à Champlain Heights par
l’intermédiaire d’environ 2 500 m de conduite
de 600 mm en fonte revêtue de PEHD pour
finalement se rendre à la raffinerie Irving Oil
située au 340 chemin Loch Lomond. Le
deuxième raccordement aux systèmes de
transport ci-dessus est une conduite d’eau brute
en PVC de 600 mm, d’une longueur d’environ
3 000 m, qui achemine l’eau brute le long du
chemin Hickey vers une chambre située à
Champlain Heights. De là, l’eau brute est
acheminée par une conduite principale de
transport d’environ 450 m d’un diamètre de
500 mm le long de la promenade Commerce
jusqu’à la raffinerie Irving Oil située au 340,
chemin Loch Lomond.
0,2638 47,061
Notes :
a) Tous les trois à cinq ans environ, la Ville entreprend des études sur les tarifs de
l’eau brute industrielle afin de réévaluer les tarifs et les structures tarifaires.
b) La réserve de stabilisation des tarifs fait l’objet d’un examen annuel dans le
cadre de l’exercice annuel d’établissement des tarifs, l’intention étant de
conserver environ sept mois de frais d’exploitation dans la réserve de
stabilisation des tarifs en tout temps.
531
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-273
Report Date November 18, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept.
Head
Chief Administrative
Officer
Chair of Finance
Committee
Craig Lavigne/Mike
Baker
Ian Fogan J. Brent McGovern Councillor Gary
Sullivan
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Common Council approve the following recommendations below:
“Approve the 2026 General Fund Capital Budget for $53,879,656 with a City Share of $26,750,000
and Other Share of $27,129,656”
“Approve the 2026 Utility Fund Capital Budget for $17,726,258 with a Utility Share of
$11,236,418 and Other Share of $6,489,840”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2026 General Fund Capital Budget totals an investment of $53,879,656 with City Share of
$26,750,000 and Other Share of $27,129,656. The capital budget has investments in Public
Safety, Corporate Services, Facilities, Growth initiatives, Parks and Recreation, Transit, Roads,
Curbs, Sidewalks and Storm.
The 2026 Utility Fund Capital Budget totals an investment of $17,726,258 with the Utility Share
of $11,236,418 and Other Share of $6,489,840. The capital budget has investment in
underground infrastructure related to road reconstruction, sanitary lift and pump stations,
structural lining, water tanks and universal meters.
Both budgets include significant capital funding from other levels of government. The City
received an additional $7,682,505 from the Province of New Brunswick’s new Capital Renewal
Funding program as part of fiscal reform for 2026.
532
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
Common Council Meeting – November 3rd, 2025 – “It is recommended that Common Council
reflect upon the proposed 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget, make all inquiries to
staff and receive and file this report and presentation”
Finance Committee Meeting – October 26th, 2025 – “It is recommended the Finance Committee
endorse the proposed 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget and forward the budget to
Common Council for receive and file”
REPORT
The 2026 General Fund Capital Budget totals an investment of $53,879,657 with City Share of
$26,750,000 and Other Share of $27,129,656. The capital budget has investments in Public
Safety, Corporate Services, Facilities, Growth initiatives, Parks and Recreation, Transit, Roads,
Curbs, Sidewalks and Storm.
The 2026 Utility Fund Capital Budget totals an investment of $17,726,258 with the Utility Share
of $11,236,418 and Other Share of $6,489,840. The capital budget has investment in
underground infrastructure related to road reconstruction, sanitary lift and pump stations,
structural lining, water tanks and universal meters.
Both budgets include significant capital funding from other levels of government. The City
received an additional $7,682,505 from the Province of New Brunswick’s new Capital Renewal
Funding program as part of fiscal reform for 2026.
General Fund Capital Budget
Appendix 1 – General Fund Capital Budget is the detailed program by project for the
recommending $53,879,657 in Capital investments.
Highlights include.
Corporate Performance - $3,975,000 investments in Fire, Peel Plaza Police Station, ERP and new
Capital and Funding Accountant position.
Facility and Asset Management - $5,635,001 for investment in the Aquatic Centre, TD Station,
Shamrock Park, Fire Stations, St Patrick Pedway and LBR.
City Market - $647,000 investments as part of the City Markets strategic plan.
Parks and Recreation - $6,372,117 for investments in Rainbow Park, Ellerdale Playground,
Harbour Passage, Memorial Field, Cricket Field and new tot lot.
Transit - $2,436,000 for two new buses and various shelters.
533
Transportation - $21,091,144 for investments in road resurfacing and reconstruction, curbs,
sidewalks, roundabout, traffic signal, sidewalks plows, Courtney Bay Causeway, fleet
replacement and Howes Lake landfill.
Urban and Rural Storm - $13,682,694 investments in a new storm outfall, sewer replacements
and storm improvements.
Utility Fund Capital Budget
Appendix 2 – Utility Fund Capital Budget is the detailed program by project for the recommending
$17,726,258 in Capital investments. Highlights include.
Industrial Water East and West - $2,575,000 includes investments in dam works, meter
replacement, transmission design, and backflow preventor.
Sanitary Network - $6,849,761 investments in various wastewater treatment plants, Lancaster
lagoon, pumping stations, various lifts stations and sanitary renewals due to road reconstruction
projects.
Water Network - $8,011,497 investments in water tank improvements, universal metering
project, water renewal due to road reconstruction projects, fleet, watermain renewal and backup
generators.
CONCLUSION
The total 2026 Capital Budget program totals $71,605,915 of Capital investment in Saint John.
There is significant funding from all levels of government that is critical to ensure the City can rely
on its infrastructure to provide the levels of services expected by the Citizens of Saint John.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The proposed 2026 General Fund and Utility Fund Capital Budget is aligned with Council’s
priorities, Debt Management and Capital Budget Policies, Council approved plans and both
General and Utility Fund’s Long Term Financial Plans.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
See enclosed Capital and Utility Fund Capital Budget
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Finance Committee, Common Council
All Service Areas Senior Leadership Team
534
ATTACHMENTS
1. Appendix 1 – 2026 General Fund Capital Budget
2. Appendix 2 – 2026 Utility Fund Capital Budget
3. Appendix 3 – 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget Presentation
535
21-Oct-25THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
CAPITAL PROGRAM SUMMARY
GENERAL FUND
21-Oct-25
Category Other
Share
City
Share
No. of
Projects Total
Proposed Program Summary For - 2026
$905,000 $3,070,000Corporate Performance 6 $3,975,000
$2,652,954 $2,982,047Facility and Asset Management 27 $5,635,001
$20,000 $667,700Growth Projects 6 $687,700
$1,098,000 $5,274,117Parks & Recreation Services 13 $6,372,117
$2,375,000 $61,000Transit2 $2,436,000
$11,384,183 $9,706,961Transportation16 $21,091,144
$8,694,519 $4,988,175Urban and Rural Storm 6 $13,682,694
Summary of Capital Costs (City Share)
Transit
0%
Urban and Rural Storm
19%
Parks & Recreation
Services
20%
Corporate Performance
11%
Growth Projects
2%
Facility and Asset
Management
11%
Transportation
37%
$27,129,656 $26,750,000 $53,879,656TOTALS:76
Page 1 of 10
536
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Corporate Performance
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Detention doors Police Station Upgrade servers that lock and unlock detention
doors.
0 200,000
ERP System City Hall Implementation of a new ERP system which
will include resourcing, training and
configuration.
0 1,000,000
Fire Equipment Upgrades Various Locations Fire Equipment Upgrades. Funding from the
PNB’s Capital Renewal Fund.
905,000
Funding Officer City Hall / Rothesay Avenue Capital & Funding Accountant/ Officer. 0 120,000
IT Infrastructure Renewal City Hall IT Infrastructure Renewal (Funded from IT
Capital Reserves).
0 750,000
Ladder Truck Various Locations Purchase of a Fire Ladder Truck to replace an
existing one (Phase 2 of 4).
0 1,000,000
TOTAL:$905,000 $3,070,000
Page 2 of 10
537
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Facility and Asset Management
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
120 Ton Chiller Lord Beaverbrook Rink Supply and Installation of 120 Ton Chiller. 0 175,000
2029 Summer Games Canada Games Aquatic Centre Upgrades to the Canada Games Aquatic Centre
in preparation for the 2029 Summer Games
(Phase I) (Including replacing the competition
pool bulkhead) (Funding assumed 40% funding
from Federal Government, 33.33% funding
from RDC. Remainder to be funded by the City
and FRSC)
2,175,954 374,047*
Automatic Gate Leisure Services office Design and installation of a new automatic gate. 0 100,000
Brine Plate Chiller
Gasket
TD Station Replace Brine Plate Chiller Gasket. (Other
Share funding from FRSC)
22,500 27,500*
Carpet Trade & Convention Center Purchase of a carpet cleaner/vacuum. (Other
Share funding from FRSC)
13,500 16,500*
Competition Pool Chair Canada Games Aquatic Centre Replace competition pool guard chair. (Other
Share funding from FRSC)
6,750 8,250*
Compressor #1 Peter Murray Arena Replace Compressor #1 that is at the end of its
useful life.
0 100,000
Concourse Dishwasher TD Station Upgrade Concourse Dishwasher. (Other Share
funding from FRSC)
9,000 11,000*
Cyber Security TD Station Network Cyber Security and Building
Management System Upgrades. (Other Share
funding from FRSC)
22,500 27,500*
Enhancement Study TD Station Enhancement Study. (Other Share funding
from FRSC)
29,250 35,750*
Existing Elevator City Hall side of St Patrick
Pedway
Engineering services to complete the design to
replace the existing elevator.
0 50,000
Fitness equipment Canada Games Aquatic Centre Replace various fitness equipment apparatuses.
(Other Share funding from FRSC)
22,500 27,500*
Flat Roof Repairs Lord Beaverbrook Rink Design services for structural repairs at flat roof. 0 50,000
Flood Water Boiler #1 TD Station Replace Flood Water Boiler #1 at the end of its
useful life. (Other Share funding from FRSC)
6,750 8,250*
Grill Upgrade Trade & Convention Center Upgrade Grill. (Other Share funding from
FRSC)
4,500 5,500*
Ice Machine Trade & Convention Center Renew large ice machine. (Other Share funding
from FRSC)
11,250 13,750*
Pedway curtin
wall/windows
St Patrick Pedway Replace curtain wall and metal framed
windows.
0 500,000
Plateware Trade & Convention Center Purchase of additonal plateware. (Other Share
funding from FRSC)
6,750 8,250*
Page 3 of 10
538
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Facility and Asset Management
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
PVC Roof Membrane TD Station Design services to replace sloped PVC Roof
Membrane. (Other Share funding from FRSC)
56,250 68,750*
Roofing Membrane Fire Station #4 Replace Roofing Membrane. 0 200,000
Sabre Compressors TD Station Replace Sabre Compressors 1, 2, 3. (Other
Share funding from FRSC)
236,250 288,750*
Skywalk Roofing St PatrickPedway Replace Skywalk roofing at the end of its
useful life.
0 150,000
Tot's Pool Water Feature Canada Games Aquatic Centre Replace tot's pool water feature. (Other Share
funding from FRSC)
4,500 5,500*
Touch Pads Canada Games Aquatic Center Replace ten touch pads for competition pool.
(Other Share funding from FRSC)
15,750 19,250*
Washroom Upgrade Municipal Operations Complex
(Main Building)
Supplmental funding to upgrade existing
washrooms (4 washrooms) based on design.
0 200,000
Washroom/ Changeroom
Renovation
Shamrock Park Shamrock Park Washroom/Changeroom
Renovation.
0 500,000
Website Update Trade & Convention Center Complete a website update. (Other Share
funding from FRSC)
9,000 11,000*
TOTAL:$2,652,954 $2,982,047
Page 4 of 10
539
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Growth Projects
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Design and Concept
Work
City Market Concept and design preparation services for the
completion of work planned to be constructed
in 2027.
0 85,000
Hooper Timepiece City Market Installation of a platform in the centre of the
market for the Hooper Timepiece to be on
display.
0 55,200
Kiosk City Market As a result of the installation of the new
platform area for seating this project intends to
remove 4 of the existing benches and will be
looking to reinstall 2 Kiosks. The Kisosks
would be 1 above and 1 below the platform.
0 103,500
New doors City Market Design and construction of creating doors for
the North and South Tenants that are accessible.
0 29,000
New Platform City Market Design and construction of a new platform to
increase seating within the City Market. The
space can also be used as a stage area when
required. Project budget also includes the
purchase of new furnishing for the area.
0 375,000
Uptown Saint John Uptown Saint John Uptown Saint John Improvements. City Share
conditional on Uptown Saint John Inc. securing
Other Share funding through Downtown Inc's
"Heart of Communities" Investment initiative.
20,000 20,000*
TOTAL:$20,000 $667,700
Page 5 of 10
540
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Parks & Recreation Services
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
All Wheels Park All Wheels Park (Station Street) Design and construction of the required repairs
to the All Wheels Park.
0 125,000
Backstop Fence Memorial Field Replacing existing backstop with new higher
fence to protect houses from flying balls.
0 250,000
Chicane Trail
Investigation
Fallsview Drive Further, geotechnical investigation to determine
existing materials on slope to allow design to
proceed.
0 50,000
Cricket Field TBD Design and Build new Cricket Field – Location
TBD.
0 140,000
Ellerdale Street
Playground
Ellerdale Street Renew the existing Ellerdale Playground. 0 600,000
Harbour Passage -
Riverview Drive
Civic # 399 to Market Place
Overpass
Harbour Passage Extension including new
lights, new curb on one side, Harbour Passage
sidewalk, landscaping, required paving,
including design and construction management
services. Project contingent on the City
receiving Active Transportation Funding.
1,098,000 732,000*
Harbour Passage
Extension (the Cove) Riverview Avenue West to
Riverview Drive
Supplemental funding for the Harbour Passage
Extension Project (the Cove). Supplemental
funding includes an allowance for setting up a
required slope monitoring program.
0 990,000
Harbour Passage
Extension Seating
Fallsview Avenue (Douglas
Avenue to Look Out)
Supplemental funding for the Harbour Passage
Extension project on Fallsview Avenue.
Funding for new seating & replaced fencing.
0 200,000
Harbour Passage Lighting Market Place West Installation of lighting for Market Place West
along Harbour Passage (Phsae 1 of 2).
0 250,000
Rainbow Park Sydney Street/Broad
Street/Charlotte Street
Complete upgrades to the Rainbow park
playground and surrounding area. Upgrades
may include vegatable garden, dog park, open
space, memorial garden, tot lot, sand play area,
covered seating area, pod sculptures, berm
buffers, and picnic area (Phase 2 of 2).
0 1,467,117
Shamrock Park - Tennis
Court Rehabilitation
Shamrock Park Design services for the upgrade of the
Shamrock Park Tennis Courts.
0 120,000
Tot Lot Playground &
Upgrades
Intersection of Grant Cresent &
Daniel Avenue
Installation of new benches, trees and possibly
a tot lot within the City property.
0 250,000*
Wood Decking Reversing Falls Lookout beside
bridge
Wood Decking Replacement.0 100,000
TOTAL:$1,098,000 $5,274,117
Page 6 of 10
541
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Transit
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Bus Shelters Various Locations Replace Transit Shelters (Ellerdale & Wood
Hollow, Margaret, Ellerdale Villa)
0 36,000
Transit Bus Replacement Various Locations Replace two Transit Buses. Other Share
funding from Permanent Transit Funding
($630,000) as well as PNB’s Capital Renewal
Fund ($1.745M).
2,375,000 25,000*
TOTAL:$2,375,000 $61,000
Page 7 of 10
542
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Transportation
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Asphalt Roadway
Resurfacing and Curb &
Sidewalk Renewal -
Neighbourhoods
Various locations Renewal of asphalt roadway and concrete curb
and sidewalk including drainage control and
landscaping in conjunction with the annual
asphalt roadway maintenance and rehabilitation
program. Project funded under the CCBF
(2024-2028) funding program as well through
PNB’s Capital Renewal Fund.
6,550,000 0*
Canterbury Street Duke Street to Queen Street Street reconstruction (excavation, backfill,
curb, sidewalk, paving), including design and
construction management services. Project
funded under the CCBF (2019-2023) funding
program.
750,000 0*
Central Peninsula and
Lower West Side
Central Peninsula and Lower
West Side
Long Term Planning to Address Climate
Change in Central Peninsula and Lower West
Side - Phase I
0 200,000w&s
Charlotte Street Broad Street to Vulcan Street Street reconstruction, (excavation, backfill,
curb, sidewalk, landscaping, paving), including
design and construction management services.
Asphalt pavements $105,000 / 0.62 LK. Project
contingent on the City receiving CHIF funding
(73.33%).
993,622 361,379w&s *
Charlotte Street Queen Square North to Princess
Street
Street reconstruction (excavation, backfill,
curb, sidewalk, landscaping, paving), including
design and construction management services.
Asphalt pavements $125,000 / 0.83LK. Project
funded under Bilateral Funding.
622,967 545,000w&s *
Courtenay Bay Causeway Crown Street to Bayside Drive Design Services for the raising of the
Courtenay Bay Causeway - Phase I . Other
Share is DMAF funding. Project contingent on
the City signing DMAF funding agreement.
691,271 1,036,906*
Engineering
Investigations and Design
Various locations Funding for engineering investigations and
design for various projects under Transporation
and Storm categories.
0 80,000
Fleet Replacement Various locations Fleet Replacement for General Fund (Funded
from Fleet Capital Reserves).
0 3,000,000
Howes Lake Landfill Howes Lake Landfill Howes Lake Landfill Closure - Phase I.
Funding from the City's Capital Reserve.
1,500,000
Lansdowne Avenue Visart Street to Pugsley Avenue Street reconstruction (excavation, backfill,
curb, sidewalk, landscaping and paving),
including design and construction management
services. Asphalt pavements $64,000 / 0.42
LK. Project funded under the CCBF (2024-
2028) funding program.
560,000 0w&s *
Page 8 of 10
543
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Transportation
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
North End Main Street to Kennedy Street Design services for North End (Main Street to
Kennedy Street) Sewer Separation Project
(Forum Site) (Transportation Component)
(including Indigenous Consultation, GHG
calculations and Climate Reporting
requirements) (Project contingent on the City
reciving CHIF funding 73.33%). .
216,324 78,677w&s *
Retaining Wall renewals Various Locations Retaining Wall renewal(s) based on
Consultant's recommendations (Locations to be
determined based on severity).
0 475,000
Rope Walk Road Somerset Street @ Rope Walk
Intersection
Road reconstruction to add left turn lane
(excavation, backfill, curb, sidewalk,
landscaping, paving), including design and
construction management services as well as
obtaining required land.
0 250,000
Roundabout Loch Lomond Road and Airport
Arterial
Construction of a new roundabout at the
intersection of Loch Lomond Road and the
Airport Arterial. Project is congingent on the
City recieving Other Share funding
DTI/Province. City Share funding from the
City's Capital Reserve.
1,000,000 1,000,000*
Sidewalk Plows Various locations Purchase of 4 new Sidewalk Plows to align
with the City's Strategic Plan.
0 1,000,000
Traffic Signals Somerset Street @ Churchill
Boulavard
Design services to upgrade the Somerset Street
& Churchill Blvd Intersection (Upgrades
required for New North End School).
0 180,000
TOTAL:$11,384,183 $9,706,961
Page 9 of 10
544
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
2026
Urban and Rural Storm
Project Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
21-Oct-25
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
PROPOSED GENERAL FUND PROGRAM
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s/Pvt: WATER AND SEWER or PAVEMENT RELATED PROJECTS
C-**: PROJECTS CARRIED OVER FOR COMPLETION THE FOLLOWING YEAR
PROJECTS INDICATED WITH * ARE DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Charlotte Street Broad Street to Vulcan Street Design and Construction of the Charlotte Street
Reconstruction project (Broad St. to Vulcan St)
including new storm outfall. (Project
contingent on the City reciving CHIF funding
73.33%).
6,511,704 2,368,296w&s *
Charlotte Street Queen Square North to Princess
Street
Install approx. 280m of new 300 mm storm
sewer, including design and construction
management services. Project to be funded
under Bilateral Funding.
316,554 432,000w&s *
Lansdowne Avenue Visart Street to Pugsley Avenue Install approx. 175 m of new 300 mm storm
sewer, including design and construction
management services. Project funded under the
CCBF (2024-2028) funding program.
330,000 0w&s *
Lower Cove Loop Sewer
Rehabilitation
Charlotte Street to Lift Station 9 Construction to separate the Lower Cove
combined sewer system to reduce flood water
infiltration and tidewater inflow from entering
the sanitary system (Phase 1 of 2). Project
includes construction management services.
Project partially funded under the DMAF
funding program.
1,345,720 2,018,579*
North End Main Street to Kennedy Street Design services for North End (Main Street to
Kennedy Street) Sewer Separation Project
(Forum Site) (Storm Component). (Project
contingent on the City reciving CHIF funding
73.33%).
190,541 69,300w&s *
Riverhill Drive
Stormwater
Improvements
Riverhill Drive Area Design services to complete improvements to
the storm sewer system in the area based on
consultants investigation and recommendations
(Phase I).
0 100,000w&s
TOTAL:$8,694,519 $4,988,175
Page 10 of 10
545
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
CAPITAL PROGRAM SUMMARY
W & S UTILITY FUND
23-Oct-25
Category Other
Share
Utility
Share
No. of
Projects Total
Proposed Program Summary For - 2026
$1,125,000 $975,000Industrial Water Renewal - East 4 $2,100,000
$475,000 $0Industrial Water Renewal - West 1 $475,000
$2,897,034 $3,952,727Infrastructure Renewal - Sanitary 13 $6,849,761
$1,992,806 $6,018,691Infrastructure Renewal - Water 17 $8,011,497
$0 $290,000Safe, Clean Drinking Water 1 $290,000
Summary of Capital Costs (Utility Share)
Infrastructure Renewal -
Sanitary
35.2%
Infrastructure Renewal -
Water
53.6%
Industrial Water
Renewal - West
0.0%
Safe, Clean Drinking
Water
2.6%
Industrial Water Renewal - East 8.7%
$6,489,840 $11,236,418 $17,726,258TOTALS:36
Page 1 of 8546
Industrial Water Renewal - East
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Aqueduct pipe repair Between Robertson Lake and
Latimer Lake
Investigation, design and repair of existing
aqueduct pipe between Robertson Lake and
Latimer Lake.
210,000 390,000*
Loch Lomond Watershed McBrien Lake Dams Renew the Southeast dam and construct as
much access road as possible to the Southwest
dam including design and construction
management (Phase 3).
175,000 325,000*
Raw water billing meters Irving oil refinery New raw water billing meters (2) for Irving oil
refinery.
600,000 0*
Renewed Transmission
main - design
Between Roberston Lake and
Latimer Lake
Complete a design to install a new transmission
main between Roberston Lake and Latimer
Lake. Project to include the investigation of
required land to proceed with construction.
140,000 260,000
TOTAL:$1,125,000 $975,000
Page 2 of 8547
Industrial Water Renewal - West
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Mill Street Custody
Transfer Station
Mill Street Mill Street Custody Transfer Station -
Backflow preventor and new meter for 250mm
line to IPP.
475,000 0*
TOTAL:$475,000 $0
Page 3 of 8548
Infrastructure Renewal - Sanitary
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Charlotte Street Broad Street to Vulcan Street Renew approx. 210m of 300mm T.C. sanitary
sewer, including design and construction
management services. Project contingent on the
City receiving CHIF funding (73.33%).
717,024 260,781*
Charlotte Street Queen Square North to Princess
Street
Renew approx. 280m of 375mm T.C. with new
375mm sanitary sewer, including design and
construction management services. Project
partially funded by Integrated Bilateral Funding.
320,768 435,000*
Connors Street & Morris
Street
Connors Street & Morris Street Design and construction of an off-road sanitary
sewer realignment between Connors Street &
Morris Street.
0 275,000
Kennebecasis 1 or Gault
Road Lift Station
1099 Kennebecasis Drive /
Gault Road
Kennebecasis 1 LS - Reconstruct lift station
above flood level to provide for reliable
collection of wastewater, including design and
construction management services. Project
being completed as part of an approved DMAF
funding program or Gault Road LS -
Replacement of a wastewater pumping station
that is at the end of it's asset life to provide for
reliable collection of wastewater, including
design and construction management services.
0 1,000,000
Lancaster Lagoon Lancaster Lagoon Design services to replace the liner at the
Lancaster Lagoon.
0 250,000
Lancaster Lagoon
Generator
Lancaster Lagoon Design and construction of the Lancaster
Lagoon Generator upgrade project including
duct banks and required programming.
0 360,000
Lansdowne Avenue Visart Street to Pugsley Avenue Install approx. 175 m of new 300 mm sanitary
sewer, including design and construction
management services. Project funded under
CCBF(2024-2028).
420,000 0*
Majors Brook Lift Station Rothesay Avenue Replacement of a wastewater pumping station
that is at the end of it's asset life to provide for
reliable collection of wastewater, including
design and construction management services
and easment aquisition. Project funded under
CCBF(2024-2028).
1,100,000 25,000*
North End Main Street to Kennedy Street Design services for the North End (Main Street
to Kennedy Street) Sewer Separation Project
(Forum Site) (Sanitary Component). Project
contingent on the City receiving CHIF funding
(73.33%).
142,552 51,846*
Page 4 of 8549
Infrastructure Renewal - Sanitary
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Removal and disposal of
sludge from sludge bags
Lancaster Lagoon Removal and disposal of a portion of the sludge
from sludge bags at the Lancaster Lagoon
(Phase 1 of 2).
0 600,000
Riverhill Drive Sanitary
Improvements
Riverhill Drive Area Design services to complete improvements to
the existing sanitary sewer system in the area
based on consultants investigation.
0 100,000
Structural lining Various Locations Structurally line and/or point repairs to existing
sanitary sewers, including design and
construction management services.
0 300,000
WWTP Millidgeville UV Millidgeville WWTP Supplemential funding for the commissioning
of the new UV disinfection system and building
with updated mechanical and electrical
components. Project partially funded under the
DMAF funding program.
196,690 295,100*
TOTAL:$2,897,034 $3,952,727
Page 5 of 8550
Infrastructure Renewal - Water
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Champlain Heights PS Champlain Heights Pump Station Design and construction of a Backup Generator
for the Champlain Heights Pump Station.
0 1,000,000
Charlotte Street Broad Street to Vulcan Street Renew approx. 210m of 250 mm C.I.
watermain with new 250mm watermain
including a new water bottle filling station and
including design and construction management
services. Project contingent on the City
receiving CHIF funding (73.33%).
908,510 330,424*
Charlotte Street Queen Square North to Princess
Street
Renew approx. 280m of 300mm C.I.
watermain, including design and construction
management services. Project partially funded
by Integrated Bilateral Funding.
504,071 600,000*
Chesley Drive Main Street North to Reversing
Falls Bridge
Design services to upgrade approximately 2
kms of watermain on Chesley Drive from Main
Street North to the Reversing Falls Bridge.
0 350,000
Climate Change Planning Central Peninsula / Lower West
Side
Long Term Planning to Address Climate
Change in Central Peninsula and Lower West
Side - Phase I
0 200,000
Engineering
Investigations and Design
Various locations Funding for engineering investigations and
design for various projects under the Water and
Sanitary categories.
0 100,000
Fleet Replacement Various locations Fleet Replacement for Utility Fund (Funded
from Fleet Capital Reserves)
0 750,000
Lansdowne Avenue Visart Street to Pugsley Avenue Renew approx. 175 m of 150 mm watermain
with 200 mm watermain, including design and
construction management services. Project
funded under CCBF(2024-2028).
530,000 0*
North End Main Street to Kennedy Street Design Services for the North End (Main Street
to Kennedy Street) Sewer Separation Project
(Forum Site) including Indigenous
Consultation, GHG calculations and Climate
Reporting requirements). (Water Component).
Project contingent on the City receiving CHIF
funding (73.33%).
50,225 18,267*
Ocean Drive & Seaward
Cresent wells
Ocean Drive & Seaward Cresent Concept planning for the future operation of the
Ocean Drive & Seaward Cresent wells. Project
scope to include proposed improvements
requried to both facililities.
0 110,000
Rockwood Water Tank
Improvements
Fisher Lake Drive Rehabilitation of the existing Rockwood Park
Water Storage Tank including upgrades to the
existing access road.
1,200,000
Page 6 of 8551
Infrastructure Renewal - Water
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Rothesay Road Bridge
Hanger Renewal
Rothesay Road Bridge Near
Brookville Manufacturing
Design and construction services for the
renewal of the watermain hangers on the
Rothesay Road bridge.
0 310,000
South Bay Wellfield South Bay Wellfield Investigation and concept design to address
South Bay Wellfield pump shaft failures.
0 75,000
Universal Metering City Wide Complete a detailed plan (i.e. Road map) on
how Saint John Water would execute the
installation of metering throughout the City in a
phased approach.
0 350,000
Water Strategy (Overall) East/ West Saint John Investigation and concept design to complete a
long term water strategy to address residential,
commerial and industrial growth throughout the
City.
0 400,000
Water Tank
Improvements
Sandy Point Road Investigation and the completion of conceptual
design options to potentially change the
location or add a new tank to double feed the
Millidgeville area and the Sandy Point High
Zone.
75,000
Water Tank
Improvements
Various Locations Design services required to move forward the
design to rehabilitate existing water tanks.
150,000
TOTAL:$1,992,806 $6,018,691
Page 7 of 8552
Safe, Clean Drinking Water
Project Location Description
Other
Share
Utility
Share
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
SAINT JOHN WATER
PROPOSED W & S FUND PROGRAM 2026
MDH: MUNICIPAL DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
PDH: PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
RDH: REGIONALLY DESIGNATED HIGHWAYS
w&s: WATER AND SEWER RELATED PROJECTS
G&D: PROJECT IS FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
*: PROJECTS DEPENDANT ON FUNDING FROM OTHERS
This is a tentative program listing of proposed capital projects.
This list has not been approved by Common Council.
Priority assignments are subject to change at any time.
23-Oct-25
Safe, Clean Drinking
Water Program
Water Treatment Plant Safe, Clean Drinking Water Program Contract
annual Rehabilitation Payment for the Water
Treatment plant.
0 290,000
TOTAL:$0 $290,000
Page 8 of 8553
2026 Draft General and Utility Fund Capital Budget
Common Council –November 3rd, 2025
Small City,
Big Heart.
554
2026 Capital Budget Inputs
•Asset Management Plan
•Council Priorities
•City Approved Plans
•Capital Budget Policy
•Debt Management Policy
•Climate Change
•Long Term Financial Plan
•Funding Programs
•Draft 5-year Capital Program – Projects that don’t make the 2026 program, will be
rolled into the opening 2027 program. Final 5-year plan to be brought to Finance
Committee late fall 2025
2026 Draft General Fund Capital Budget
2 555
2026 Draft General Fund
and Utility Fund Capital
Budgets
General Fund Capital Budget - $53,879,656
City Share - $26,750,000
Other Share - $27,129,656
Utility Fund Capital Budget - $17,726,258
Utility Share- $11,236,418
Other Share - $6,489,840
556
2026 General Fund Draft Capital
Budget
City Share – General Fund - $26,750,000
City Debt - $9,000,000
Pay As you Go - $11,500,000
Capital Reserves - $6,250,000
Continued focus on Financial Principles
Targeting 25% reduction on infrastructure deficit over 10 years
Continue to focus on pay as go by maintaining or increasing annually
Reduction of debt by 25% over next 10 years
557
2026 General Fund Draft Capital
Budget
Other Share – $27,129,656
Funding From
Regional Development Corporation (RDC)
Provincial Capital Renewal Funding
Canadian Community Building Fund (CCBF)
Integrated Bilateral Funding
Transit Renewal Funding
Disaster Mitigation Adaptation Fund (DMAF)
Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund (CHIF)
This funding allows more investment in
Regional Facilities
Active Transportation – Harbour Passage Extension
Asphalt Resurfacing, Curb and Sidewalk Renewal
Street Reconstruction and Reimagination
Climate Change Resilience – Courtney Bay Causeway
Sewer Separation/Storm Outflows 558
2026 Investment in
New/Enhancements
City Market – Strategic Plan Investments - $647,700
Extension of Harbour Passage – Riverview Drive - $1,830,000
Upgrades to Rainbow Park (Phase 2) - $1,467,117
Four new Sidewalk Plows - $1,000,000
New security gates for Leisure Services Office - $100,000
New Roundabout – Airport Arterial - $2,000,000
New Cricket Field - $140,000 (additional funds included in prior capital budgets)
559
Overview of
2026
Investments
in Existing
Assets
ERP Replacement Project - $1,000,000
Saint John Fire – Ladder Truck Replacement Phase 3 - $1,000,000
Regional Facilities
CGAC - $2,660,000
TD Station $850,000
Trade and Convention Centre - $100,000
Various Fire Stations - $200,000
Shamrock Park Washroom/Changerooms - $500,000
St. Patrick Pedway - $500,000
560
Overview of 2026
Investments in Existing
Assets (cont.)
Parks and Recreation
Renewal Ellerdale Playground - $600,000
Tot Lot Playground and Upgrades - $250,000
Saint John Transit – 2 buses and shelters - $2,436,000
Asphalt Curb/Sidewalks - $1,500,000
Raising of Courtney Bay Causeway - $1,728,177
Howes Lake Landfill Closure Phase 1 - $6,550,000
Traffic Signals – Somerset/Churchill Boulevard - $180,000
Lower Cover Loop Sewer Rehabilitation - $3,364,299
561
Overview of 2026 Investments
in Existing Assets (cont.)
Road Reconstruction Projects
Charlotte Street – Broad to Vulcan Street
Charlotte Street – Queen Square N to Princess Street
Landsdowne Ave. – Visart to Pugsley Ave.
Rope Walk Road – Somerset Street to Intersection
Canterbury Street – Duke to Queen Street
Proposing – Capital and Funding Accountant Position - $120,000
562
Saint John Water –2026 Draft Capital Budget
10 563
Saint John Water – 2026
Draft Capital Budget
Saint John Water investments are much more than replacing pipes under a street;
Climate Change/Environment – investments include reconstruction of wastewater lift stations above flood level to ensure reliable collection of wastewater, protect the
environment
Enhancing the reliability of the water and wastewater systems
Watershed Improvements
Investment to ensure the City can meet
its growth objectives.
11564
Saint John Water – 2026
Draft Capital Budget
Significant Investments in Sanitary System
Wastewater Pumping Stations
Kennebecasis Drive - $1,000,000
Majors Brook - $1,125,000
Wastewater Treatment Plants - $491,790
Millidgeville
Sanitary Sewer Replacement
Charlotte Street - $1,772,368
Conner & Morris Street- $275,000
Lancaster Avenue - $420,000
Structural Lining - $300,000
12565
Saint John Water – 2026
Draft Capital Budget
Significant Investments in Water Network
Watermain Renewal
Charlotte Street - $2,495,324
Lansdowne Ave - $530,000
Rehabilitation of Water Storage Tanks - $1,200,000
Universal Metering Planning – $350,000
System backup investments – $1,000,000
Loch Lomond Watershed - $500,000
Aqueduct Pipe Repairs - $500,000
Meter replacements for IOL - $600,000
Mill Street Transfer Station - $290,000
13566
Conclusion
The proposed Capital Budgets for both the General and Utility Funds align with the Capital Budget Policy, Reserve Policies and Long-Term Financial Plan.
Both budgets balance the need for strategic reinvestment into the City’s infrastructure while ensuring there is also new investment.
Staff are recommending Common Council approve the 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget.
567
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Council
SUBJECT: Municipal Emergency Response Plan (MERP) – 2025 Revision
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner Chief Administrative
Officer
Public Safety
Committee Chair
Richard Evans
/Leah
Robichaud
Rob Nichol J. Brent McGovern Councillor Greg
Norton
RECOMMENDATIONS
Public Safety Committee recommends Common Council approve the following
recommendations:
1. "It is recommended Common Council adopts the revised Municipal Emergency
Response Plan (MERP) attached to this report which was reviewed in
accordance with the Emergency Measures Act of the Province of New
Brunswick and the Saint John Emergency Measures By-Law.”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City’s current Municipal Emergency Response Plan (MERP) was adopted in
October 2021 with the requirement for annual review and update as required.
Administrative changes to the MERP are done as required, however any updates or
changes to the plan require Council approval. A full review has been conducted in 2025
which included internal and external engagement to ensure the plan reflects the
current risk profile of the community. The result is a revised MERP which includes
eighteen response plans for eighteen primary hazards identified. The revisions were
presented at the November 19th Public Safety Committee meeting.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
January 14, 2019, it was resolved that Common Council refer item 11.1 Expanding the
Saint John Common Council Committee Structure to the City Manager, to report back
recommendations on developing a plan to expand the City of Saint John Common
Council Committee Structure to include a third Committee, that being a Public Safety
Committee / Environment and Transportation services.
M&C No. 2025-284
Report Date November 19, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Public Safety Services
568
On September 20, 2021, it was resolved that Common Council adopt the Municipal
Emergency Response Plan (MERP) which was developed in accordance with the
provincial Emergency Measures Act, RSNB 2011, c. 147 and the Saint John Emergency
Measures By -Law, By- law Number EM- 7.
On October 30, 2023, it was resolved that Common Council:
1. Adopt the revised Municipal Emergency Response Plan (MERP) attached to this
report which was reviewed in accordance with the Emergency Measures Act of the
Province of New Brunswick and the Saint John Emergency Measures By-Law; and
2. Direct the CAO to incorporate feedback provided by the Medical Officer of Health
for the South Region, Dr. Kimberly Barker at the Public Safety Committee meeting
of October 25, 2023, and that staff make further modifications to the Municipal
Emergency Response Plan (MERP) as appropriate and report back to Public Safety
Committee at its next scheduled meeting with a further revised MERP.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The revised MERP is aligned with Councils’ priorities, objectives “Belong” and
“Perform” by promoting a safe place to live and accountability in the delivery of public
services through established plans, policies, and best practices.
REPORT
The Municipal Emergency Response Plan and the associated supplementary plans are
dynamic documents that are updated as required. The MERP must be reviewed and
updated annually to ensure it remains current and reflects the current conditions.
Revisions have been recommended to the risk category and actions for Forest/
Wildfire Risks, Flood and Complex Structure Fires to reflect actual experience in the
last 5 years. The revisions were presented on November 19th to the Public Safety
Committee and now need Council approval.
2025 was a significant year for wildfire risk in the province. The province was under a
provincial wide burn ban for much of the summer months, with record low rainfall
and high temperatures. New Brunswick had over 430 wildfires, burning 3408
hectares in 2025. The City of Saint was fortunate to not have a wildfire that exceeded
our firefighting resources. The Department of Natural Resources were brought in on
several occasions to assess wildfires within the City boundaries. With this we are
recommending an increase to the likelihood rating for item 2.6.5 Forest/ Wildland
Fire from a 4 to 5, which results in an overall risk category of High. Resources and
recommended actions have also been updated in the plan.
The flood risk rating has been reduced from 5 to 4 due to the absence of significant
flooding events since 2019. This change reflects five consecutive years without an
incident requiring SJEMO activation. However, flooding remains an ongoing concern
for the City each year.
The risk rating for Complex Structure Fires has been raised from 4 to 5 to reflect
actual incidents over the past five years. SJEMO team members are preparing a plan 569
for the vulnerable population during emergency incidents. This was an action item
from the Housing for All strategy adopted by Council.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Internal input has been received from all Service Areas, and Saint John Police.
Public Input has been solicited through “Shape Your City”; and Town Hall.
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A –Saint John Municipal Emergency Response Plan
– Revised November 19, 2025
570
City of Saint John
Municipal Emergency Response Plan
Saint John Emergency Management Organization
City of Saint John P.O. Box 1971
Saint John, NB E2L 4L1
November 19, 2025
571
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 2 of 65
MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
FORWARD
Saint John Common Council adopted the city’s original The City of Saint John Municipal Emergency Response Plan
(MERP) in 1998 and its most recent update in 2023. As part of the adoption of the updated MERP, Common Council,
in concert with the Public Safety Committee, adopted the Safety and Continuity Management Program of Plan / Do
/ Check / Act, and a Service Review Schedule which include a regular review of the MERP.
The Saint John Emergency Management Organization (SJEMO) in the winter of 2015, adopted the Incident Command
System (ICS) as the emergency management framework for managing large scale incidents. The following Municipal
Emergency Response Plan follows the nationally recognized Incident Command System.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
In Canada, municipalities are responsible for the first response to emergencies within their boundaries, supported by
the provincial government if the scale of the emergency exceeds municipal capabilities.
SJEMO has adopted the following guiding principles to ensure the highest standard of municipal response.
- SJEMO activation – The Saint John Emergency Management Organization is mobilized when an emerging
incident is beyond the scope, capacity and capability of primary response agencies and requires
coordination of resources.
- Partnerships – All members of the community have a role to play in emergency management. Emergency
preparedness starts at the level of the individual and households and includes private sector businesses;
industrial partners; volunteer and non-government organizations and academia. Effective partnerships with
the emergency management organization and first response agencies must be based on effective
collaboration, coordination, and communication.
- Continuous Improvement – SJEMO aspires to be better today than it was yesterday and better tomorrow
than it is today. Through a vigorous and systematic after-action review process following any incident,
SJEMO aims to learn from any gaps and improve emergency preparedness, emergency response and
measurement of success.
- During emergency mitigation SJEMO will follow ICS identifying Problems and Priorities; setting objectives;
establishing strategies and dispatching resources to carry out the necessary tasks with a positive
perspective. All ideas and viable solutions will be explored. (See PPOST)
COMPANION PLANS (not accompanying the MERP)
- Evacuation Plan
- Pandemic Plan
- Flood Mitigation Plan
- Emergency Social Services Plan
- Communication Plan – Including Crisis
Communication Plan
AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN (Proprietary)
- All Hazards Municipal Response Actions including Site Specific Emergency Response Plans
AUTHORITY
This plan is adopted by Council, under the authority of the New Brunswick Emergency Measures Act; and The City of
Saint John By-Law Number EM-7, A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the Event of An Emergency, also known as the Saint
John Emergency Measures By-Law, originally enacted by Common Council on September 12, 2005 (See Appendix A
and B).
Responsibility for the management of municipal emergency operations rests with the Mayor and Council. Council is
the ultimate authority for decision-making during an emergency while delegating operational decisions to the Saint
John Emergency Management Organization Director.
572
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 3 of 65
The EMO (Emergency Management Organization) Director is responsible for coordinating the efficient
emergency response operations in the community on behalf of the Mayor and Council. The Director may activate
the Emergency Operations Center partially or fully, depending on the magnitude of the emergency.
573
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 4 of 65
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part 1 - General Information
1.1 Background
1.2 Areas of Influence and Interest
1.3 Phases of an Emergency Operation
1.4 Graduated Response
1.5 Levels of Responsibility
1.6 Levels of Response
1.7 Authority – Minister of Justice and Public Safety
1.8 States of Emergency / Link to Emergency Measures Act (electronic copy only)
1.9 Saint John Emergency Management Organization (SJEMO)
1.10 Emergency Operations Centre (EOC)
1.11 Activation Timeline
1.12 Local Service districts
1.13 Emergency communications
1.14 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Volunteer Agencies
1.15 Mutual Aid and Request for Assistance (RFA)
1.16 Termination of Operations
1.17 Plan Audits
1.18 Training and Exercises
1.19 Budget
1.20 Definitions
Part 2 – Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA)
2.1 Risk
2.2 Likelihood
2.3 Consequence Ratings
2.4 Consequence Categories
2.5 HIRA Total Risk Score Ranges
2.6 Hazard Summary with Applicable Action(s)
2.6.1 Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, or Explosive (CBRNE)
2.6.2 Flood
2.6.3 Extreme Weather (Blizzard/ Ice Storm/ Thunderstorm/ Hurricane)
2.6.4 Complex Fire (Structure/ Industrial)
2.6.5 Forest Fire/ Wildfire
2.6.6 Extreme Temperatures (Heat/Cold)
2.6.7 Power Outage
2.6.8 Landslide/Erosion/Earthquake
2.6.9 Public Health/Pandemic
2.6.10 Cyber Attack
2.6.11 Active/Violent Threat
2.6.12 Communication Failure
2.6.13 Air Quality
2.6.14 Aviation Incident
2.6.15 Port/ Marine (Cruise Ships/Cranes)
2.6.16 Potable Water
2.6.17 Civil Disorder
2.6.18 Critical Infrastructure Failure (Transportation/ Engineering)
Part 3 - Activation Levels, Municipal and Regional Roles and Responsibilities
3.1 Activation Levels
574
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 5 of 65
3.1.1 Level 1 – Enhanced Monitoring
3.1.2 Level 2 – Partial Activation
3.1.3 Level 3 – Full Activation
3.2 Municipal Roles and Responsibilities
3.2.1 Emergency Management Council Committee
3.2.2 Site Incident Commander
3.2.3 Site Information Officer
3.2.4 Site Liaison Officer
3.2.5 Site Safety Officer
3.2.6 Site Operations Section
3.2.7 Site Planning Section
3.2.8 Site Logistics Section
3.2.9 Site Finance and Admin Section
3.3 Municipal Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) Team Responsibilities
3.3.1 Director of EOC
3.3.2 Liaison Officer of EOC
3.3.3 Risk Management Officer of EOC
3.3.4 Information Officer of EOC
3.3.5 Operations Section Chief of EOC
3.3.6 Planning Section Chief of EOC
3.3.7 Duty Officer of EOC
3.3.8 Logistics Section Chief of EOC
3.3.9 Finance and Administration Section Chief of EOC
3.4 Regional REAC/REOC Roles and Responsibilities
3.4.1 Tasks Common to All
3.4.2 Department of Justice and Public Safety (JPS) – REMC
3.4.3 NB Emergency Public Information (NBEMO-PIO)
3.4.4 Emergency Management Communications Group (EMCG)
3.4.5 Office of the Fire Marshall (OFM)
3.4.6 Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)
3.4.7 Department of Transportation and Infrastructure (DTI)
3.4.8 Department of Natural Resources and Energy (DNRE)
3.4.9 Ambulance New Brunswick (ANB)
3.4.10 Department of Health
3.4.11 Emergency Social Services (ESS)
3.4.12 Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD)
3.4.13 Canadian Red Cross
3.4.14 Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries (DAFF)
3.4.15 New Brunswick Power (Saint John Energy)
3.4.16 Department of Environment and Local Government (DELG)
4.1 Appendixes
4.1.1 Appendix “A” – NB Emergency Measures Act
4.1.2 Appendix “B” - The Saint John Emergency Measures By-Law
4.1.3 Appendix “C” – State of Local Emergency Template
4.1.4 Appendix “D” – Activation Timeline
575
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 6 of 65
4.1.5 Appendix “E” – Contact List
4.1.6. Appendix “F” –Planning “P”
4.1.7. Annex “1” – Evacuation Plan (not attached as an appendix)
576
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 7 of 65
PART 1 – GENERAL INFORMATION
Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this Municipal Emergency Response Plan (MERP) is to outline procedures to be
followed by local government to provide a prompt and coordinated response to an emergency,
and activities that support emergency preparedness. The MERP addresses incidents that may
cause damage of a magnitude warranting activation of the Emergency Operations Centre (EOC).
Scope
The scope of this plan includes officials and staff of the municipality of Saint John and assisting
agencies within the boundaries of The City of Saint John. It also provides for support of neighbouring
jurisdictions under provincial or federal authority if called upon to do so. The MERP does not address
emergencies which are normally handled at the scene by the appropriate first responding agencies.
Vision
The vision of the Saint John Emergency Management Organization is for Saint John to be a disaster-
resilient and sustainable community in which private and corporate citizens collaborate with the
SJEMO to cultivate and sustain an effective community-based emergency preparedness culture.
Mission
The mission of the SJEMO is to develop, implement, and maintain a highly effective emergency
management program that takes an all-hazards, ICS-based approach to emergencies while
promoting continuous improvement through on-going education and review.
LIST OF AMENDMENTS:
AMENDMENT NO. DATE BY WHOM AMENDED DATE AMENDED
01 2021-08-04 Public Safety Committee 2021-09-20
02 2023-10-25 Public Safety Committee 2023-10-25
03 2023-12-06 Public Safety Committee 2023-12-06
04 2025-11-19 Public Safety Committee 2025-11-19
Copies of the complete Municipal Emergency Response Plan and any amendments to be provided to
the following Distribution List by title or equivalent:
Mayor and Council Commissioner of Human Resources
Chief Administrative Officer Manager of Supply Chain Management
General Council Commissioner of Growth and Community Services
Common Clerk Commissioner of Public Works and Transportation
Fire Chief / Director of EMO Commissioner of Utilities and Infrastructure
Police Chief Chief of Staff and Chief Financial Officer
Director of External Relations Operations Manager, Stormwater Rural
Manager of EMO/ Assistant Deputy Chief
Other Stakeholder agencies:
Saint John Energy NBEMO Saint John Transit Horizon Health
577
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 8 of 65
Red Cross Salvation Army Industrial Stakeholders Public Health
1. General Information
1.1 Background
1.1.1
Emergency situations, at times, generate confusion with respect to roles, responsibilities, and
jurisdictions. By means of the following Municipal Emergency Response Plan, needless duplication of
effort or waste of resources will be reduced. MERP was developed using the Incident Command System
and was refined with the CSA (Canadian Standards Association) Z1600-17 Emergency and Continuity
Management Program.
MERP is divided into three colour-coded parts.
a. Part 1 (Green): General Information.
b. Part 2 (Yellow): Municipal Response/Actions; and
c. Part 3 (Red): Roles and Responsibilities during Activation.
1.2 Areas of Influence and Interest
1.2.1
In the event of an emergency, delineating areas of influence and interest is critical to managing and
coordinating, limiting disruption, and ensuring that only the resources required during the emergency
are used. As defined:
a. The Area of Influence is tied to jurisdictions and the requisite authorities to commit the
necessary resources to influence the outcome of an emergency.
b. The Area of Interest is defined by defined by geography, connectivity, and time. The Area
of Interest is further defined by actual or potential events, normally situated outside the
area of influence, which may impact the region.
1.3 Phases of an Emergency
1.3.1
An emergency will normally graduate through four distinct phases. They are:
a. The Warning Phase consists of actions taken to counter and curtail the effects of the
incident. These include alerting the public and Municipal authorities and preparing
resources.
b. The Impact Phase refers to the event itself.
c. The Response Phase, which may overlap the Impact Phase, covers the period during which
the emergency is brought under control.
d. The Recovery Phase is the clean-up period used to return the community to normal.
1.4 Graduated Response
578
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 9 of 65
1.4.1
A graduated response allows for the control and coordination of resources assigned to deal with an
emergency. It allows for the use of only those resources, human and material, necessary to meet the
requirements of that emergency and speaks to attempting to deal with an emergency at the lowest
level practicable. In keeping with this concept, the response at the Municipal level will be tailored to
meet the circumstances of a given emergency.
1.5 Levels of Responsibility
1.5.1
The municipal level of emergency management falls into a graduating system of increased
responsibility, areas of influence and interest that are based on the various levels of government
authority in the Province of New Brunswick as follows:
a. Individual – Individuals are responsible for themselves and their immediate family and
include household and neighbourhood preparations such as the 72 Hour Emergency
Preparedness Kit.
b. Municipal/Local Authority Response – Municipal level resources managed by local
Mayors and Councils, and Local EMO.
c. Regional – Regional level resources coordinated by the NB EMO Regional Emergency
Management Coordinators (REMC) and Regional Emergency Action Committees
(REAC).
d. Provincial – Government of New Brunswick resources managed by the Department of
Justice and Public Safety (JPS) and NB EMO.
e. National – Government of Canada resources managed by Public Safety Canada.
1.6 Levels of Response
1.6.1
A graduated response will focus efforts to ensure the lives and welfare, and property of citizens and
the environment are at the forefront of response actions. As such, the following levels of response
will be used:
a. Individual Response – Assist municipal and local authorities in identifying the
emergency.
b. Municipal or Local Authority Response – Municipal authorities are responsible for
dealing with the emergency.
c. Regional Response - When the capacity of the local authority is exceeded or is likely to
be exceeded, a regional response is activated through the REMC.
d. Provincial Response - When a regional response is insufficient, the REMC will request
assistance from the Provincial Emergency Action Committee (PEAC).
e. National Response - If additional response is required, federal support and assistance
will be arranged by the PEAC.
1.7 Authority – Minister of Public Safety
1.7.1
In accordance with the Emergency Measures Act, the Minister of Public Safety is responsible for
emergency declarations, executive coordination, and assigned executive powers.
The Minister advises the Premier and Executive Council on emergency management and security
matters, and coordinates the assistance provided by:
579
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 10 of 65
a. Department of Justice and Public Safety, Deputy Minister.
b. Police, Fire and Emergency Services Division, Assistant Deputy Minister.
c. Executive Director Emergency Services.
d. Director Office of the Provincial Security Advisor; and
e. Director Emergency Measures Organization.
The Minister shall coordinate emergency measures plans within the province and may delegate
powers vested in him by or under the Emergency Measures Act. Subject to the approval of the
Lieutenant-Governor in Council, the Minister may:
a. Enter into agreements with the Government of Canada (GoC), the government of a
province or territory of Canada or the government of a state of the United States of
America, or an agent of any of them, with respect to emergency measures plans.
b. Enter into agreements with the GoC and the Workplace Health, Safety and
Compensation Commission for the administration and payment of compensation
benefits to persons engaged in training or carrying out duties related to a state of
emergency or a state of local emergency: and
c. Acquire by purchase or lease of real and private property for the purposes of
administering the NB EMO.
The Minister may:
a. Divide the Province into districts and sub-districts for the purposes of the Emergency
Measures Act.
b. After consultation with a municipality, designate the boundaries of the municipality to
include areas adjacent thereto.
c. Require municipalities to prepare emergency measures plans, including mutual
assistance programs, and to submit them to the Emergency Measures Organization for
review for adequacy and integration with the Municipal Emergency Response Plans.
d. Establish procedures for the prompt and efficient implementation of emergency
measures plans; and
e. Require any person to develop emergency measures plans in conjunction with the
Emergency Measures Organization or the municipalities to remedy or alleviate any
hazard to persons, property or the environment that is or that may be created:
1. By a condition that exists or may exist on that person’s property.
2. By that person’s use of property.
3. An operation in which that person is or may be engaged; or
4. By a process that that person is or may be utilizing.
1.8 States of Emergency: New Brunswick Emergency Measures Act
1.8.1
The Minister of Public Safety may at any time, when satisfied that an emergency exists or may exist,
declare a state of emergency in respect to all or any area of the province for a maximum of 14 days.
The mayor of a municipality may, under similar circumstances, declare a State of Local Emergency
(SOLE) in respect of that municipality or part of that community for a maximum of 7 days.
580
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 11 of 65
When a state of emergency or a state of local emergency has been declared under this Act, the
Minister or the municipality shall immediately cause the details of the declaration to be
communicated or published by those means that the Minister or municipality considers the most
likely to make the contents of the declaration known to the civil population of the area affected.
On a state of emergency being declared in respect to the Province or an area of the Province, or on
a state of local emergency being declared in respect to a municipality or an area of a municipality,
the Minister may, during the state of emergency, in respect of the Province or an area of the
Province, or the municipality may, during the state of local emergency, in respect of the
municipality or an area of the municipality, as the case may be, do everything necessary for the
protection of property, the environment and the health or safety of persons therein, including:
a. To cause an emergency measures plan to be implemented.
b. To acquire or utilize or cause the acquisition or utilization of any private property by
confiscation or by any means considered necessary.
c. To authorize or require any person to render the aid that the person is competent to
provide.
d. To control or prohibit travel to or from any area or on any road, street, or highway.
e. To provide for the maintenance and restoration of essential facilities, the distribution
of essential supplies and the maintenance and coordination of emergency medical,
social, and other essential services.
f. To cause the evacuation of persons and the removal of livestock and movable property
threatened by a disaster or emergency, and plan for the adequate care and protection
of them.
g. To authorize any person properly identified as authorized by the Minister, by the
Emergency Measures Organization or by the municipal emergency measures
organization to enter any building or on any land without warrant.
h. To cause the demolition or removal of any building, structure, tree, or crop if the
demolition or removal is necessary or advisable for the purposes of reaching the scene
of a disaster, of attempting to forestall its occurrence or of combatting its progress.
i. To procure or fix prices for food, clothing, fuel, equipment, medical or other essential
supplies and the use of property, services, resources, or equipment; and
j. To order the assistance, with or without remuneration, of persons needed to carry out
the provisions mentioned in this section.
And in addition, the Minister may authorize or require a municipality to cause an emergency
measures plan for the municipality, or any part of the municipality, to be implemented.
1.9 Saint John Emergency Management Organization (SJEMO)
1.9.1
When a substantial municipal involvement is indicated or when there is a need to coordinate a
municipal response, SJEMO will be activated.
When credible information supports the need for a coordinated municipal response, SJEMO may be
assembled by the EOC coordinator or designate at any time before or during an emergency. The
SJEMO will use the following activation levels:
a. Level 1 (Green): Enhanced Monitoring: Continuous monitoring by all SJEMO members
of an emergency that may require immediate municipal response.
581
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 12 of 65
b. Level 2 (Yellow): Partial Activation: Once notified, selected SJEMO members may be
called in to assist in supporting ongoing efforts towards an emergency.
c. Level 3 (Red): Full activation: All SJEMO members are to report to the EOC or as
directed.
The EOC will be managed by the SJEMO Manager or his/her designate. The precise municipal
representation in the EOC will depend on the nature and scope of the emergency. It may also
include provincial, federal, or other agency representatives, as necessary.
SJEMO will:
a. Assess a potential emergency within three risk areas:
•natural hazards – the risks associated with natural (geological, meteorological, or
biological) hazards (e.g., earthquake, landslide, flood, drought, pandemic influenza,
foot and mouth disease, insect infestation).
•intentional human actions – the risks associated with chemical, nuclear, or other
hazards, resulting from deliberate actions (e.g., terrorism, sabotage); and
•unintentional human actions – the risks associated with chemical, nuclear, or other
hazards resulting from accidents (e.g., hazardous material spill or release,
explosion/fire, water control structure/dam/levee failure).
b. Prepare or review contingency plans and procedures.
c. Consider the deployment of resources and Incident Commanders to an emergency.
d. Monitor operations, provide direction to departments, regions, Incident Commanders.
e. Provide situation updates and making recommendations to the Director; and
f. If the emergency escalates to the point where further powers are required, the
Municipal EM Coordinator may recommend to Mayor and Council that a State of Local
Emergency be declared in accordance with the Emergency Measures Act (R.S.N.B.
2011, c. 147) and the municipal by-law (EM-7).
1.10 Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
1.10.1
When a substantial Municipal response is required, SJEMO will be activated and report to the EOC
or other assigned location(s). The EOC shall contain the necessary working accommodations and
communications to enable proper coordination. In addition to the EOC, departmental operation
centres or other designated facilities may be established to control and direct departmental
operations.
When required, the following activation levels will be used to notify members of SJEMO. The alert
will come from the SJEMO Director or designated alternate. The levels are:
a. Level 1 (Green): Enhanced Monitoring: Continuous monitoring by all SJEMO members
of an emergency that may require immediate Municipal assistance.
b. Level 2 (Yellow): Partial Activation: Once notified, selected SJEMO members may be
called to assist in supporting ongoing efforts towards an emergency.
582
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 13 of 65
d. Level 3 (Red): Full Activation: All SJEMO members are to report to the EOC or as
assigned (which could include remote location(s).
1.11 Activation Timeline (Municipal Activation Timeline link)
1.11.1
Irrespective of the emergency, when activated, the EOC will use the attached timeline to ensure
interoperability within the municipality and with those attending in a mutual aid capacity.
In addition, NB EMO is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. As part of their normal duties, the
NB EMO staff will monitor events that may impact New Brunswick.
1.12 Local Service Districts (LSDs)
1.12.1
The Department of Environment and Local Government (DELG) Local Service Managers (LSMs) are
members of the REAC. They will monitor, and if necessary, coordinate with the REMC for all
emergency planning and operations for LSDs.
On occasion, municipalities may be requested to support operations in neighboring LSDs. As such,
the City of Saint John will be prepared to assist. Cost capture will be initiated upon receipt of any
request.
1.13 Emergency Communications - / Crisis Communication
1.13.1
The City of Saint John will use the following communications platform:
a. Operational Communications: Routine communications will use the most efficient means
available with due regard to maintaining records of decisions and actions taken. Depending
on the nature of the emergency or immediacy of the communication, other means may be
required:
1. Trunked Mobile Radio (TMR) will allow all agencies to communicate verbally via a
mutual aid channel designated by Provincial Mobile Communications Center (PMCC).
Such a channel should be requested by the responding agency and maintained for the
duration of the event, with additional channels designated, as necessary. PMCC should
record all communication on this system.
2. Social Media, the City’s website, cloud-based platforms, and other technology may be
used to connect the EOC to a REOC (Regional Emergency Operations Centre) to
simultaneously exchange information such as event logs, imagery, and detailed maps.
When available, these should be linked to ensure maximum awareness between various
agencies contributing to the response. Data must be captured and recorded at
scheduled intervals and during significant events.
3. Telephone: With reduction of the traditional land line within the municipal organization
and the increased use of cellular communications, cellular communication will be the
most popular method of rapidly connecting two individuals. Vulnerabilities include
downed lines or cell towers, loss of voice quality, restriction of information sharing and
poor record keeping.
583
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 14 of 65
4. Virtual: With the increased use of virtual meeting platforms such as ‘Teams’ or ‘Zoom’,
it has become easier and more efficient to hold virtual briefing meetings. Vulnerabilities
of this method include no data connection or poor connection quality.
b. Public Information: Communicating information to the public in a clear and timely manner
is a crucial element of managing an incident. Consideration should be given during the
warning phase, if possible. Informing the public of registration and warming centers,
evacuation plans, and recovery operations will assist in reducing anxiety. Many methods
may be utilized.
1. ALERT READY is the national system used by a provincial authority in cases of serious
threat to life and safety. It employs interruptions to the public broadcasting systems
on radio and television. Eventually, it may also have the capability to target specific
cell towers for customized messaging. ALERT READY messaging is to be coordinated
through NBEMO.
2. Public messaging via social media is the most widespread and effective means of
distributing information as it increases coverage as recipients share with friends.
Various media such as e-mail, Facebook, Instagram, and others could be used. To
achieve maximum efficiency, a sole source of verified information should be utilized
to avoid conflicts. Frequent and timely updates must be maintained to prevent
disinformation.
3. Media conferences by persons in authority. Care in avoiding impromptu statements,
and the selection of a known and credible person of authority in the community is
recommended.
4. Self-registry by citizens on municipal warning systems such as the City of Saint John
Emergency Alert system allows for targeted messages over a broad spectrum of
events.
5. Posting written directives at warming shelters, municipal and public offices in
addition to pre-advising citizens of where and how to seek information during
emergencies will be implemented to ensure smooth communication during an
incident.
1.14 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) / Volunteer Agencies
An effective emergency response will depend to a large degree on the full use of all resources in the
community. The province and most municipalities have several social services agencies, clubs,
organizations, and other civic-minded groups who can provide a wide range of skills, people, and
equipment.
Many volunteer agencies are prepared to offer their services in an emergency. These volunteers
should be encouraged. Where appropriate, a memorandum of understanding or a letter of intent
should be prepared and signed by municipal authorities and the volunteer agency.
584
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 15 of 65
These memoranda or letters should specify the forms of assistance to be provided and the
arrangements, including financial, for its provision. These formal arrangements are useful to ensure
the coordination of volunteer activity. Procedures for obtaining and rendering assistance are to be
set out in Municipal Emergency Response Plans. Volunteer agencies will, depending on their
assigned task, be allotted to the appropriate emergency response departments who will control and
coordinate the volunteer agency response.
1.14.1
The following is an example list of NGOs and assisting agencies:
AGENCY FORMS OF ASSISTANCE DEPARTMENT
Emergency Measures
Communication Group (EMCG) Communications NB EMO
Civil Air Search and Rescue
Association (CASARA) Air Searches & Air Support DND and NB EMO
NB Ground Search & Rescue Ground Searches RCMP & NB EMO
Canadian Red Cross Welfare, Registration & Inquiry Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
Salvation Army Social Services & Food Services Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
St. John Ambulance Medical Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
RCMP Auxiliary Police Law & Order RCMP & NB EMO
Point Lepreau Wardens Service Notification and Traffic Control NB EMO
1.15 Mutual Aid and Request for Assistance (RFA)
1.15.1
The municipality may become overwhelmed at any time during an emergency. Therefore, additional
resources from neighbouring jurisdictions may be required. Mutual Aid arrangements as well as
arrangements with local volunteer agencies may be utilized.
However, when it is anticipated that quick access to additional resources is required, then a Request
Force Assistance (RFA) will be submitted to the REMC. The RFA will come from an authorized
municipal/LSD representative.
Requests for assistance from other Government of Canada departments, such as the Canadian
Armed Forces (CAF), will be coordinated by NB EMO who will determine if the request is required.
1.16 Termination of Operations / Recovery
1.16.1
The Municipal emergency response will continue until Municipal assistance, direction and
coordination are no longer required, and the operation is terminated. The gradual reduction of
departmental staff and the withdrawal of resources may begin before termination but must be
done in a coordinated fashion.
585
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 16 of 65
If communities experienced significant impacts due to the emergency, there might be a need to
support and/or supplement personal, family, and community structures that may have been
damaged or disrupted.
1.16.2
The effects of an emergency depend directly on the type, severity, and duration of the event. Some
common effects of an emergency include:
a. Impact on Life / Social Effects:
(1) Loss of life.
(2) Injury to persons and animals
(3) Stress and psychological trauma.
(4) Focus on the short term, foregoing long-term goals and opportunities.
(5) Delay of programs that serve on long-standing social needs; and
(6) Gaps in community economic classes tend to widen.
b. Physical Effects:
(1) Damage to buildings, commercial structures, and community facilities.
(2) Alteration of the landscape, such as in landslide or major flood; and
(3) Environmental contamination by chemicals or pollutants.
c. Economic Effects:
(1) Loss of business.
(2) Loss of jobs; and
(3) Reduced cash flow within the community.
1.16.3
The following are possible participants during the recovery phase of an emergency:
Potential Participant Services they may be able to provide:
Animal Care Groups Provide advice on animal care and temporary shelter for animals
Banks and Credit Union Provide financial support to residents and businesses.
NB Housing Provide temporary shelter during reconstruction.
Canada Post Temporary Mail delivery services
NB Social Services Ongoing financial assistance for homeless in the long term
Additional assistance for persons already on assistance.
NB Health Authorities
Provide advice on disease prevention during clean-up
Provide advice on drinking water and septic system safety
Arrange for inspections
Provide advice on medical and mental health issues
Employment and Social
Development Canada Employment Insurance
586
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 17 of 65
Insurance Corporations Vehicle and Property Damage Claims
Cash advance for people with damage to homes and vehicles.
Local Government
Public Information
Debris removal
Inspection Services and Building Permits
School Boards Identifying needs to change school season or school location, etc.
Utility Companies
Electrical power, gas, telephone, cable, and internet services
Information for safe re-entry
Site inspection and reconnections
Volunteer Services
Agencies
Distribution of support
Debris removal
Clean-up
Temporary Shelter
Rent or Income financial assistance.
Fundy Regional Service
Commission Debris removal
1.16.4
An After-Action Review (AAR) to evaluate the effectiveness of the emergency response will be
conducted within 14 days of the termination of the operation. The proceedings will be chaired by
the Director of SJEMO or designate and attended by the emergency response personnel involved in
the emergency.
After-Action Review: At the conclusion of an emergency, an After-Action Review (AAR) will be
completed using the following example: (Example)
Sustain Remarks Points to improve Remarks
Business cycles were
completed.
This should continue
for further activations.
No phones during
the business cycle.
Remind everyone that
phones are to be turned off.
1.17 Plan Audits
1.17.1
An annual review of MERP will be conducted to ensure contact information remains valid within
the attached annexes. In addition, MERP will undergo a rewrite if the standard operating
procedures are deemed to have significantly changed.
1.18 Training and Exercises
1.18.1
Training: SJEMO will utilize methods such as tabletop exercises, simulations, seminars or full-scale
exercises internally and/or in conjunction with external agencies annually to ensure interoperability
and proficiency.
Recall Exercise: Using the SJEMO fan-out, SJEMO will initiate a recall twice a year to confirm that
the contact information for public contacts, emergency contacts, City departments and external
agencies are kept up to date.
587
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 18 of 65
1.19 Budget
1.19.1
The Saint John Emergency Management Organization budget is part of The City’s annual budget and
is reviewed and approved by Council annually.
1.20 Definitions
1.20.1 Act (The Act) New Brunswick Emergency Measures Act.
1.20.2
All-Hazards
Emergency
Management
Planning
An approach that recognizes that the actions required to mitigate the effects of
emergencies are the same, irrespective of the nature of the event, thereby
permitting optimization of scarce planning, response, and support resources. It
employs generic methodologies, modified as necessary by circumstances.
1.20.3 Assembly area Designated area for evacuees to gather for processing and transport
1.20.4 Asset
Assets include but are not limited to information in all forms and media,
networks, systems, materiel, real property, financial resources, employee trust,
public confidence, and international reputation.
1.20.5 Business
Continuity Plan
A plan to minimize potential losses and maintain viable recovery strategies for
services, operations, or government following a disruptive event.
1.20.6 By-Law Refers to the Saint John Emergency Measures By-Law
1.20.7 CANUTEC
Canadian Transport Emergency Centre operated by the Transportation of
Dangerous Goods (TDG) Directorate of Transport Canada. The Directorate’s
overall mandate is to promote public safety in the transportation of dangerous
goods by all modes
1.20.8 CASARA Canadian Air Search and Rescue Association.
1.20.9 CMRA Canadian Marine Rescue Auxiliary.
1.20.10 Critical Service
A service which, if compromised, in terms of availability or integrity would result in
a high degree of injury to health, safety, security or economic well-being of the
population or effective functioning of Government and must be continuously
delivered.
1.20.11 Concept of
Operations
Concept of operations provides a framework to operationalize horizontal
management and an effective governance structure and delineates clear roles
and responsibilities of the principal committees and individuals central to each
phase of the incident management process.
1.20.12 Critical
Infrastructure
Critical infrastructure refers to processes, systems, facilities, technologies,
networks, assets, and services essential to the health, safety, security or
economic well-being of the population and the effective functioning of
government. Critical infrastructure can be stand-alone or interconnected and
interdependent within and across provinces, territories, and national borders.
Disruptions of critical infrastructure could result in catastrophic loss of life,
adverse economic effects, and significant harm to public confidence.
588
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 19 of 65
1.20.13 Department
Department of the Government of New Brunswick and includes a crown agency,
corporation, board, or commission established by the Government of New
Brunswick.
1.20.14 DAAF Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries.
1.20.15 DH Department of Health
1.20.16 DHR Department of Human Resources.
1.20.17 DTI Department of Transportation and Infrastructure.
1.20.18 DEECD Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
1.20.19 DELG Department of Environment and Local Government.
1.20.20 DNRED Department of National Resources and Energy Development
1.20.21 Designated
Alternate
An individual to whom responsibility and authority for a particular function,
normally performed by another individual, has been officially delegated.
1.20.22 Director Director of New Brunswick Emergency Measures Organization.
1.20.23 Disaster An emergency that overwhelms the community’s normal resources and coping
ability and therefore requires extraordinary measures including outside help.
1.20.24 EMCG Emergency Measures Communication Group
1.20.25 Emergency
A present or imminent event which requires prompt coordination of action or
regulation of persons or property to protect life safety, property, the
environment or the health and welfare of the population.
1.20.26
Emergency
Management
Unit (EMU)
A territorial unit corresponding to part of the municipality identified for purposes
of emergency and evacuation planning, and recognized for its demographic,
environmental and logistical characteristics.
1.20.27
Emergency
Operations
Center (EOC)
An Emergency Operations Centre is a pre-designated facility staffed by an
established and recognized team of people who are responsible for providing
direction, coordination, communication, and support during emergency
operations. The EOC may be set up at any other suitable location.
1.20.28 Emergency
Response Plan
A plan, program or procedure prepared by the province or a municipality that is
intended to mitigate the effects of an emergency and protect life safety,
property, the environment or the health and welfare of the population in the
event of such an occurrence.
1.20.29 Emergency
Shelter A publicly operated facility providing temporary or transitional accommodation.
1.20.30 Emergency Site
Manager (ESM)
Emergency Site Manager, a person designated to provide the required direction
and coordination of the on-site emergency response by participating agencies.
1.20.31
Emergency
Social Services
(ESS)
Emergency shelter services provided in an emergency either by the Canadian Red
Cross, Salvation Army, or Department of Emergency Social Services (ESS):
Services include registration and inquiry, Lodging, feeding, clothing, and personal
services.
589
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 20 of 65
1.20.32
Hazard
Identification
and Risk
Assessment
(HIRA)
An assessment of the relative risk of occurrence and the potential impact on
people and property of the emergencies or disasters that could affect all or part
of the jurisdictional area for which the authority has responsibility.
1.20.33 Incident An incident is an abnormal situation that demands a response for which regular
municipal standard operating procedures and resources are sufficient.
1.20.34 Incident Action
Plan (IAP)
A directive for managing each operational period during an emergency. It defines
the goals, objectives, resources, and direction for response during each
operational period and serves as the accountability document for the emergency
organization. It is also a tool for coordinating multi-agency response.
1.20.35
Incident
Command
System (ICS)
A standardized on-site management system designed to enable effective,
efficient incident management by integrating a combination of facilities,
equipment, personnel, procedures, and communications operating within a
common organizational structure.
1.20.36 IRCS Integrated Radio Communications System
1.20.37 JPS Department of Justice and Public Safety
1.20.38 Liaison Officer Representative from another agency who serves as a point of contact on-site.
1.20.39 Minister Minister of Justice and Public Safety charged with the administration of the
Emergency Measure Act.
1.20.40
Municipal
Emergency
Management
Council
Committee
Includes the members of Council appointed as per the Saint John Emergency
Measures By-Law.
1.20.41
Mutual Aid /
Mutual
Assistance
Agreement
A pre-arranged agreement entered into by two or more entities whereby the
parties to the agreement undertake to render assistance to one another.
1.20.42 NB EMO New Brunswick Emergency Measures Organization as established by the
Emergency Measures Act.
1.20.43 NB GSAR New Brunswick Ground Search and Rescue.
1.20.45 NEA National Emergency Agencies.
1.20.46 PEOC Provincial Emergency Operations Centre (Fredericton)
1.20.47 PELT Department of Post-Secondary Education, Training and Labour
1.20.48 PIO Public Information Officer, responsible for all official communication with the
public and the media on behalf of the city.
1.20.49 PLGS OEC Point Lepreau Generating Station Off-Site Emergency Centre.
1.20.50 PSEPC Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
1.20.51 Reception
Center
A location where evacuees are received, documented, assessed for personal
needs, and referred
590
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 21 of 65
1.20.52 REOC Regional Emergency Operation Centre.
1.20.53 Risk
The combination of the likelihood and the consequence of a specified hazard
being realized; refers to the vulnerability, proximity, or exposure to hazards,
which affects the likelihood of adverse impact.
1.20.54 Risk
Assessment
The concept of risk is defined as a product or process which collects information
and assigns values to risks for the purpose of informing priorities, developing, or
comparing courses of action, and informing decision making.
1.20.55 Risk
Management
The use of policies, practices, and resources to analyze, assess and control risks
to health, safety, environment, and the economy.
1.20.56 Shelter-In-Place Staying put and taking shelter rather than evacuating
1.20.57 Situational
Awareness
Situational awareness is being aware of one's environment and circumstances to
understand how events and actions will affect objectives.
1.20.58 SNB Service New Brunswick
1.20.59 State of
Emergency
State of emergency declared by the Minister in accordance with the Emergency
Measures Act.
1.20.60 State of Local
Emergency
State of emergency declared by a municipality pursuant to subsection 11(2) of
the New Brunswick Emergency Measures Act or renewed pursuant to Section
18(2) of the Act.
1.20.61
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(SOP)
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are a set of instructions constituting a
directive, covering those features of operations, which lend themselves to a
definite, step-by-step process of accomplishment.
1.20.62 PWT
Provincial Transportation and Infrastructure Department. Resource for
infrastructure failure including Cyber and structural.
Saint John Public Works and Transportation Department which deals with
roadway maintenance, traffic management, storm water management, solid
waste collection, transit, parking, and parks and recreation.
1.20.63 Threat The presence of a hazard and an exposure pathway; threats may be natural or
human-induced, either accidental or intentional.
1.20.64 Threat
Assessment
The process of identifying or evaluating entities, actions, or occurrences, whether
natural or human activity, which has or indicates the potential to harm life,
information, operations and/or property.
1.20.65 Trunked Mobile
Radio (TMR)
A computer-controlled two-way radio system that allows sharing of few radio
frequency channels among a large group of users.
1.20.66 Unified
Command
An arrangement under ICS, which enables multiple agencies to respond jointly to
an incident under a single common command structure, with each agency
retaining control of its own resources and command structure.
1.20.67 Vulnerability
The conditions determined by physical, social, economic, and environmental
factors or processes, which increase the susceptibility of an organization or
community to the impact of hazards.
591
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 22 of 65
1.20.68
Vulnerability
assessment
A process for identifying physical features or operational attributes that renders
an entity, asset, system, network, or geographic area susceptible or exposed to
hazards.
1.20.69 Warning Order An official communication warning the public of the possibility of an impending
evacuation; shelter in place order or other emergency order.
PART 2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT
2. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA)
2.1 Risk = Likelihood x Consequence
2.2 Likelihood / Frequency - L
2.2.1
Based on the number of occurrences within the City of Saint John:
1. Rare: Less than 1% chance in any year; Occurs every 100 years or more
2. Very Unlikely: 1-2% chance in any year; Occurs every 50-99 years
3. Unlikely: 2-5% chance in any year; Occurs every 20-49 years
4. Probable: 5-20% chance in any year; Occurs every 5-19 years
5. Likely: Over 20% chance in any year; Occurs ≤ 5 years
6. Certain: Almost 100% chance in any year; The hazard commonly occurs annually
2.3 Consequences Rating - C
2.3.1
Based on the severity of each consequence the impact was rated as follows:
1. None: Rated as Zero (0)
2. Low: Rated as One (1)
3. Medium: Rated as Two (2)
4. High: Rated as Three (3)
2.4 Consequence Categories
2.4.1
The following consequences were considered in the risk assessment of each potential Hazard:
1. Fatalities: Potential number killed because of the hazard
2. Injuries / Illness: Potential number injured or ill because of the hazard
3. Psychosocial: Potential number of people traumatized
4. Social Connections: Potential impact on formal or informal networks of support including
family and community support.
5. Evacuation or Shelter-In-Place: Potential for formal evacuation, shelter-in-place orders, or
people stranded.
6. Property Damage: Potential for direct negative consequences of a hazard on buildings,
structures and other forms of property including crops.
7. Critical Infrastructure Service: Potential for negative impact of a hazard on processes,
systems, facilities, technologies, networks, assets, and services essential to the health,
safety, security, or economic well-being of Canadians and functioning of government.
8. Environmental Damage: Potential negative consequences of a hazard on the environment,
including soil, water, air, plants, and animals.
9. Economic: Potential negative consequences of a hazard on commercial, industrial, or
regional economies.
10. Reputational: The perception of one or more organizations or jurisdictions, in the minds of
its stakeholders, the public and others who are vital to its success.
592
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 23 of 65
2.5 HIRA Total Risk Score Ranges – Likelihood x Consequence
Total Risk
Score Category
0 – 30 Very low
31 – 60 Low
61 – 90 Moderate
91 – 120 High
121 – 150 Very high
151 - 180 Extreme
2.6 Hazard Summary with Applicable Action(s)
Hazards Brief Description Likelihoo
d
Conseq
uence
Total
Risk
Score
RISK
Category
2.6.1 CBRNE
When chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear, or
explosive hazards may be
present.
5 19 95 HIGH
2.6.2 Flood
Accumulation of water beyond
its normal confines such as a
lake, or over land areas.
4 19 76 MODERATE
2.6.3
Extreme
Weather
(Blizzard/
Ice Storm/
Hurricane)
Severe storm with high winds,
and heavy snow. 6 15 90 MODERATE
2.6.4 Complex
Structure Fire
A fire involving buildings or
structures within a
municipality.
5 22 110 HIGH
2.6.5 Forest/Wildlan
d Fire
Uncontrolled fire occurring in
nature. 5 20 100 HIGH
2.6.6
Extreme
Temperature
(Heat/Cold)
Temperature which is
considered extreme and
unusual in the area in which it
occurs.
6 12 72 MODERATE
2.6.7 Power Outage An interruption of normal
sources of electrical power. 6 12 72 MODERATE
2.6.8
Landslide/
Erosion/
Earthquake
Erosion is a physical process by
which shorelines and/or roads
are altered. Landslide is when
5 13 65 MODERATE
593
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 24 of 65
large snow/mud mass slides
down a hillside. Earthquake is a
sudden release of stored
energy that radiates seismic
waves.
2.6.9 Public Health/
Pandemic
Diseases that impact humans
or animals. 5 13 65 MODERATE
2.6.10 Cyber Attack
An offensive maneuver that
targets computer information
systems, networks,
infrastructures, or
smartphones.
5 12 60 MODERATE
2.6.11 Active/ Violent
Threat
The use of physical force with
intent, effect, or reasonable
likelihood of causing pain,
harm, injury or damage to any
person or property.
3 19 57 LOW
2.6.12 Communication
Failure
Widespread breakdown of
normal communication
capabilities.
5 10 50 LOW
2.6.13 Air Quality When outside air quality is
threatened or compromised. 5 10 50 LOW
2.6.14 Aviation
Incident
An accident associated with the
operation of an aircraft. 3 16 48 LOW
2.6.15 Port/ Marine
An incident involving the port
or marine vessel or equipment,
including cranes that could
affect the safety of operation
or individuals.
3 14 42 LOW
2.6.16 Potable Water
Water system that serves a
major residential development
becomes compromised.
4 10 40 LOW
2.6.17 Civil Disorder/
Mass Gathering
When many people are
involved and are set upon a
common aim. A public event
which gathers more than 500
persons indoors or outdoors.
3 13 39 LOW
2.6.18
CI Failure
(Transportation
/ Engineering)
Structural or safety related
issues related to critical
infrastructure include rail,
bridges, roads.
2 18 36 LOW
Reference: NB EMO National Disaster Data Bank
594
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 25 of 65
HAZARD RESPONSE PLANS
2.6.1 CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, OR EXPLOSIVE (CBRNE)/HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
Hazard Description
Protective measures taken in situations in which chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear, or explosive hazards may be present. Unintentional
or intentional (CBRNE)
A violent and destructive shattering or blowing apart of something caused
by a bomb detonation, gas explosion or industrial accident.
Diseases that impact humans and animals.
Removing and destroying or storing damaged, unwanted domestic,
agricultural/industrial products and substances.
Any substance or material that could adversely affect the safety of the
public, handlers or carriers
Potential Impacts Life Safety / Losses to local economy / Municipal Services / Jurisdictional
Issues / International Implications / Environmental Impact / Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 95 - HIGH
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions
Municipal first responders’ assessment and IAP creation. Possible EOC
activation (advise REMC change in status). Public Communication. Notify
OFM. Notify DELG.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force / RCMP
IT Department
Communications
Growth & Community
Development
Parks & Rec
Public Works and
Transportation
Finance
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
Issue public warnings
o City Communication
Plan
o Use of Alert Ready (if
applicable)
Heavy HAZMAT deployment
Isolation / Containment
Evacuation/ shelter in place
Comfort shelters or reception
centres
Coordinate with disposal
providers
Liaise with carriers
ERAC implementation
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
8. Request Federal Resources
(CBRNE)
595
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 26 of 65
NBEMO
GNB Public Health
Horizon Health
Saint John Energy
DELG
Fire Marshall
CANUTEC
Carrier / ERAC
RCMP CBRNE Team
PLNGS
Red Cross
Emergency Social
Services (ESS) NB Power
Enbridge Gas
Liberty Gas
Horizon Health
Emergency Response Guide
through Transport Canada:
tc.canada.ca
Canutec online contact
information: 1-888-CANUTEC
(226-8832)
Public Health Guide
All ICS Forms
Additional Instructions
A. Chemical spill (water or land)
a. Check radar for precipitation
b. Check current temperature
c. Check current short-term predictions for sudden changes in temperature or wind:
www.Spotwx.com
B. Hazardous Material Release (airborne)
a. Check radar for precipitation
b. Check current temperature
c. Check current short-term predictions for sudden changes in temperature or wind
www.Spotwx.com
C. The HYSPLT model can be used to give a first guess of where the material will go READY
Current Meteorology (noaa.gov)
a. Select one starting location
b. Select Ensemble for type of trajectory
c. For meteorology select NAM CONUS
d. Enter coordinates of the release
e. Select the latest model run
f. Under display option select Google Earth
g. Click Request Trajectory
596
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 27 of 65
2.6.2 FLOOD
Hazard Description
The accumulation of water beyond its normal confines such as a lake, or
over land.
A sudden and destructive rush of water caused by heavy rainfall.
The spontaneous release of water from a barrier built to hold back the
flow of water.
An abnormal rise of water generated by a storm, over and above the
predicted astronomical tides.
Potential Impacts Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy / Municipal
Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact / Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 95 - HIGH
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal assessment and IAP creation. Possible EOC activation (advise
REMC change in status). Public Communication.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Growth & Community
Services
GIS
Public Works &
Transportation
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
NBEMO
Saint John Energy
GNB Transportation &
Infrastructure
Education
Horizon Health
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
(if applicable)
Use of emergency alert (if
applicable)
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open
comfort centres or
reception centres
Stage emergency response
resources in areas may be
isolated
Close roads or reroute
Coordinate with
neighbouring jurisdictions
Shut down vulnerable
power grid
Relocate hazardous
materials
NBEMO River Watch
River watch end when water
level in Jemseg is at 3.6m
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
597
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 28 of 65
Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
Red Cross
DELG
Canadian Coast Guard
GNB Public Health
Additional Instructions:
– Refer to previous spring freshet notes, policies, & IAP’s
Precipitation over the next 72 hours. http://www.cocorahs.org/Canada.aspx
Real-time water levels from hydrometric water stations. Real-Time Hydrometric Data - Water Level
and Flow - Environment Canada (ec.gc.ca)
Check cumulative precipitation using surface observation networks including Coco Rahs.
Check model predictions for precipitation accumulation and intensity over the next 72 hours
Storm Surge
o To assess the risk of storm surge you will need tide information (times and magnitudes), storm
surge modeling and wave modeling
o Tides can be obtained at the https://tides.gc.ca/en/stations/65
o Storm surge estimate will be obtained through Environment Canada warnings or more detailed
modelling provided is special briefing packages
o Check the Environment Canada Wave Model to see if there are any large waves approaching the
time of peak water level.
o Use the tide times and the storm surge model to find the predicted peak water level (consider
wave setup) – this will be the water level from chart datum
Total Water Level (CD) = (Tide) + (Predicted Storm Surge) + (Wave Setup)
o Optional: In some cases, you may want to convert the predicted water level relative to chart
datum to the water level relative to CGVD28 which is the reference level for heights in Canada.
598
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 29 of 65
2.6.3 EXTREME WEATHER (BLIZZARD / ICE STORM / THUNDERSTORM / HURRICANE)
Hazard Description Severe winter storm with low temperatures, high winds, and heavy snow.
A system which produces violent hail, lighting, high winds, flash floods
and/or floods.
Extreme high windstorm systems with speeds between 80km/h and
480km/hr.
Potential Impacts Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy / Municipal
Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact / Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 90 - MODERATE
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions
Municipal assessment and IAP creation. Possible EOC activation
(advise REMC change in status). Public Communication.
Blizzard warning issued when winds of 40 km/h or greater are
expected to cause widespread reductions in visibility to 400 metres
or less, due to blowing snow, or blowing snow in combination with
falling snow for at least 4 hours.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works and
Transportation
Growth & Community
Services
Arbourists
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
NBEMO
Education
Horizon Health
Red Cross
Saint John Energy
Enbridge Gas
Liberty Gas
Issue weather warnings
Use of emergency alerting
system (if applicable)
Monitor power outages
Be prepared to open
comfort or reception
centres
Tree Removal
Re-open roads
Proactive messages re.72 Hour
kit during monitoring phase
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
Additional Instructions: All ICS Forms - http://www.icscanada.ca/en/Forms.html
599
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 30 of 65
The Canadian Hurricane Center (CHC) will provide the best information on how an
approaching tropical cyclone may affect Canada www.hurricanes.ca
Latest hurricane bulletins if CHC website has not been updated
http://kamala.cod.edu/offs/CWHX/wocn31.chunk.html
The National Hurricane Center in Miami also has lots if information on tropical cyclones
including forecasts, probability maps and reference information. http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/
Sea Surface Temperature (SST) anomaly map shows difference in water temperature
compared to average in the Atlantic http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tafb/atl_anom.gif
Website showing the range of storm tracks http://derecho.math.uwm.edu/models/
City of Saint John Winter Storm Management:
https://saintjohn.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=3268e3816a8140d6b
eeb904fd8db6ef5
600
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 31 of 65
2.6.4 COMPLEX FIRE (STRUCTURE / INDUSTRIAL)
Hazard Description
A fire involving multiple buildings or structures within a municipality.
A fire involving heavy industry facilities and equipment.
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy /
Municipal Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact /
Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 110 - HIGH
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality may
consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Saint John Transit
Public Works and
Transportation
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
Saint John Energy
Enbridge Gas
Liberty Gas
Horizon Health
Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
Red Cross
Fire Marshal / Mutual Aid
GNB Public Health
Salvation Army
Neighbouring Fire
Departments including KV
Fire, Grand Bay Westfield,
and Simonds
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
(if applicable)
Use of emergency
notification system (if
applicable)
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open
comfort centres or
reception centres.
Saint John Transit for
transit bus for shorter term
shelter.
Salvation Army may be an
option for rehab support
for First Responders
including food.
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
All ICS Forms
601
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 32 of 65
2.6.5 FOREST FIRE / WILDFIRE
Hazard Description An uncontrolled fire occurring in nature.
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy /
Municipal Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact /
Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 100 - HIGH
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality may
consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring. Communication to region. Request for support as
required.
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works &
Transportation
Growth & Community
Services
Facility Management
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
Saint John Energy
Education
Horizon Health
GNB Public Health
Emera Pipeline
Irving Oil
Department of Natural
Resources & Energy
Development
DELG
Red Cross
Neighbouring Fire
Departments for mutual aid
assistance.
Issue public warnings with pre-
determined messages (if
applicable)
Use of Emergency Notification (if
applicable)
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open warming
centres or reception centres
Communications – public updates
Resource Needs
Assessment
1. Identify resources
required
2. Identify resources at
hand
3. Identify resources
lacking
4. Mutual Aid request
(PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
602
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 33 of 65
Additional Instructions:
All ICS Forms: http://www.icscanada.ca/en/Forms.html
Forest Fire
Government of NB Fire Watch
o Fire Watch website updated daily at 2pm for Burn Bans between April and October
o Fire Dashboard updated daily
Fire Smoke Canada: https://firesmoke.ca/ Includes BlueSky Canada smoke forecasts, fire
weather forecasts, fire information Canada wide.
Air Quality Health Index
http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/hypub-bin/trajtype.pl
1) Select one starting location
2) Select Ensemble for type of trajectory
3) For meteorology select NAM CONUS
4) Enter coordinates of the fire
5) Select the latest model run
6) Under display option select Google Earth
7) Click Request Trajectory
603
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 34 of 65
2.6.6 EXTREME TEMPERATURES (HEAT/COLD)
Hazard Description
Heat/Cold which is considered extreme and unusual in the area in which it
occurs. When Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) issues a
heat warning or extreme cold warning.
Potential Impacts Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy / Municipal
Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact / Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 72 - MODERATE
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality may
consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Communications
Growth
Facility
Management
SJ Transit
Communications
EXTERNAL
GNB Public Health
Ambulance NB
Horizon Health
Emergency Social
Services (ESS)
Red Cross
SJ Energy
NB EMO
Issue public warnings with pre-
determined messages (if applicable)
Use of Emergency Notification (if
applicable)
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open comfort
centres or reception centres
Coordinate with Fresh Start Services
to open Emergency Homeless
Shelters
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources
required
2. Identify resources at
hand
3. Identify resources
lacking
4. Mutual Aid request
(PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
Additional Instructions:All ICS Forms
Local Air Quality Health Index: https://weather.gc.ca/airquality/pages/index_e.html
Heat Alert Criteria (per ECCC):
604
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 35 of 65
Issued when 2 or more consecutive days of daytime maximum temperatures are expected to reach
30°C or warmer and nighttime minimum temperatures are expected to fall to 18°C or warmer.
Or
Issued when 2 or more consecutive days of humidex values are expected to reach 36 or higher.
Extreme Cold Warning Threshold Criteria (per ECCC)
Issued when the temperature or wind chill is expected to reach minus 35 degrees Celsius for at least
two hours.
Emergency Homeless Shelters: Fresh Start Services. https://freshstartsj.ca/about/programs/
605
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 36 of 65
2.6.7 POWER OUTAGE
Hazard Description An interruption of normal sources of electrical power
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local
economy / Municipal Services / Jurisdictional Issues /
Environmental Impact / Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 72- MODERATE
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts.
Municipality may consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
Public Works and
Transportation
SJ Fire Dept
SJ Police Force
Growth &
Community Services
Facility
Management
Communications
EXTERNAL
SJ Energy
NB Power
Ambulance NB
Horizon Health
Emergency Social
Services (ESS)
Red Cross
Issue public warnings
with pre-determined
messages (if applicable)
Use of Notification
system (if applicable)
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open
comfort centres or
reception centres
Coordinate power
restoration
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National Assistance (NBEMO)
All ICS Forms
606
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 37 of 65
2.6.8 LANDSLIDE/ EROSION/ EARTHQUAKE
Hazard Description
A landslide occurs when a large snow / mud / rock mass slides down a
mountain or hillside.
An earthquake results from a sudden release of stored energy that
radiates seismic waves.
Erosion is the physical process by which shorelines and/or roads are
altered.
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy /
Municipal Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact /
Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 65- MODERATE
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality may
consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works and
Transportation
Utilities and Public
Infrastructure
SJ Water
Technical Inspections
Services
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NBNBEMO
Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
Red Cross
SJ Energy
Enbridge Gas
Liberty Gas
Fire Marshall
Emera Pipeline
Urban Search & Rescue
(USAR)
Depends on severity however
consider the following:
Possible Evacuation
Road Closures
Structure Stability
Engineering advice will
likely be required
Long term stabilization
Emergency notification
Coordinate with
neighbouring jurisdictions
Shut down vulnerable
power grid
Relocate hazardous
materials
Be prepared to open
comfort centres/reception
centres
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
Additional Instructions:
http://www.icscanada.ca/en/Forms.html
607
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 38 of 65
2.6.9 PUBLIC HEALTH PANDEMIC
Hazard Description A disease outbreak that has spread across multiple countries and
continents and usually impacts many people
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy /
Municipal Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact /
Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 65- MODERATE
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality may
consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Human Resources
Communications
General Counsel
Procurement
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
GNB Public Health
SJRH
NBEMO
Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
Red Cross
Internal and External
Communication
Social distancing / Masking
Work from home options
Barriers installed / signage
Scheduling to ensure
minimal exposure
Testing procedures
PPE procurement
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
NOTES/ CONSIDERATION
See COVID Business Continuity Plans and Policies for reference.
Follow Public Health Guidelines
New Brunswick Pandemic Influenza Plan: http://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/ps-
sp/pdf/emo/Pandemic_Planning-e.pdf
608
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 39 of 65
2.6.10 CYBER ATTACK
Hazard Description
A cyber attack is any offensive maneuver that targets computer
information systems, computer networks, infrastructures, personal
computer devices, or smartphones.
Potential Impacts Theft of valuable and sensitive data / Suspension of entire systems
/International Implications
HIRA Total Risk Score 60- MODERATE
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions
Isolate and protect all portals into the cyber system that controls the
infrastructure. Provide separate water supply/potable water from
another source to bypass.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
o Strategic Services
o Communications
o Human Resources
o Information Technology
o SJ Fire Dept.
o SJ Police Force
o Public Works and
Transportation Services
o SJ Water
o Technical Inspections
Services
EXTERNAL
o Ambulance NB
o NB EMO
o SJ Energy
o Enbridge Gas
Suspension of employee
access to all IT assets
Collection of all IT assets for
the purpose of backup and
reset
Determine source and
reach of attack
Internal and External
communication
Implement business
continuity plans
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
NOTES/ CONSIDERATION
Refer to notes/ policies and actions from the 2020 Cyber Attack for the City of Saint John
609
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 40 of 65
2.6.11 ACTIVE/VIOLENT THREAT
Hazard Description
The use of physical force with intent, effect, or reasonable
likelihood of causing pain, harm, injury or damage to any person
or property
A public event which gathers more than 500 persons indoors or
outdoors.
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local economy /
Municipal Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact
/ Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 57- LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality
may consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Police Force (Lead)
Saint John Fire
Public Works and
Transportation
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
Red Cross
GNB Public Health
NB Public Safety
NB EMO
KVPF
RCMP
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
(if applicable)
Use of Emergency
notification (if applicable)
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared for mass
casualties
Traffic Control
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
610
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 41 of 65
2.6.12 COMMUNICATION FAILURE
Hazard Description Widespread breakdown of normal communication
infrastructure/capabilities.
Potential Impacts Critical Infrastructure / Losses to local economy / Municipal
Services / Jurisdictional Issues / Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 50- LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality
may consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Information Technology
Dept.
Strategic Services
Public Safety and
Communication Center
(PSCC)
City Public Works and
Transportation
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
Saint John Energy
Fire Marshall
Communications
Stakeholders (Bell, Aliant,
Rogers)
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
Use of emergency
notification system using
any available
communication methods
including HAM Radio; door-
to-door or flyers (if
applicable)
Activate Emergency
Management Consultative
Group (EMCG) messaging
Dispatch liaison
representatives to
municipal EOCs
Use of SIMPLEX radio
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
Additional Instructions: All ICS Forms
611
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 42 of 65
2.6.13 AIR QUALITY
Hazard Description If the outside air quality is threatened or compromised
Potential Impacts Losses to local economy / Municipal Services / Jurisdictional
Issues / Environmental Impact / Active Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 50 - LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality
may consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works &
Transportation
Growth & Community
Services
Facility Management
Communications
EXTERNAL
GNB Public Health
Ambulance NB
Saint John Energy
Education
Horizon Health
Emera Pipeline
Irving Oil
JDI
Department of
Environment & Local
Government DELG
Communications
Red Cross
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
(if applicable)
Use of Emergency
Notification (if applicable)
Possible shelter in place
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open
comfort reception centres
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
612
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 43 of 65
Additional Instructions:
All ICS Forms: http://www.icscanada.ca/en/Forms.html
Local Air Quality Health Index for New Brunswick:
https://weather.gc.ca/airquality/pages/provincial_summary/nb_e.html
Wildfire Smoke Prediction System: https://weather.gc.ca/firework/index_e.html
https://www.elgegl.gnb.ca/AirNB/en/SamplingLocation/Index
613
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 44 of 65
2.6.14 AVIATION INCIDENT
Hazard Description An incident or accident associated with the operation
of an aircraft.
Potential Impacts
Critical Infrastructure / Life Safety / Losses to local
economy / Jurisdictional Issues / Environmental Impact
/ Transportation
HIRA Total Risk Score 42 - LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts.
Municipality may consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
DELG
Transport Canada
Coroner
Fire Marshall
Horizon Health
GNB Public Health
Red Cross
Marine (Port Authority
and Canadian Coast
Guard)
Airline Carrier
Airport Authority
Canadian Border Security
Agency
Assist with
casualties
Possible Evacuation
Road Closures
Structure Stability
Establish
Temporary Shelters
Joint Rescue
Coordination
Centre (JRCC)
Sequestering of
international
passengers
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial Assistance
(NBEMO)
Request National Assistance (NBEMO)
Additional Instructions: All ICS Forms
614
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 45 of 65
2.6.15 PORT/MARINE (CRUISE SHIPS/CRANES)
Hazard Description An incident involving the port or marine vessel or equipment, including
cranes that could affect the safety of operation or individuals.
Possible Effects Danger to Public Safety/ Casualties / Deaths / Civil Disorder /
Evacuations / Limited Access by First Responders
HIRA Total Risk Score 42- LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions
Losses to local economy / Limited access by First Responders /
Jurisdictional Issues / International Implications / Danger to Public
Safety / Casualties / Deaths / Evacuation /
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
o SJ Fire Dept.
o SJ Police Force
o Public Works and
Transportation
o Saint John Water
o Communications
EXTERNAL
o Port Saint John
o NB EMO
o Department of Justice &
Public Safety
o Atlantic Towing (JDI)
o Ambulance NB
o Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
o Red Cross
o Horizon Health
o GNB Public Health
o Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
(if applicable)
o Use of Emergency
notification (if applicable)
o Possible Evacuations
o Be prepared for mass
casualties
o Traffic Control
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
NOTES/ CONSIDERATION
The Port is on Federal land.
615
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 46 of 65
2.6.16 POTABLE WATER
Hazard Description Water system failure where a large volume of customers is
compromised.
Possible Effects Limited access by First Responders / Danger to Public Safety /
Casualties HIRA Total Risk Score 40 - LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality
may consider EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Water
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works and
Transportation
Communications
EXTERNAL
Horizon Health
GNB Public Health
Ambulance NB
Red Cross
Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
Department of
Environment & Local
Government (DELG)
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
(if applicable)
Use of Emergency
notification (if applicable)
Be prepared to secure,
organize, and deliver large
quantities of potable water.
Cleanup of system
Hazardous material in
supply
Resource Needs Assessment
Identify resources required
Identify resources at hand
Identify resources lacking
Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
Request National
Assistance (NBEMO)
616
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 47 of 65
2.6.17 CIVIL DISORDER
Hazard Description Civil disorder is when many people are involved and are set
upon a common aim.
Possible Effects Casualties / Danger to public health / Deaths / Evacuation
HIRA Total Risk Score 39 – LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality
may consider EOC activation.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works and
Transportation
Communications
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
GNB Public Health
Department of Justice &
Public Safety
Canadian Armed Forces
(CAF)
Department of Natural
Defence (DND)
Issue public warnings
Use of emergency
notification system (if
applicable)
Be prepared to assist
isolated communities that
are denied emergency
services
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional Assistance
(NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National Assistance
(NBEMO)
Additional Instructions:
All ICS Forms
617
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 48 of 65
2.6.18 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE FAILURE (TRANSPORTATION/ ENGINEERING)
Hazard Description
Engineering hazards occur when structures used by people fail.
A derailment that can result in substantial loss of life and/or risk to the
environment.
Structural or safety related issues that could force a bridge to be
temporarily closed.
Possible Effects Limited access by first responders / Danger to Public Safety /Casualties /
Deaths / Evacuation/ Jurisdictional Issues/ Public Messaging
HIRA Total Risk Score 36 - LOW
Immediate Actions (IA)
Municipal Actions Municipal first responders report on CI impacts. Municipality may consider
EOC activation. Info REMC.
REMC Actions Monitoring
The following actions may/may not occur; lead agency's procedures take precedence.
Suggested Agencies Possible Actions Remarks
INTERNAL
SJ Fire Dept.
SJ Police Force
Public Works &
Transportation
Technical Inspection Services
Communications
Saint John Water
GIS
EXTERNAL
Ambulance NB
Saint John Energy
Red Cross
NB Southern Railway
CN Rail
Emergency Social Services
(ESS)
RST
Fire Marshall
Coroner
Transport Canada
Issue public warnings with
pre-determined messages
Use of emergency
notification system (if
applicable)
Liaison
Possible Evacuations
Be prepared to open
comfort centres or
reception centres
Be prepared for mass
containment
Be prepared to assist
isolated communities
Resource Needs Assessment
1. Identify resources
required
2. Identify resources at hand
3. Identify resources lacking
4. Mutual Aid request (PSCC)
5. Request Regional
Assistance (NBEMO)
6. Request Provincial
Assistance (NBEMO)
7. Request National
Assistance (NBEMO
618
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 49 of 65
Canadian Coast Guard (CCG)
Environmental emergencies
DELG
DTI
GNB Public Health
Additional Instructions:
Emergency Response Guide through Transport Canada: tc.canada.ca
Canutec online contact information: 1-888-CANUTEC (226-8832)
PART 3 ACTIVATION LEVELS AND ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
3. Activation Levels
3.1 Activation - Nominal Role / Fan Out Attached as Annex A to Part 1.
3.1.1
Level 1 – Enhanced Monitoring: Continuous monitoring by all SJEMO members of an emergency that may require
immediate regional assistance.
3.1.2
Level 2 – Partial Activation: Once notified, selected members of SJEMO may be called in to assist with supporting
ongoing efforts towards an emergency. Depending on the location of the emergency, the use of a virtual EOC may
be a viable option.
3.1.3
Level 3 – Full Activation: Once notified, all SJEMO members will report to the EOC. This will depend on the location
of SJEMO members at the time of notification.
3.2 Municipal Roles and Responsibilities
Public Safety Committee
3.2.1
a. Provides overall emergency policy and direction to the EOC Director.
b. Sets expenditure limits.
c. Formally requests outside support/resources (e.g., Provincial and Federal support).
d. Authorizes declaration and termination of “State of Local Emergency.”
e. Provides direction for emergency public information activities; and
f. Acts as a spokesperson for the jurisdiction.
Command Staff at Site Responsibilities
3.2.2
Site Incident Commander (may have a deputy if required)
a. Reports to Municipal Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) Director if activated.
b. Responsible for overall management of the incident at the site.
c. Ensures planning meetings are scheduled as required.
d. Approves and authorizes implementation of Incident Action Plan.
e. Determines incident objectives and strategy.
f. Authorizes release of information to media.
619
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 50 of 65
g. Orders the demobilization of the incident when appropriate.
h. May provides advice and information to the executive group as requested; and
i. Ensures overall incident objectives are being met by sections.
3.2.3
Site Information Officer (may have assistants as required)
a. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
b. Advises the Incident Commander.
c. Develops material for use for both media briefings and public communication.
d. Ensures the monitoring of print and electronic media coverage of the event; and
e. Oversees the flow of information within the EOC and with all response agencies.
3.2.4
Site Liaison Officer
a. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
b. Serves as the primary contact for agency representatives.
c. Advises agencies of operational updates and status; and
d. Monitors incident to identify current or potential inter-organizational problems.
3.2.5
Site Safety Officer (may have assistants as required)
a. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
b. Identifies hazardous situations associated with the incident.
c. Reviews the action plan for safety implications; and
d. Exercises authority to stop and/or prevent unsafe acts.
General Staff at Site Responsibilities
3.2.6
Site Operations Section
The Operations Section manages all tactical operations. The Section Chief is usually from the lead agency. ie. during
a large fire, this section should be managed by the Fire Chief (or designate).
a. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
b. Manages all tactical operations.
c. Assists in development of the operations portion of the incident action plan; and
d. Creates branches / divisions, task forces to carry out the strategies in the action plan as required.
3.2.7
Site Planning Section
The Planning Section collects, evaluates, processes, and disseminates information for use at the incident.
a. Reports directly to the incident commander.
b. Collects and processes information for situational awareness.
c. Provides input and supervises the preparation of the Incident action plan.
d. Determines need for specialized resources; and
e. Monitors incident status and informs IC of any changes.
3.2.8
Site Logistics Section
All incident support is provided through the Logistics Section which ensures that, if resources are required for the
operations, they are provided as best possible given timing, circumstances, and other constraints.
a. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
b. Monitors the resources for continuous operability.
620
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 51 of 65
c. Requests and releases resources as required; and
d. Oversees the demobilization of Logistics Section.
3.2.9
Site Finance / Administration Section
The Finance / Administration Section manages all financial aspects of the incident.
a. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
b. Collects all documentation for the incident and provide financial updates as required.
c. Ensures procurement procedures for supplies are prepared and completed; and
d. Ensures that all personnel time records are accurately completed and inputted.
3.3 Municipal Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) Team Member Responsibilities
3.3.1
EOC Director
Reports to: Emergency Management Council Committee
The EOC Director’s primary responsibility is to coordinate the efficient response and manage all resources required
for the emergency. Responsibilities include:
a. activating the Emergency Operations Centre if required.
b. initiating the EOC fan-out/notification list.
c. ensuring key EOC positions are staffed as required.
d. ensuring an up-to-date contact list is maintained for fan-out purposes.
e. reporting major events to New Brunswick Emergency Measures Organization.
f. ensuring the development of an Incident Action Plan.
g. ensuring EOC members take prompt and effective action in response to problems.
h. ensuring action logs are maintained by all EOC staff.
i. requesting expert assistance as required.
j. advising Council if there is a need to evacuate a specific area.
k. coordinating evacuation with other EOC staff.
l. consulting with Health/Social Services Agency Representative on the selection and opening of shelter(s)
and or reception centre(s).
m. monitoring the capacity of the area resources and if overextended, requesting assistance through mutual
aid and EMO, upon approval from Council.
n. informing EOC staff of major events as they arise.
o. ensuring communications are established.
p. ensuring a thorough situation briefing is conducted during shift changes and transfer of command.
q. ensuring that a main event log is maintained and safeguarded; and
r. other duties as required.
3.3.2
Liaison Officer
Reports to: EOC Director
The Liaison Officer acts as the primary point of contact/coordination for outside agency representatives; other EOC’s
and volunteer organizations. Responsibilities include:
621
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 52 of 65
a. contacting outside agency representatives that have not acknowledged requests to report to the EOC; and
ensures required agencies are in the EOC
b. briefing agency representatives on their role and position within the EOC.
c. acting as a point of contact for volunteers and/ or volunteer organizations.
d. providing specific services as requested by EOC Director.
e. assisting with coordinating how volunteers and/or volunteer organizations can assist with the response.
f. other duties as assigned by the EOC Director.
3.3.3
Risk Management Officer
Reports to: EOC Director
The duties of the Risk Management Officer are as follows:
Risk Management – Monitors the safety of the EOC and that good risk management practices are applied
throughout the response organization. Protects the interests of all EOC participants, agencies, and organizations by
ensuring due diligence in information collection, decision-making, and implementation. Monitors situations for risk
exposures and ascertains probabilities and potential consequences of future events. Identifies and analyses liability
and loss exposures.
Safety – The Risk Management Officer maintains link with Safety Officers as applicable and provides advice on
safety issues. The Risk Management Officer has the authority to halt or modify all unsafe operations within or
outside the scope of the EOC Action Plan, notifying the EOC
Director of actions taken. It should be noted that while the risk management officer has responsibility for safety, it is
recommended that a safety specialist be appointed who is familiar with all aspects of safety and relevant legislation.
Security – The Risk Management Officer ensures that appropriate security measures have been established to allow
for only authorized access to the EOC facility and documentation.
3.3.4
Information Officer
Report to: EOC Director
The duties of the Information Officer are as follows:
a. maintaining an up-to-date list of all media services in the area.
b. implementing a crisis communication plan to support the incident action plan.
c. leading an Emergency Public Information Team (if required).
d. establishing a media-briefing centre;
e. keeping the public informed of significant developments occurring during the emergency.
f. briefing the media periodically.
g. maintaining a log of all actions taken.
h. briefing the EOC Director during planning meetings.
i. ensuring that replacement is thoroughly briefed during shift changes; and
j. other duties as assigned by the EOC Director.
3.3.5
Operations Section Chief
Reports to: EOC Director
622
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 53 of 65
The Operations Section focuses on the current operational period by liaising with and supporting the Incident
Management Team in accordance with the incident action plan. Responsibilities of the Operations Section Chief
include:
a. gaining and maintaining situational awareness.
b. consulting with the EOC Director to determine who will be in the Operations Section.
c. receiving information from the Operations Section and forward to the appropriate people including the
Duty Officer.
d. ensuring situation reports are disseminated to the Operations Section.
e. briefing the EOC Director during planning meetings on the current situation.
f. consulting with EOC Director, after planning meetings, on the appropriateness of the incident action plan.
g. leading the operations section to achieve the objectives established in the incident action plan.
h. keeping the EOC Director and the Information Officer updated; and
i. other duties as assigned by Operations Section Chief.
3.3.6
Planning Section Chief
Reports to: EOC Director
Planning Section Chief oversees the conduct of planning meetings, the development of incident action plans for
each planning cycle; and for managing and disseminating information. Responsibilities include:
a. chairing planning meetings.
b. providing leadership to additional planning staff.
c. recommending objectives and their priorities to the EOC Director.
d. drafting incident action plans for the EOC Director’s approval.
e. disseminating incident action plans to the EOC team.
f. conducting planning for the next operational period; and
g. performing other duties as assigned by the EOC Director.
3.3.7
Duty Officer
Reports to: Planning Section Chief
The Duty Officer manages and disseminates information. Responsibilities include:
a. assisting with setting up the EOC.
b. assisting with notifying EOC participants.
c. opening, maintaining, and displaying a main event log.
d. maintaining situational awareness.
e. drafting and disseminating situational reports to EOC participants, Emergency Measures Organizations, and
other pertinent stakeholders.
f. maintaining a map of the incident indicating the location of incidents and resources,
g. providing a briefing of the current situation for the initial planning meeting.
h. other duties as assigned by the Planning Section Chief.
3.3.8
Logistics Section Chief
Reports to: EOC Director
623
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 54 of 65
The Logistics Section provides EOC support such as security, feeding, amenities, backup power, telecommunications,
information technology, and mapping. Responsibilities of the Logistics Section Chief include:
a. maintaining a list of all telecommunications resources in the area.
b. providing telecommunications in support of emergency operations.
c. ensuring EOC security arrangements are made.
d. ensuring EOC has sufficient log sheets, markers, status boards, writing paper, etc.
e. preparing meals and sleeping arrangements for EOC participants.
f. facilitating mapping requests.
g. briefing EOC participants, during planning meetings, on matters of importance.
h. working to support the incident action plan and/or fulfill direction given by the EOC Director.
i. providing operators for the radio networks and the message centre;
j. establishing a back-up network using Amateur Radio systems and assigning frequencies.
k. maintaining office machinery, equipment, stationary.
l. maintaining a sign-in sheet; and
m. ensuring sufficient telephone resources for EOC participants.
3.3.9
Finance and Administration Section Chief
Reports to: EOC Director
The Finance and Administration Section concerns itself with the financial aspects of an emergency, including
capturing the costs of dealing with an incident, procuring items, dealing with claims and compensation, and
recording the work hours of EOC participants. Responsibilities of the Finance and Administration Section Chief
include:
a. ensuring EOC participants sign in and out of the EOC.
b. developing a plan for capturing costs dealing with the incident.
c. briefing EOC participants during planning meetings on matters of importance.
d. procuring of resources for the EOC or for resources requested by the Incident Management Team which
have been approved by the EOC Director.
e. working to support the incident action plan and/or fulfill direction given by the EOC Director.
f. obtaining EOC participants’ sign-in/sign-out times during deactivation; and
g. assisting with DFAA claims, as required during the recovery phase.
3.4 Regional REAC/REOC Roles and Responsibilities
3.4.1
Tasks Common to All:
a. On arrival, open and maintain departmental log
b. Contact Provincial Emergency Operations Centre (PEOC) – maintain contact.
c. Determine capability of department to respond to the emergency; and
d. Review departmental emergency response plan or business contingency plan.
3.4.2
Department of Justice and Public Safety (JPS) – Regional EM Coordinator
a. Provide regular updates to the PEOC.
b. Lead the business cycles relating to REOC activities.
624
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 55 of 65
c. Coordinate response activities with external agencies.
d. Request assistance from province or federal government (as appropriate), through the PEOC.
e. Assess emergency needs and establish a strategic direction; and
f. Monitor Municipal actions within regions.
g. Assume EM coordinator role for unincorporated areas & LSD’s
3.4.3 NB Emergency Public Information (NBEMO-PIO):
When required, the Director may appoint a PIO to a REOC.
3.4.4
Emergency Management Communication Group (EMCG):
a. Verify that the telecommunications mobilization is complete.
b. Report to the REOC on all matters related to telecommunications.
c. Commence long-term telecommunications planning in response to this emergency.
d. Provide relief radio operators for stations operating under the control of the EMCG
e. Establish a telecommunications link with NB EMO/ PLGS Off-Site EOC (if required).
3.4.5
Office of the Fire Marshall Office (OFM):
a. Report to the REOC on matters relating to rescue, firefighting, and fire prevention
b. Activate Mutual Aid Agreement(s) – Fire – when required.
c. Ensure that dangerous goods support services are contacted when required.
d. Provide discretionary assistance to the ambulance and police services.
e. Obtain updates from Fire Dispatch and the Fire Control Officer (FCO); and
f. Assess the need for additional resources and request these through Fire Dispatch.
3.4.6
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP):
a. Respond to immediate police needs arising from the emergency.
b. Report to the REOC on matters relating to crowd control, traffic control, protection of life and property,
and law enforcement.
c. Ensure the protection of public and private property within the emergency area.
d. Assist in ground search and rescue (GSAR) operations (if required).
e. Liaise with other polices services (as required); and
f. Arrange for additional police assistance when required.
3.4.7
Department of Transportation and Infrastructure (DTI):
a. Be responsible for the construction, repair and maintenance of all roads, bridges, highways and regional
wharves and ferries as may be required during the emergency.
b. Assist with the implementation of emergency highway traffic control measures in conjunction with
Police services.
c. Conduct damage assessment to the regional transportation system, facilities, and infrastructure.
d. Inform the REOC immediately upon the closing of any regional roadways or municipal roads that are
necessary for emergency response operations, such as evacuation routes, and suggest alternative
routes.
e. Give priority to maintaining and keeping open regionally controlled roads and assist in keeping
municipal roads open that are necessary to support emergency operations.
f. Coordinate the mobilization of contractor equipment/personnel and engineering expertise to keep
regional roadways open,
g. Expedite the issuing of permits to transportation companies that will engage in common, or contract
carrier operations related to the emergency; and
h. Provide engineering, architectural contract, and administrative support to emergency construction
projects.
625
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 56 of 65
3.4.8
Department of Natural Resources and Energy Development (DNRED):
a. Responsible for the provision of emergency rescue services (rural) and emergency firefighting
assistance (rural).
b. Assist in the evacuation and closure of regional Parks as required.
c. Be prepared to provide facilities to be used as assembly, relocation, and dispatch areas for emergency
response operations, and temporary emergency care and accommodation.
d. Implement water control measures as required or if requested; and
e. Provide departmental equipment and personnel resources if requested.
3.4.9
Ambulance New Brunswick (ANB):
a. Be prepared to provide comprehensive, region-wide ambulance services.
b. Coordinate the communication and dispatch systems necessary to meet the requirements during an
emergency; and
c. Provide regular updates to your PEOC representative.
3.4.10
Department of Health (DH):
a. Activate the Provincial Health Plan (if required).
b. Coordinate resources across the province to meet the requirements of the emergency, in coordination
with the PEOC, other government departments, public and private health practitioners where/when
required.
c. Be prepared to arrange for the delivery of counselling services and critical stress debriefings to
emergency workers.
d. Ensure records management protocols are in place for those patients hospitalized for casualties or
diseases related to the emergency.
e. Arrange for the testing of agricultural and marine products identified as possibly being contaminated.
f. Inspect buildings to identify radiological hazards resulting from the emergency.
g. Provide and coordinate comprehensive assessments of the health impact, and the ability to continue
providing essential health services; and
h. Act as the primary department for the liaison with Health Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada
Center for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, other regional health authorities and IEMG Health
Officials for consultation and assistance.
3.4.11
Emergency Social Services (Department of Social Development) (ESS):
a. Liaise with private social service organizations, including the Canadian Red Cross, during the emergency
and act as the link between them and the REOC.
b. Be prepared to provide assessments of the impacts of the emergency on the delivery of essential social
services, including an evaluation of the need for special assistance to meet unique human service
demands.
c. Be prepared to provide psychological support during and immediately after the emergency; and
d. Maintain a resource list of housing and accommodations available for displaced persons.
3.4.12
Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD:
a. Responsible for coordinating with administrators of New Brunswick Schools/Community Colleges for
the protection of their students during an emergency; and
626
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 57 of 65
b. Support the establishment of reception centres and shelters for evacuees by allowing the use of
buildings under your control for this purpose (only when officially requested).
3.4.13
Canadian Red Cross:
a. When requested, establish a reception centre for Registration & Inquiry.
b. Assists in reuniting families, and answer inquiries regarding the condition and whereabouts of missing
persons (if applicable).
c. Provide Emergency Lodging for homeless, and evacuated persons.
d. Provide food and meals to those persons without food or the ability to properly prepare food.
e. Provide clothing or emergency covering until regular sources of supply are available.
f. Provide for the initial reception of evacuees arriving at Reception Centres; inform them of immediate
emergency help; offer temporary care for unattended children and dependent elderly; assist with the
temporary care of residents from special care facilities; provide or arrange for provision of financial
and/or material assistance; and
g. Offer immediate and long-term emotional support to people with personal problems and needs created
or aggravated by the emergency.
3.4.14
Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fisheries (DAAF):
a. If required, in collaboration with Dept of Health, arrange sampling of locally produced foodstuff and
marine products, and delivery of samples to Health Canada (or other).
b. Ensure for the disposal of condemned or contaminated foodstuff.
c. In the event of an evacuation, help facilitate the movement and welfare of farm animals.
d. In collaboration with Public Safety, Fisheries and Oceans, Canadian Coast Guard, and others, arrange for
the removal of fishing vessels in any danger area and direct them to safe harbours.
e. Contact appropriate Wharfingers to prepare them for the arrival of redirected fishing vessels.
f. Be prepared to assist other agencies as required; and
g. Provide regular updates to your PEOC representative.
3.4.15
New Brunswick Power (Saint John Energy):
a. Direct liaison with PEOC on a continual basis and ensure REOC is fully briefed; and
b. Report to the REOC Coordinator on the current departmental staffing and anticipated needs.
3.4.16
Department of Environment and Local Government (DELG):
a. Monitor and coordinate emergency planning and operations for local service districts (LSDs).
b. Provide recommendations regarding assistance to individuals affected within the LSDs.
c. Coordinate and monitor extraordinary regional expenditures related to an emergency.
d. Facilitate liaison with local authorities and, if required, recommend the appointment of an official
administrator to act as council.
e. If called upon, support the provision of shelter and accommodation for evacuated people who cannot
return to their homes for some time; and
f. Provide guidance to assist in the determination of appropriate options for longer-term emergency
housing, when required.
4.1 APPENDIX
4.1.1 “A” New Brunswick Emergency Measures Act
627
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 58 of 65
4.1.2 “B” The Saint John Emergency Measures By-Law
4.1.3 “C” Declaration of State of Emergency
4.1.4 “D” Activation Timeline
4.1.5 “E” Contact List – To be updated a minimum of once annually in May, to distribution list
628
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 59 of 65
APPENDIX “A” New Brunswick Emergency Measure Act
Most current to be found on Government of New Brunswick Web Site
APPENDIX "B" Saint John Emergency Measures By-Law (www.saintjohn.ca) under by-laws
629
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 60 of 65
Appen Appendix “C” DECLARATION OF A STATE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
Section 11 (2) of the Emergency Measures Act
Whereas the area of herein described is or may soon be encountering an emergency that requires
the increased powers of the Emergency Measures Act to prevent harm or damage to the safety,
health, and welfare of persons, or to prevent damage to property, or the environment.
Emergency Area: Within the area(s) with the boundaries in the City of Saint John, County of Saint
John, Province of New Brunswick, as follows:
Nature of the Emergency:
AND WHEREAS the undersigned is satisfied that an emergency or threat of an emergency exists in the
above-noted municipality.
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY DECLARES pursuant to Section 11(2) of the Emergency Measures Act, a State
of Local Emergency in the Municipality noted above as of and from _________ o’clock in the forenoon
(_____) or afternoon (_____) of the day of _____, AD, 20 ____.
THIS DECLARATION OF A STATE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY shall exist until _____ o’clock in the forenoon
(_____) or afternoon (_____) of the day of _____, AD., 20____ or for a maximum of 7 days from the date
and time specified above unless the Declaration is renewed or terminated.
DATED at the City of Saint John, County of Saint John, Province of New Brunswick, on the ____ day of
_____________, AD 20____.
X______________________________________________
Mayor, City of Saint John
NOTE: This declaration is only valid for a maximum of 7 days with a further renewal of 7 days, if required.
Describe the boundaries
Describe the emergency in detail
630
Appendix “D” Activation Timeline City of Saint John Activation Timeline
Critical Infrastructure (CI) is defined as those physical and information technology facilities, networks, services, and assets, which, if disrupted or destroyed, would
have a serious impact on the health, safety, security, or economic well-being of New Brunswickers or the effective functioning of government. CI impacts that
require an immediate assessment in accordance with the recommended Activation Timeline.
LOW: Potential, imminent or actual threats, vulnerabilities, or incidents. Active Monitoring is mandatory.
MEDIUM: Potential, imminent or actual threats, vulnerabilities or incidents assessed as limited in scope but having impacts on critical infrastructure. Mandatory
monitoring is required. An escalation in REOC activation will likely be necessary.
HIGH: Potential, imminent or actual threats, vulnerabilities, or incidents where precautions and actions are required immediately.
Energy and Utilities – Electrical power,
Natural gas, Oil production.
Low: A-1 Medium: B-1 High: B-7
Transportation - Roads, Air, Rail,
Marine.
Low: B-1 Medium: D-1 High: D-7
Information and Communication
Technology – Telecommunications.
Low: B-1 Medium: B-7 High: C-1
Food - Food safety at production, Sales
and use nodes, Distribution.
Low: A-1 Medium: B-2 High: C-2
Government - Services, Public facilities,
Information, and information networks.
Low: A-1 Medium: B-1 High: B-7
Finance - Banking, Securities,
Investments, Integrity of electronic
banking systems.
Low: A-1 Medium: A-3 High: B-1
Health - Hospitals, Healthcare, Blood
Supply.
Low: A-1 Medium: C-1 High: D-1
Water - Drinking water, Wastewater
contamination.
Low: B-1 Medium: C-1 High: D-1
Safety - Hazardous substances,
Explosives, Nuclear waste, Emergency
services.
Low: A-1 Medium: B-7 High: C-1
Manufacturing - Chemical and strategic
manufacturers.
Low: A-1 Medium: B-1 High: C-1
Activation Timeline: Used in conjunction with the graduated response concept, it provides for a common operating tempo between municipalities. With the
assistance of the Red Cross, case by case request will be actioned. Note, that should an abnormal number of requests be received from a specific geographic area
then in accordance with C-7 of the activation timeline, the requirement for WCs will be assessed.
631
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 62 of 65
Ser Timeline 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A 0 – 12 Hrs. Initial CI Impact
Assessment
Liaise
with
REMC
Maintain
Situational
Awareness
Municipal Departments
provide updates to EOC
Coordinator
MEAC Activation
Level 1
Submit
Report to
Mayor and
Council and
NB EMO
B 12 – 24
Hrs.
Detailed CI Impact
Assessment
Liaise
with
REMC
Maintain
Situational
Awareness
Municipal Departments
provide updates to EOC
Coordinator
MEOC Activation
Level 1
Minor
Impacts Case
by Case
Municipal
Emergency
Response Plan
Activated
Submit
Report to
Mayor and
Council and
NB EMO
C 24 – 36
Hrs.
Final CI Impact
Assessment
Liaise
with
REMC
Municipal EOC
Activation
REOC Activation in support
of municipal activation(s)
Municipal
Departments
provide updates to
EOC Coordinator
Maintain
Situational
Awareness
Requirement
for WCs/RCs
Assessed
Submit
Report to
Mayor and
Council, and
NBEMO
D 36-48 Hrs.
Response Activities
to Critical
Infrastructure
Liaise
with
REMC
Emergency
Managed by
Municipalities
Maintain Situational
Awareness
Open WCs or RCs as
required
Municipal
Mutual Aid
Requests (if
required)
REOC Support
to
Municipalities /
LSDs
Submit
Report to
Mayor and
Council and
NB EMO
E 48 – 60
Hrs.
Monitor Critical
Infrastructure
Recovery Efforts
Liaise
with
REMC
EOC / WCs / RCs
Monitoring
Maintain Situational
Awareness
Regional Visits from
REMC / NBEMO
Submit
Report to
Mayor and
Council, and
NB EMO
F 60 – 72
Hrs.
Monitor Final
Critical
Infrastructure
Recovery Efforts
Liaise
with
REMC
EOC / WCs / RCs
Monitoring
Recommend WCs / RCs
closures if no longer
required
Monitor EOC
Deactivations
Submit
Report to
Mayor and
Council, and
NB EMO
G 72 + Hrs.
Critical
Infrastructure
Restoration Efforts
Ongoing or
Completed
Final
Liaison
with
REMC
Submit Final
Report to NB
EMO
MEOC Deactivation
Disaster Financial
Assistance (if
applicable)
Conduct an
AAR
632
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 63 of 65
Appendix “E” – Contact List to be updated annually - CONFIDENTIAL
633
APPENDIX “F” – PLANNING P
634
SAINT JOHN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
Page 65 of 65
ANNEX “1” – EVACUATION PLAN
(Internal document)
635
Nominating Committee Meeting – November 19, 2025
2nd Floor Boardroom, City Hall
Present: Mayor D. Noade Reardon
Deputy Mayor J. MacKenzie
Councillor B. Harris
Councillor M. Darling
City Clerk J. Taylor
Deputy City Clerk A. McLennan
Administrative Assistant K. Tibbits
Committee of the Whole Members:
Subject: Recommended Appointments to Committees
The Nominating Committee, having met on November 19, 2025, makes the following recommendations:
Planning Advisory Committee: to reappoint Brad Mitchell from January 1, 2026 to June 30, 2026; to
appoint Jeff Roach, replacing Brad Mitchell, for a three-year term from July 1, 2026 to July 1, 2029; to
appoint Blake Slattery, replacing Anne McShane, for a three-year term from December 2, 2025 to
December 2, 2028; and to appoint Peter Corfield, replacing Peter Pappas, for a three-year term from
January 1, 2026 to January 1, 2029.
Saint John Free Public Library: to appoint both Kennedy McGeachy and Stephanie Woods Stevens each
for a three-year term from December 2, 2025 to December 2, 2028.
Sincerely,
Mayor and Chair of the Nominating Committee
636
M&C No. 2025-285
Report Date November 26, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area General Counsel
SUBJECT: Amended and Restated Agreement of Purchase and Sale of 324
Charlotte Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN
SESSION OF COUNCIL
On February 19, 2025, the City entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale
with J.N. Lafford Realty Inc. for two PIDs comprising a 2.5-acre property at 324
Charlotte Street. During the due diligence period, the purchaser identified a title
issue with one parcel (PID 55147482). On May 5, an extension was granted to
allow additional time to address this title issue. On November 18th, 2025, J.N.
Lafford confirmed in writing to the City of Saint John that they accept the title as
is and remain committed to completing the purchase of 324 Charlotte Street. Due
to delays in resolving the title issue, the purchaser has requested extensions to
the Deposit Date, Closing Date, and Failure to Build date.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
That the City enter into an Amended and Restated Agreement of Purchase and
Sale for the property located at 324 Charlotte Street with J.N. Lafford Realty Inc.
(hereinafter “Lafford”) in the form as presented to Committee of the Whole at its
meeting held December 1, 2025, amending the Agreement of Purchase and Sale
between the City and Lafford dated February 19, 2025, and that the Mayor and
Clerk be authorized to execute the said Amended and Restated Agreement of
Purchase and Sale and any documents ancillary thereto.
637
M&C No. 2025-272
Report Date November 17, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Fire and Emergency Services
Subject: Funding Agreement – Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation of Canada
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION
OF COUNCIL
The Saint John Fire Department applied for a grant through the Firehouse Subs Public Safety
Foundation of Canada. The application was submitted in July 2025, and the department was
notified in early November that it had been successful. The Foundation will provide the full
amount to the City via EFT once all required documentation has been completed and submitted.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
That the City enter into a Funding Agreement with the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation
of Canada generally in the form as attached to M&C 2025-272 to accept a grant award; and that
the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the said agreement and any documents ancillary
thereto.
638
- 5 -
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-262
Report Date November 26, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Utilities and
Infrastructure Services
SUBJECT: Local Leadership for Climate Adaptation(LLCA) - Vulnerability
Assessment of the Urban Heat Island Effect and Associated Factors in
Saint John, New Brunswick
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to seek Common Council’s approval to enter into a
Grant Agreement with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities for the
Vulnerability Assessment of the Urban Heat Island Effect and Associated Factors
in Saint John, New Brunswick.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
It is recommended that the City enter into the Grant Agreement generally in the
form as attached to M&C No. 2025-262 to receive funding from the Green
Municipal Fund under the Local Leadership for Climate Adaptation (LLCA) Program
- for the Vulnerability Assessment of the Urban Heat Island Effect and Associated
Factors in Saint John, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute
the said Grant Agreement and any other documents ancillary thereto.
639
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OPEN REPORT
M&C No. 2025-287
Report Date November 26, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area General Counsel
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Committee of the Whole OPEN facing report - ROFR Market Square.docx
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION OF
COUNCIL
At its meeting held October 28, 2024, Council resolved to sell the parcel of land at 75 Smythe
Street (PID 55024251) and to issue to the Hardman Group Limited written notice setting out the
terms and conditions upon which the City is prepared to sell its interest in the parcel of land at
75 Smythe Street (PID 55024251) in accordance with section 27 of the Lease between the City
and the Hardman Group Limited (the “Lease”).
The Hardman Group Limited elected to exercise its Right of First Refusal, and afterwards assigned
its interest in the Lease to 752472 N.B. Inc. The purpose of the report is to seek authority for the
City to close the transaction.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
That the City sell the parcel of land bearing PID 55024251 to 752472 N.B. Inc., the assignee to the
Hardman Group Limited (“HGL”), pursuant to the January 24, 2025 election by HGL to exercise its
Right of First Refusal under a Lease between the City and HGL dated October 14, 1980, as
amended; and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documents to
effect the land transaction.
640
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OPEN REPORT
M&C No. 2025-281
Report Date November 26, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Growth and Community
Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Housing for All – License Agreement Red Zones Department of
Transportation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION OF
COUNCIL
The City of Saint John is entering into a license agreement with the Department of Transportation
and Infrastructure to facilitate the City of Saint John’s Housing for All Policy Framework, which
includes providing services to unhoused persons on public lands, and in some cases, the
relocation of encampments from high risk areas through a person centred and rights based
approach.
The City of Saint John released a new Housing for All Policy Framework in September 2025
outlining a compassionate and coordinated approach to addressing homelessness in our
community. It includes the creation of Green, Yellow, and Red Zones, each with specific purposes
to ensure public safety, uphold human rights, and support unhoused residents. This work is being
done in partnership with local service providers and the Province of New Brunswick.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
1) That the City enter into a License Agreement with His Majesty the King, in Right of
the Province of New Brunswick, generally as presented to the Committee of the
Whole on December 1, 2025, and
2) That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the License Agreement and any
documents ancillary thereto.
641
642
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-279
Report Date November 24, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Growth and Community
Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Community Safety & Security Team and Community Resilience Fund
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head Chief Administrative Officer
Benn Purinton A Poffenroth / C McKiel J. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Common Council:
1. Approve the Community Resilience Fund Policy as attached to this report and allocate up
to $250,000 per year for two years (total $500,000) from operating reserves to implement
the Community Resilience Fund pilot; and
2. Direct staff to proceed with implementation of the Community Safety & Security (CSS)
Team as described in this report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Residents, businesses, and community partners in Waterloo Village, parts of the Uptown, and the
Thorne/Rothesay Avenue corridor have raised ongoing concerns about nuisance activity and
visible disorder, such as public intoxication, open drug use, property damage, aggressive
solicitation, noise and other nuisances. These issues are affecting perceptions of safety and
confidence in key public spaces and business areas. To respond, staff is proposing two two-year
pilot programs.
643
Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team
The Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team is a visible, non‑police presence meant to prevent
and respond to nuisance and public disorder while supporting community wellbeing. The team
uses a voluntary‑compliance first approach, combining proactive patrols with dispatched
response to non-emergency situations. Service areas will include the Waterloo Village, parts of
the Uptown and on Thorne Avenue and Rothesay Avenue around emergency shelters.
The Team will be delivered by a contracted, non-police provider managed by the City’s Growth
and Community Services department. Saint John Police do not supervise, direct, or manage the
CSS Team, but coordination will take place when an incident meets clearly defined escalation
thresholds.
The team’s goal is to ensure residents and businesses get efficient and appropriate response to
everyday nuisance issues, reduce crime and disorder through consistent presence, and increase
coordination between City services, Police, and community partners. As the pilot progresses, CSS
operations will be refined and updated as necessary based on results and community feedback.
Community Resilience Fund
The Community Resilience Fund is a two-year pilot grant program that helps small sized
businesses (less than 100 employees) and non-profits in Saint John address the impacts of crime
and safety concerns.
Through this fund, the City supports:
• Repairs and recovery from damage
• Security improvements and prevention measures
• Community-led safety and education initiatives
The goal is to strengthen community resilience and support local businesses by making shared
spaces safer and more welcoming.
The applications will be reviewed based on the prioritization criteria defined in the Community
Resilience Fund Policy. Grants will be awarded twice per year (April and August), or until funds
last, following review and approval by the Grant Committee.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
N/A
644
REPORT
Background
Over the past year, residents, businesses, and community partners have raised growing concerns
about safety and visible disorder in parts of Waterloo Village, Uptown, and the Thorne/Rothesay
Avenue corridor. People are seeing more open alcohol and drug use, public intoxication, property
damage, aggressive behaviour and noise in public spaces. These issues do not always meet the
threshold for a police response, but they affect how safe people feel going about their daily lives.
At the same time, small businesses and non-profit organizations are spending more time and
money dealing with vandalism, clean-up, and security measures. Council has heard clearly that
there is a need for an on-the-street presence that can respond to non-emergency concerns, and
practical support for those bearing the costs of safety-related impacts.
This report introduces two two-year pilot programs to address these concerns: a Community
Safety & Security (CSS) Team and a Community Resilience Fund.
Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team
Overview
The Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team is a visible, non‑police presence meant to prevent
and respond to nuisance and public disorder while supporting community wellbeing. The team
uses a voluntary‑compliance first approach, combining proactive patrols with dispatched
response to non-emergency situations. Service areas will include the Waterloo Village, parts of
the Uptown and on Thorne Avenue and Rothesay Avenue around emergency shelters.
The CSS team will operate 24/7 on a 2-year pilot basis, with a two‑person team on duty at all
times. A dedicated number will be used for the teams to receive calls about and respond to non-
emergency situations. When called, CSS will attend to stabilize the situation and, in some cases,
coordinate hand‑offs to Police or Outreach when needed. Between calls, the team will conduct
proactive patrols to deter crime and nuisance throughout Waterloo Village, parts of the Uptown
and around emergency shelters.
CSS is delivered by a contracted, non-police provider managed by the City’s Growth and
Community Services department. Saint John Police do not supervise, direct, or manage the CSS
program. The CSS Team will coordinate with Police only when an incident meets clearly defined
escalation thresholds.
645
The team’s goal is to ensure residents and businesses get efficient and appropriate response to
everyday nuisance issues, reduce crime and disorder through consistent presence, and increase
coordination between City services, Police, and community partners. Metrics such as calls and
interactions will be regularly reported so the public can see activity. Outcomes and operations
will be refined and updated as necessary over the course of the pilot based on results and
community feedback.
Geography & Service Hours
The pilot service area includes Waterloo Village, parts of the Uptown, and the Thorne/Rothesay
Avenue corridor around emergency shelters. Within these zones, patrol emphasis is placed on
key anchors (e.g., King Square, Loyalist Burial Grounds, Waterloo Street corridor, Green Zone
communities, and shelter perimeters), with deliberate extension into adjacent blocks and
flexibility to adjust patrol area based on incident data and community feedback. The CSS Team
will operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, with a two-person team on duty at all times
working 12-hour shifts. This model will be subject to a 90-day post launch review, based on call
data, community feedback and performance indicators, to confirm the service area and whether
continuous coverage remains the preferred option or whether a different model would be more
effective.
Dispatch and Call-Taking
A dedicated phone number will be distributed directly to stakeholders (businesses, churches,
shelters, property managers) within the service area. When calls are received, they will be
screened for location and urgency by the CSS team; out-of-area or policing matters are redirected
to the appropriate channels (911, Police non-emergency, outreach or City service requests). For
in-area, non-emergency calls, the CSS unit is tasked with an average response target of 20
minutes. The number is intentionally not published broadly at launch to avoid confusion with
existing emergency/non-emergency numbers and to prevent immediate city-wide demand that
could overwhelm the small pilot team.
CSS Team Functions and Boundaries
The paired CSS unit will address day-to-day issues including, but not limited to, obstruction at
entrances, aggressive solicitation, noise, open alcohol or drug use, public urination/defecation
and wellness checks in public spaces. The default response is education, redirection, and de-
escalation, with clear thresholds for when to engage community partners such as Police or
Outreach.
The CSS Team are not police officers; they do not conduct criminal investigations or use force.
Saint John Police do not supervise, direct, or manage the CSS program. The CSS Team will
646
coordinate with Police only when an incident meets clearly defined escalation thresholds.
Additionally, nothing in this plan authorizes or implies City direction of Saint John Police
operations. All police deployment and enforcement decisions remain the sole responsibility of
Saint John Police.
It is anticipated that the CSS Team will have partial ability to formally enforce by-laws through
the use of administrative penalties. Authority to do so will require designation of the CSS Team
as by-law enforcement officers by Common Council, amendment of City by-laws and the
establishment of new procedures.
Performance Management
The CSS Team pilot will be managed by the City’s Growth & Community Services department.
Performance will be measured using a set of key performance indicators to show whether it is
achieving what Council intended: responding quickly to non-emergency nuisance issues in the
pilot areas and reducing visible disorder. The contractor will track the number of calls received,
patrols completed, interactions and escalations to Police, and this information will be used to
adjust operational details, including but not limited to, patrol routes and hours of coverage.
The first month of operation will be used to set a baseline, after which practical targets will be
set, and a detailed 90-day review will roll up early trends and recommend changes, including
service area changes and whether to confirm the 24/7 model or pivot to a different pattern of
hours based on demand.
Summary of Preferred Proponent (GardaWorld)
Through a recent competitive procurement process for security services, GardaWorld was
identified as the preferred proponent to deliver the Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team
pilot, based on their level of experience and ability to meet the City’s service level requirements.
GardaWorld is a large Canadian-based security services company with extensive experience
providing uniformed guarding, mobile patrols and community safety programs for both public
and private sector.
GardaWorld currently delivers a comparable community safety and security program for the City
of Fredericton, providing downtown patrols, supporting needle and sharps collection, and
assisting with minor clean-ups and encampment-related issues in coordination with municipal
staff and police. Drawing on that experience, GardaWorld will assign a site supervisor to support
day-to-day quality control, attend regular coordination meetings with City staff, and ensure that
call data, patrol activity and escalation information from Saint John are captured through their
647
reporting system to support the City’s performance management and Council reporting for the
two-year pilot.
For the Saint John CSS Team, GardaWorld has proposed a dedicated local team of licensed
security guards who will meet or exceed the City’s training standards. The CSS Team will receive
training through their onboarding process in de-escalation, trauma-informed practice, mental
health awareness, Standard First Aid, AED and Naloxone, along with other required modules to
support safe operations in the pilot area. This will be supplemented by Saint John specific
orientation on local procedures and expectations, with an emphasis on voluntary compliance,
respectful engagement and appropriate hand-offs to Police and Outreach.
Implementation Plan
Should the recommendation in this report be approved, staff will work with the proponent to
complete the remaining onboarding and set-up required to deploy the Community Safety &
Security (CSS) Team into the field. This will include finalizing any outstanding contract details,
confirming hours of service and routes within the pilot area, and putting basic reporting and
communication processes in place. On that basis, the target is to have the CSS Team operational
in Waterloo Village, parts of the Uptown, and the Thorne/Rothesay corridor by early February
2026.
Once launched, the pilot will run as a two-year program, structured as an initial one-year term
with an option to renew the contract for a second year. Staff will complete a 90-day review
following the launch to assess call volumes, deployment patterns, and how well the model is
working with Police, Outreach, and other partners, and will bring forward any practical
adjustments to hours or service area coverage as needed. After that point, staff will provide
quarterly summary updates to Council, with a more comprehensive evaluation and
recommendation on the future of the CSS Team near the end of the two-year period.
Community Resilience Fund
As part of the Community Security Plan Framework discussed with Committee on October 6,
2025, staff proposed a two-year Community Resilience Fund to help small businesses (less than
100 employees) located within the City of Saint John boundaries, manage the direct impacts of
crime and visible disorder.
That direction was built on through feedback received in stakeholder engagement sessions
throughout the month of October, where participants expressed strong support for the fund,
emphasized the need for a simple and accessible application process and advocated for eligibility
to include non-profit organizations. A draft Community Resilience Fund Policy with supportive
648
guidelines has been prepared to guide implementation of the pilot and is planned to return to
Council in open session for formal adoption.
Objectives and Program Focus
The Community Resilience Fund is designed to work alongside the Community Safety & Security
(CSS) Team by helping businesses and community organizations address the financial and
operational impacts of vandalism, security incidents, and ongoing safety concerns. The policy
objectives are to:
Support small businesses and local non-profit organizations with costs related to property
damage and security improvements;
Promote prevention and education (e.g., crime prevention, de-escalation, mental-health
and trauma-informed practices);
Encourage partnerships between businesses, social agencies and the City to foster safer,
more inclusive public spaces; and
Provide clear and accountable guidelines for distributing limited grant funds.
Funding Structure and Eligibility
The Community Resilience Fund is structured as a two-year pilot grant program with a maximum
budget of $250,000 per year, funded from operating reserves, consistent with the overall
financial framework previously presented to Committee. Individual businesses and non-profit
organizations will be eligible for grants of up to $7,500 per year, with the fund generally covering
up to 50% of eligible costs for businesses and up to 75% of eligible costs for non-profit
organizations, with the remainder contributed by the applicant.
Collective projects led by the BIA, Uptown Saint John Inc. or groups of four or more neighbouring
businesses will be eligible for grants of up to $25,000, with the fund covering up to 50% of eligible
costs, where they provide broader community benefit (e.g., shared lighting or alleyway
improvements).
Eligible applicants include small businesses operating within the City of Saint John, local non-
profit organizations with premises in the city, commercial property owners leasing to those
businesses or non-profits, Uptown Saint John Inc. for collective initiatives, and mixed-use multi-
unit developments under construction in affected areas.
Application Rounds and Prioritization
To keep administration manageable and align with available funding, applications will be
accepted twice per year (currently planned for April and September intakes), with two
649
application periods: Round 1: September 1, 2025 – March 31, 2026, Round 2: April 1, 2026 –
August 31, 2026.
Applicants will be asked to describe the issues they are facing, demonstrate evidence of impact
(e.g., police reports, photos, invoices), and submit detailed receipts for eligible costs such as
security cameras, lighting, repairs for damage, biohazard clean-up, or prevention and training
initiatives.
Applications will be reviewed by an independent evaluation committee composed of up to five
City staff to screen, review and evaluate all applications and make recommendations on grant
awards to Common Council based on a prioritization scoring matrix. The matrix
assesses demonstrated need and impact, alignment with program objectives (prevention,
response, and community safety), reasonableness of costs, and the degree of community benefit.
Reporting, Accountability and Next Steps
Successful applicants will be required to submit receipts and a brief outcome report within 90
days of project completion, and non-compliance may affect eligibility for future funding. The City
will provide an annual summary of grants awarded, types of projects supported, and observed
outcomes, and will track key performance indicators such as program uptake, distribution of
funds, and prevention versus response investments.
The policy is scheduled for review after two years to assess effectiveness, equity in distribution,
and alignment with evolving community needs, at which point Council will be able to determine
whether the Community Resilience Fund should be continued, adjusted, or concluded.
The Resilience Fund Policy sets out detailed rules, including eligibility, cost-sharing, and reporting
requirements for successful applicants.
Conclusion
The CSS Team and the Community Resilience Fund are designed to be used together: one focuses
on behaviour in public spaces, the other on the physical and financial impacts on nearby
properties. The CSS Team aims to reduce the frequency and severity of nuisance behaviour and
visible disorder in key areas. The Resilience Fund helps businesses and organizations recover
when incidents do happen and encourages investments that make these spaces safer and more
welcoming over time. Both initiatives are two-year pilots. Clear data will be collected along with
feedback from stakeholders which will be brought back to Council so that informed decisions can
be made about whether to continue, adjust, or end the programs.
650
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The combined CSS Team and Community Resilience Fund reinforce the City’s GROW and BELONG
strategic priorities.
Under GROW, the Community Resilience Fund provides direct, practical support to local small
businesses and non-profit organizations experiencing safety-related losses, while incentivizing
proactive improvements that sustain commercial activity and public confidence in key business
districts.
Under BELONG, the CSS Team will emphasize trauma-informed, voluntary-compliance
approaches, respectful engagement with people experiencing homelessness, addictions, or
mental health challenges, and coordinated referral to outreach and social supports rather than
enforcement as a first resort.
Together, the CSS Team and Community Resilience Fund advance a holistic approach that
balances immediate response with long-term prevention and shared community resilience.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
From a service perspective, the CSS Team is expected to:
Provide a consistent, 24-hour, visible presence in the Waterloo Village, Uptown and
around emergency shelters.
Offer a rapid, non-police response to nuisance and low-level disorder.
Improve coordination between City services, Police, outreach, and community partners.
Support the effectiveness of the Community Resilience Fund and other investments by
addressing behavioural issues that contribute to property damage and safety concerns.
Financially, the pilot CSS Team is estimated to cost approximately $65,000 per month or $780,000
per year, inclusive of labour, supervision, standard equipment, and a contractor-provided pickup
truck. This is broadly consistent with the initial cost envelope previously discussed with
Committee of the While under the Community Security Plan Framework, and staff propose to
fund the pilot from operating reserves.
From a service perspective, the Community Resilience Fund offers a new, community-facing tool
that complements field operations of the CSS Team by addressing the root causes and
downstream impacts of disorder. The fund supports safety improvements, shared space projects,
651
and prevention-oriented education that help stabilize conditions in priority areas and reduce
repeated service calls.
From a financial perspective, the Community Resilience Fund will operate as a two-year pilot with
an annual budget of $250,000, drawn from operating reserves (total allocation of $500,000).
Individual grants will provide up to $7,500 per business or non-profit per year, typically covering
50% of eligible expenses (or 75% for non-profits). Larger collective projects led by Uptown Saint
John Inc. or groups of four or more businesses may receive up to $25,000.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Strategic Services Kevin Fudge
Corporate Services Lisa Caissie
Growth & Community Services Ronald Moncada
Growth & Community Services David Dobblesteyn
ATTACHMENTS
Community Resilience Fund Policy
Presentation
652
Community Safety &
Security Team
and
Community Resilience Fund
December 1, 2025
653
Presentation Overview
•Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team
Overview
•Summary of Recommended Proponent
•Community Resilience Fund Overview
•Recommendations:
•Award Contract for CSS Team.
•Approve Community Resilience Fund Policy.
•Proceed to Implementation of CSS Team and
Community Resilience Fund.
CI TY O F SAINT JO HN:COMMUNITY SAFETY & SE CURITY
654
Overview of CSS Team
CITY OF SAINT JOHN
•A visible,presence focused on nuisance /public disorder in :
•Waterloo Village,
•Portions of the Uptown,and
•Thorne/Rothesay Avenue area.
•Combines proactive patrols with dispatched response to non-
emergency situations using voluntary-compliance first approach.
•Structured escalation to Police,Outreach,EMS when required.
•Delivered via a two-year pilot.Focused,measurable,and adaptable
based on data and partner feedback.
655
Service Area & Coverage Hours
Dispatched Service Area:
•Waterloo Village,
•Portions of the Uptown; &
•Thorne/Rothesay Avenue area around emergency shelters.
Patrol of anchors (King Square, Waterloo Street, shelter perimeters).
Coverage Model:
•24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
•Continuous two-person team working 12-hour shifts.
•Weekday supervision. Supports quality, training, performance.
90-day review of coverage model based on call data and outcomes.
CI TY O F SAINT JO HN:COMMUNITY SAFETY & SE CURITY
656
Dispatch
COMMUNITY SAFETY & SECURITY
•Dedicated phone line distributed
to service area stakeholders.
•Response time aim:20 minutes.
•Number is not public at launch to:
•Prevent confusion withemergency/non-emergencynumbers.
•Prevent city-wide demand ofteam.
CITY OF SAINT JOHN:GROWTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
657
CSS Will Address
CSS will respond to nuisance / public disorder issues including:
•Obstruction of entrances.
•Aggressive or intrusive solicitation.
•Nuisance noise, shouting, and non-violent disorder.
•Open alcohol or drug use in public spaces.
•Vandalism/graffiti and vacant building exterior checks.
•Non-emergency wellness checks in public spaces.
Default response is education, de-escalation, and voluntary
compliance, with escalation only when required.
CI TY O F SAINT JO HN:COMMUNITY SAFETY & SE CURITY
658
Boundaries & Escalation
CITY OF SAINT JOHN
•CSS Team members are not Police. Managed by City of Saint
John.
•Core focus: set expectations in public spaces and gain
voluntary compliance, not replacing policing or outreach.
•Clear thresholds for escalation:
•Police: threats, safety risks, in-progress vandalism, or repeated non-compliance.
•Outreach: indicators of distress or support needs, encampment work.
•EMS/911: medical distress.
•Works / By-Law / Fire: large clean-ups, property standards hazards, fire risks.
659
Performance Measures / Pilot Phases
KPIs to show whether the pilot is achieving its intended outcomes:
•Calls for services
•Interactions
•Escalation rate to Police
•Response time
•Completed patrols
Pilot review structure:
•Day-90 review: determine early trends and need for
adjustments.
•Ongoing Quarterly reviews,
•Year-1 renewal decision,
•Year-2 evaluation to inform whether to sustain, adjust,
expand, or conclude the model.
CI TY O F SAINT JO HN:COMMUNITY SAFETY & SE CURITY
660
Recommended Proponent –GardaWorld
CITY OF SAINT JOHN:GROWTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
•Large Canadian-based security company with extensive experience in uniformed guarding,
mobile patrols, and community safety programs for public and private sector clients.
•Proven municipal partner. Delivers a comparable community safety and security program for
the City of Fredericton.
•Robust training package: de-escalation, trauma-informed practice, mental health awareness,
Standard First Aid/AED, etc.
•Staffing model aligned to the Operational Plan. Flexible, continuous two-person team with
relief pool, dedicated site supervisor, safety check-ins and extra coverage support.
661
Community Resilience Fund
•Two-year pilot grant program to help small businesses and non-profit
organizations manage direct impacts of crime and visible disorder.
•Eligible applicants include:
•Licensed small businesses within Saint John.
•Local non-profit companies.
•Commercial property owners leasing to businesses/non-profits.
•Uptown Saint John Inc.
•Mixed-use multi-unit developments under construction.
•Eligible projects include:
•Security and prevention (cameras, lighting, alarms, staff training),
•Damage response (repairs, graffiti removal)
•Business resilience initiatives (shared lighting or alley upgrades)
CI TY O F SAINT JO HN:COMMUNITY SAFETY & SE CURITY
662
Funding & Eligibility
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE FUND
•Budget: up to $250,000 per year for 2 years, funded from operating
reserves.
•Up to $7,500 per business/non-profit annually (to cover 50% of project
expenses for businesses; 75% for non-profits). Up to $25,000 for
collective projects led of groups of 4+ neighbouring businesses.
•Applications accepted twice per year (April and September) with two
application periods*:
•Round 1: September 1 –March 31 (of the following year).
•Round 2: April 1 –August 31.
•Reviewed by an independent evaluation committee composed of up to
five (5) City staff appointed by the Commissioner of Growth and
Community Services or their designate, who will base their evaluation on
the Prioritization Matrix.
663
Recommendation
That Common Council:
•Award the Community Safety & Security Team Contract to
GardaWorld.
•Approve the Community Resilience Fund Policy.
•Proceed with implementation of the Community Safety &
Security Team and the Community Resilience Fund.
CI TY O F SAINT JO HN:COMMUNITY SAFETY & SE CURITY
664
Questions?
665
Title: Community Resilience Fund Policy
Subject: Community Resilience Fund Category: Finance and Administrative Services
Policy No.: FAS-030 M&C Report No.:
Effective Date: Next Review Date:
Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy:
Finance and Administrative Services
Related Instruments:
Policy Sponsors:
Chief Administrative Officer Chief Financial Officer
Commissioner Growth & Community Services
Document Pages:
This document consists of 8 pages.
Revision History:
Date Created:
Common Council Approval Date:
Contact:
Finance and Administrative Services
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
666
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE AND CONTEXT ..................................................................................................................... 3
2. POLICY STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................. 3
3. ELIGIBILITY ........................................................................................................................................... 3
4. ELIGIBLE EXPENSES .............................................................................................................................. 4
5. FUNDING STRUCTURE ......................................................................................................................... 5
6. APPLICATION PROCESS ........................................................................................................................ 6
7. EVALUATION ........................................................................................................................................ 6
8. REPORTING AND ACCOUNTABILITY .................................................................................................... 7
9. PRIORITIZATION MATRIX ..................................................................................................................... 7
10. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ........................................................................................................ 8
11. ADMINISTRATION ................................................................................................................................ 8
12. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................................................................................. 9
667
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
3
1. PURPOSE AND CONTEXT
1.1. The purpose of this policy is to provide guidance for the implementation of a 2-year
pilot grant called the Community Resilience Fund (CRF) for small sized businesses (less
than 100 employees) and Non-Profit Companies in Saint John, facing direct impacts
related to crime, including property damage, security needs, and increased safety
concerns.
1.2. The program seeks to encourage crime prevention and education initiatives that
strengthen community resilience, while ensuring funds are used responsibly and
equitably.
2. POLICY STATEMENT
2.1. The CRF Policy objectives are to:
2.1.1 Support small sized businesses and Non-Profit Companies, with costs related
to property damage and security.
2.1.2 Promote preventive measures and education on crime prevention, de-
escalation, and community support.
2.1.3 Encourage partnerships between businesses, social agencies, and the
municipality to foster safer and more inclusive public spaces.
2.1.4 Provide clear, fair and accountable guidelines for the distribution of grant
funding.
3. ELIGIBILITY
3.1 Eligible applications include:
3.1.1 Registered small sized businesses operating within the Saint John
geographical boundary that have less than 100 employees in total and with
priority being given to areas experiencing the largest negative impacts
supported by data.
3.1.2 Non-Profit Companies with operating offices in Saint John, that have been
affected by crime in their areas.
3.1.3 Owners of commercial properties leased to small sized businesses or Non-
Profit Companies, impacted by criminal activity.
668
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
4
3.1.4 Uptown Saint John (Business Improvement Association) applying on behalf
of member businesses for collective prevention/education initiatives.
3.1.5 Mixed Use multi-unit developments under construction.
3.2 Not Eligible:
3.2.1 Residential Property Owners and businesses in a principal residence.
3.2.2 Businesses in arrears on municipal taxes or user fees.
3.2.3 Government or quasi-government organizations.
3.2.4 Costs that have been recovered by insurance (deductible is eligible).
3.2.5 Any costs incurred prior to following proper process such as the issuance of
building or heritage permits.
4. ELIGIBLE EXPENSES
3.1 Security and Prevention Costs
3.1.1 Security cameras (CCTV, doorbell cameras, monitoring systems) on condition
to provide access to footage to Police for open investigations.
3.1.2 Alarm systems, security mirrors, new locks (re-keying locks), motion
detectors and security audits.
3.1.3 Lighting improvements to deter loitering or unsafe activity.
3.1.4 Security staff training in de-escalation and safe engagement.
3.1.5 Education workshops for business owners and staff on crime prevention,
mental health first aid, or trauma informed approaches.
3.1.6 Bollards, fencing, or planters that deter crime without reducing accessibility.
3.2 Damage Response
669
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
5
3.2.1 Repairs for broken windows, damaged doors, and storefront damage
caused by criminal -related incidents.
3.2.2 Graffiti removal.
3.2.3 Anti-graffiti initiatives, shatterproof glass or security film for windows.
3.2.4 Cleanup costs for biohazards (needles, waste) or vandalism linked to street
activity.
3.3 Business Resilience
3.3.1 Community awareness campaigns led by business groups in coordination
with service providers.
3.3.2 Support to neighborhood watch type programs.
3.3.3 Shared waste/needle disposal units maintained by organization or private
contractors.
3.3.4 Joint business-BIA investments in street lighting or alleyway upgrades.
3.3.5 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) studies led by the
BIA.
5. FUNDING STRUCTURE
5.1 Maximum Program Budget: $250,000 annually.
5.2 Program Length: 2 Year Pilot Program.
5.3 Maximum Grant per Business/ Non-Profit Company: Up to $7,500 annually. There
can be more than one grant per year however the total payable to the business will
not exceed $7,500 annually.
5.4 Grant Payment: Applications must be processed, approved and paid out in the year
awarded.
5.5 Cost Sharing: Grants may cover up to 50% of eligible expenses. Applicants must
provide the remaining 50%.
670
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
6
5.5.1 For Non-Profit Companies grants may cover up to 75% of eligible expenses.
Applicants must provide the remaining 25%.
5.6 Collective Projects: Up to $25,000 for the Business Improvement Association or
groups of 4 or more businesses in the same area (with separate individual street
access entrances) applying jointly for a collective project.
6. APPLICATION PROCESS
6.1 Applications accepted twice per year (April and September), and not to exceed the
annual maximum program budget.
6.1.1 There will be two application periods:
• Round 1: September 1 – March 31 (of the following year). Grants
awarded in April.
• Round 2: April 1 – August 31. Grants awarded in September.
6.2 Applicants must provide:
6.2.1 Description of issues(s) faced and evidence of impact.
6.2.2 Reimbursement based on detailed receipts for expenses incurred.
6.2.3 Confirmation that applicant is not delinquent in property tax or utility bill
payments.
7. EVALUATION
7.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA
7.1.1 Application must demonstrate need and impact on the business.
7.1.2 Application must align with program objectives (prevention, response,
community safety).
7.1.3 Costs must be reasonable.
7.1.4 Preference given for applications that provide opportunities for
collaboration and provides a broader community benefit.
7.2 EVALUATION COMMITTEE
671
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
7
7.2.1 The Commissioner of Growth and Community Services or their designate will
appoint an independent evaluation committee composed of up to five (5)
City staff to screen, review and evaluate all applications and make
recommendations on grant awards to Common Council.
8. REPORTING AND ACCOUNTABILITY
8.1 Grant recipients must submit receipts and a brief report on outcomes within 90 days
of project completion/ funds being released.
8.2 Noncompliance may result in ineligibility for future funding.
8.3 The City will produce an annual summary of the grants awarded and outcomes
achieved in the annual report.
9. PRIORITIZATION MATRIX
9.1 Where demand exceeds available funding, priority will be given to:
9.1.1 Small and Independent Businesses – locally owned businesses with limited
financial capacity to absorb costs.
9.1.2 Local Non-Profit Companies with facilities in areas with higher criminal
activity.
9.1.3 High impact incidents – applicants that can demonstrate repeated or severe
impacts related to crime (multiple property damages, safety incidents).
9.1.4 Aesthetic Security - security measures that blend seamlessness with or
enhance the visual appearance of a space or building, such as warm lighting,
decorative screening or fencing, discreet cameras, etc.
9.1.5 Community Benefit – projects that benefit multiple businesses, improve
shared spaces or enhance overall public safety.
9.1.6 Prevention Oriented Proposals – initiatives that reduce the likelihood of
future damage or incidents, rather than only responding to past harm.
9.1.7 Geographic Equity – ensuring grants are distributed across different
neighborhoods and business districts rather than one concentrated area
with a focus on areas with elevated criminal activity.
672
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
8
9.1.8 Partnership Projects – applications that involve collaboration with BIA’s,
non-profits, or service providers.
Note: These criteria are not ranked and are normally weighed equally. In some
cases, the committee may give more weight to certain factors based on the needs
of the area or the impacts described in the application.
10. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
10.1 The success of the program will be tracked and reported annually using the following
indicators:
10.1.1 Program Uptake:
• Number of grant applications received.
• Percentage of businesses supported.
10.1.2 Financial Accountability
• Average grant amount awarded.
• Percentage of funding allocated versus budgeted.
• Ratio of prevention versus response funding.
10.1.3 Impact on Businesses
• Review of Outcome reports to track impacts on businesses.
• Review of Outcome reports to track recipients reporting improved
safety/security.
10.1.4 Community and Prevention Outcomes
• Number of businesses/staff trained in prevention and de-escalation.
• Number of collaborative/partnership projects funded.
10.1.5 Equity and Distribution
• Geographic distribution of grants across neighborhoods.
11. ADMINISTRATION
11.1 This policy will be reviewed in two years or as needed to assess uptake,
effectiveness, and alignment with evolving community needs.
11.2 The City may end the program at any time.
673
City of Saint John
Community Resilience Fund Policy
9
12. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
12.1 The Commissioner of Growth and Community Services or their designate is
responsible for the overall administration of the program. They will appoint the
evaluation committee and a lead staff member to facilitate the administration of
the program.
12.2 The Evaluation Committee will be responsible for evaluating all grant requests and
impartially making a joint recommendation on a grant award to Common Council
based on this policy.
12.3 Common Council will award grants on the recommendation of the Evaluation
Committee but will not be involved in evaluating specific grant requests.
12.4 The Chief Financial Officer or their designate will issue grants to applications through
resolution of Common Council.
674
COMMON COUNCIL REPORT
M&C No. 2025-280
Report Date November 25, 2025
Meeting Date December 01, 2025
Service Area Growth and Community
Services
Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council
SUBJECT: Council Report - Community Safety and Security Team - Contract Award.docx
AUTHORIZATION
Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head Chief Administrative Officer
Benn Purinton A Poffenroth / C McKiel J. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Common Council award the contract for the Community Safety & Security
Team to GardaWorld Security at an annual cost of approximately $780,000 plus HST for a one (1)
year term with the option to extend for one (1) additional one (1) year term, and, that the Mayor
and Common Clerk be authorized to sign any contract documents necessary to complete the
award.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team is a proposed two-year pilot program designed to
provide a visible, non-police presence to help prevent and respond to nuisance activity and public
disorder in Waterloo Village, parts of the Uptown, and the Thorne/Rothesay Avenue corridor
around emergency shelters. The CSS Team will operate as a two-person team, providing coverage
24 hours a day, seven days a week.
The CSS Team will focus on voluntary compliance, combining proactive patrols with dispatched
response to non-emergency situations, and will work closely with City services, Police, and
community partners to support community wellbeing and improve perceptions of safety in key
public spaces and business areas.
Through a recent competitive procurement process, GardaWorld Security was identified as the
preferred proponent to deliver the CSS Team based on its ability to meet the City’s service level
requirements within the approved budget. The recommended contract is for an estimated
annual cost of $780,000 plus HST, with an option to renew for one additional year, and includes
675
a trained dedicated local team, a site supervisor for day-to-day quality control and reporting, and
a vehicle. Approval of this contract will allow the City to launch the pilot, monitor performance,
and adjust operations over time based on call data, results, and community feedback.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
N/A
REPORT
Residents, businesses, and community partners in Waterloo Village, parts of the Uptown, and the
Thorne/Rothesay Avenue corridor have raised ongoing concerns about nuisance activity and
visible disorder, such as public intoxication, open drug use, property damage, aggressive
solicitation, noise and other nuisances. These issues are affecting perceptions of safety and
confidence in key public spaces and business areas. To respond, staff is proposing a two-year
Community Safety & Security Pilot program.
The Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team is a visible, non‑police presence meant to prevent
and respond to nuisance and public disorder while supporting community wellbeing. The team
uses a voluntary‑compliance first approach, combining proactive patrols with dispatched
response to non-emergency situations. Service areas will include the Waterloo Village, parts of
the Uptown and on Thorne Avenue and Rothesay Avenue around emergency shelters. The CSS
Team will operate as a two-person team, providing coverage 24 hours a day, seven days a week
The team’s goal is to ensure residents and businesses get efficient and appropriate response to
everyday nuisance issues, reduce crime and disorder through consistent presence, and increase
coordination between City services, Police, and community partners. As the pilot progresses, CSS
operations will be refined and updated as necessary based on results and community feedback.
Through a recent competitive procurement process for security services, GardaWorld Security
was identified as the preferred proponent to deliver the Community Safety & Security (CSS) Team
pilot, based on their level of experience and ability to meet the City’s service level requirements.
GardaWorld is a large Canadian-based security services company with extensive experience
providing uniformed guarding, mobile patrols and community safety programs for both public
and private sector.
GardaWorld currently delivers a comparable community safety and security program for the City
of Fredericton, providing downtown patrols, supporting needle and sharps collection, and
assisting with minor clean-ups and encampment-related issues in coordination with municipal
staff and police. Drawing on that experience, GardaWorld will assign a site supervisor to support
676
day-to-day quality control, attend regular coordination meetings with City staff, and ensure that
call data, patrol activity and escalation information from Saint John are captured through their
reporting system to support the City’s performance management and Council reporting for the
two-year pilot.
For the Saint John CSS Team, GardaWorld has proposed a dedicated local team of licensed
security guards who will meet or exceed the City’s training standards. The CSS Team will receive
training through their onboarding process in de-escalation, trauma-informed practice, mental
health awareness, Standard First Aid, AED and Naloxone, along with other required modules to
support safe operations in the pilot area. This will be supplemented by Saint John specific
orientation on local procedures and expectations, with an emphasis on voluntary compliance,
respectful engagement and appropriate hand-offs to Police and Outreach.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The CSS Team will reinforce the City’s BELONG strategic priority by emphasizing a trauma-
informed, voluntary-compliance first approach, respectful engagement with people experiencing
homelessness, addictions, or mental health challenges, and coordinated referral to outreach and
social supports rather than enforcement as a first resort.
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
This contract was a planned expense in the Growth & Community Services 2026 operating
budget.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS
Supply Chain Management facilitated the Request for Proposal (RFP) process to solicit proposals
for By-law Enforcement Services. As such the RFP closed on October 31, 2025, with the following
proponents responding by submitting proposals:
COMPANY NAME
Admiral Safety & Security
GardaWorld Security
Shadow Security
677
A review committee, consisting of staff from Supply Chain Management and Growth and
Community Services reviewed the submissions for completeness and compliance with the RFP
requirements and selection criteria consisting of the following:
1. Quality and Completeness of Proposal
2. Proponent Experience
3. Key Personnel & Staffing Plan
4. Service Delivery Approach
5. Cost
Also, in accordance with the City’s standard procedures, the committee members evaluated the
proposals based on the proposals’ technical merits. Following this, the financial proposals were
opened and evaluated, and corresponding scores were added to the technical scores.
The GardaWorld Security proposal was selected as the best proposal based on an overall rating
of the evaluation criteria offering a strong overall solution for the City.
The above processes are in accordance with the City’s Strategic Procurement Policy and Supply
Chain Management support the recommendations being put forth.
Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person
Supply Chain Management Chris Roberts
ATTACHMENTS
None
678